Filed with Sources, Books & Media (MOC) · Related: 60.1 Israel-Palestine · Key Arguments (MOC)
Logical Fallacies - Philosophical Threads
1 | Over-arching Themes in Dave Smith’s Case
| Theme | Illustrations from the debate | Philosophical/ideological current |
|---|---|---|
| Radical non-interventionism | “This war … is not in our interest and may be catastrophic.” Smith’s yard-stick is always U S self-interest—troops, debt, domestic cohesion—rather than global order. | Libertarian foreign-policy tradition (Ron Paul, Robert Taft) grounded in the Non-Aggression Principle and a narrow reading of the U-S constitution’s war powers. |
| Historical scepticism of official threat claims | Iraq WMD, Libya 2011, Afghanistan—used as precedents to doubt current intelligence and political rhetoric. | A Humean empiricism / “once bitten, twice shy” stance: past induction of deception ⇒ future claims need extraordinary proof. |
| Moral equivalence (“relativism”) | Repeated juxtaposition of Israel’s undeclared nukes with Iran’s enrichment; likening Israeli lobbying to Iranian proxy warfare. | Implicit ethical consequentialism that weighs effects (civilian deaths, instability) more than intentions or legal status, often flattening distinctions between actors. |
| Anti-elite / populist framing | “Neocon war-hawks,” “luring America,” “experts who lied last time.” | Populist distrust of technocratic elites, common in post-2008 libertarian & MAGA discourse. |
| Prudential realism / cost-benefit calculus | Focus on $37 T debt, military overstretch, domestic unrest, and potential blow-back. | Classical realist concern for state capability and stability, minus any Wilsonian idealism. |
2 | Logical & Rhetorical Weak-spots
| Category | Example quotation | Why it’s problematic |
|---|---|---|
| False equivalence | “So is Hamas now a proxy of Israel?” (on Qatari cash) | Funding to placate Hamas ≠ Iran’s direct training, C² and arms pipeline. Equates qualitatively different relationships, diluting causal responsibility. |
| Straw-man | Treats any U-S help (e.g., missile-defence) as sure path to “boots on the ground.” | Kisin explicitly rejects ground troops; Smith replies as if that were the proposal. |
| Slippery-slope | “I don’t know that America will survive this …” | Predicts national collapse without showing inevitability or even high probability; the leap from “costly” to “existential” is unwarranted. |
| Cherry-picking / inflation | “…about a million innocent people died in Iraq.” | Upper-bound of academic estimates; midpoint studies place excess deaths closer to 400-500 k (abcnews.go.com). |
| Appeal to (selective) authority | CIA 2007 NIE & 2025 ATA show no active bomb program (cia.gov, dni.gov). | Correctly cited, but he omits the same documents’ warning that Iran “could produce a weapon in months if it chooses,” weakening his case by omission. |
| Hasty generalisation | “Every regime-change war ends in catastrophe.” | Overlooks limited cases (e.g., Serbia 1999, Côte d’Ivoire 2011) where coercion or leader removal did not trigger protracted civil collapse. |
3 | Consistent Philosophical Threads
-
Libertarian Just-War Minimalism
War is only just in direct national self-defence. Anything else violates the non-aggression axiom. -
Consequentialist Human-Cost Accounting
Smith emphasises body-counts, refugees, debt: he judges war primarily by outcomes, not intentions or legitimacy. -
Anti-neocon Narratives & “Blow-back”
Echoes the realist / Chalmers Johnson idea that aggressive U-S policy creates the very threats it claims to solve (e.g., Iran enriching to deter regime change). -
Strategic Isolationism vs. Moral Universalism
Implicit claim that the U-S owes no moral duty to prevent regional aggression unless Americans are directly harmed—a rejection of “Responsibility to Protect.”
4 | Bottom-Line Assessment
Strengths
- Empirical memory of Iraq & Libya keeps necessary scepticism alive.
- Correct that U-S intelligence still finds no current Iranian weapon program (though also warns of rapid “break-out”) (cia.gov, dni.gov).
- Highlights genuine fiscal and political constraints on new wars.
Weaknesses / Fallacies
- Treats worst-case forecasts (U-S collapse, million deaths) as near certainties.
- Collapses critical moral distinctions via false equivalence, the hallmark of relativism.
- Relies on an unverified “Israeli-funded seven-countries memo” link to Wesley Clark’s anecdote (youtube.com).
- Ignores Iran’s IAEA-verified stockpile of 60 % uranium, which materially shortens bomb “sprint” time and therefore does change the strategic equation.
Overall, Dave Smith’s case is a coherent libertarian-realist critique of intervention, but it occasionally stretches evidence, employs slippery-slope rhetoric, and leans on moral equivalence—all of which weaken its logical rigour.
4: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fAnNJW9_KYA “General W. Clark: “This is a memo of how we’re going to … - YouTube”
Breakdown of Dave Smith‘s Arguments
Dave Smith’s Major Assertions — Full Quotes, Fact-Checks, and Notes on Moral Relativism
| # | Dave Smith’s verbatim words (from the debate) | What the claim means | Evidence / Reality Check | Moral-relativism flag |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | “Since 2007 our CIA has said they’re not … they don’t have nuclear weapons and they’re not striving to achieve them … Tulsi Gabbard in the annual threat assessment just reaffirmed the same thing.” | U.S. intelligence continues to judge that Iran halted its nuclear-weapon design work and has not restarted it. | Mostly correct. • The 2007 National Intelligence Estimate stated Iran “halted” its weapons program in 2003 and had not decided to build a bomb (armscontrol.org). • Every unclassified Annual Threat Assessment since 2019 repeats: “We continue to assess that Iran is not currently undertaking the key nuclear-weapons development activities necessary to produce a device.” (See 2022 & 2024 reports) (dni.gov, responsiblestatecraft.org). Note, however, that the IC also stresses Iran could quickly cross the line if it chose. | None here; he quotes IC language without equating moral standing. |
| 2 | “They’re enriching up to 60 percent; that’s what’s called a latent nuclear deterrent … you need three-to-five percent for power, maybe 20-plus for medical.” | 60 % enrichment is beyond civilian need but still below weapons-grade (90 %); Iran may be signaling capability, not building a bomb. | • IAEA reports (May 2025) list ≈ 233 kg of 60 % U-235—well over the JCPOA cap and ample for rapid sprint to 90 % (thetimes.co.uk). • Civilian power reactors use ≈ 3–5 %; research-reactor targets for medical isotopes top out around 20 %. So the technical numbers are right. But experts note that holding so much 60 % materially shortens “break-out” time; calling it merely “latent” understates the proliferation danger. | None. |
| 3 | “Do you guys think Benjamin Netanyahu has been mistaken for 30 years claiming Iran is a year-to-three years away from a nuke, or was he lying?” | Netanyahu has issued rolling “imminent bomb” warnings since the early 1990s. | • 1992: Netanyahu (then opposition MK) told colleagues Iran was “three to five years” from a bomb. (blogs.timesofisrael.com) • 1995 book Fighting Terrorism: “five to seven years at most.” (blogs.timesofisrael.com) • UN speech 2012 (“red-line” cartoon) predicted breakout by 2013. Thus Smith’s timeline is broadly accurate. Whether it is lying or bad forecasting is subjective, but the record shows Netanyahu’s rolling deadlines have slipped repeatedly. | None. |
| 4 | “This war is not about nukes that Iran doesn’t have. It’s about the same regime-change playbook Wesley Clark described — seven countries in five years, study paid for by the Israelis.” | U.S./Israeli hawks pursue a long-standing plan to topple Iran regardless of the nuclear issue. | • Gen. Wesley Clark has publicly recounted seeing a memo in 2001 listing seven states (Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Iran) slated for overthrow (en.wikipedia.org). • Clark never produced the memo; no documentary link to an Israeli-funded “study” has been verified. The “study paid for by Israelis” portion is unsubstantiated. | Yes. Smith implies equal moral weight between Iran’s threats and U.S./Israeli policy, suggesting the latter is the real aggressor. |
| 5 | “We went into the terror wars in a much stronger place than today; now we’re $37 trillion in debt, culturally divided — we may not survive another war like this.” | The U.S. fiscal and societal position is weaker than in 2003; national debt ≈ $37 T. | • Treasury bulletin shows $36.2 T gross federal debt as of April 2025 (fiscaldata.treasury.gov). Rounding to 37 T is reasonable, though slightly high. Cultural division is judgmental but widely observed. | None. |
| 6 | “The worst thing that ever happened to the people of Iraq was George W. Bush’s war … about a million innocent people died.” | Iraq War produced ~1 million excess deaths. | Over-stated. • Peer-reviewed PLOS (2013) estimated ≈ 500,000 excess deaths 2003-11 (journals.plos.org). • The 2006 Lancet survey’s 95 % range spans 400k–940k; some later ORB polling reached 1.0–1.4 M but lacks scholarly consensus (wired.com). So “about a million” cites the upper end of controversial estimates. | None. |
| 7 | “Netanyahu sent the head of Mossad to Qatar to keep the money flowing to Hamas … yet Hamas is called an ‘Iranian proxy’. Why isn’t it Israel’s proxy?” | Israel enabled Qatari cash shipments that strengthened Hamas, undermining claims that Hamas is only Iran’s tool. | • From 2018–2023, Israel approved Qatari suitcases of cash into Gaza; Mossad chief Yossi Cohen met Doha officials to maintain the flow (foreignpolicy.com). • Israel argued the payments bought temporary calm; critics now see the policy as a grave error (timesofisrael.com). Smith’s factual kernel is sound. His leap — Hamas therefore Israel’s proxy — is rhetorical; funding alone ≠ operational control. | Yes. He uses the symmetry (“proxy for us / for them”) to blur lines of responsibility — a classic moral-relativist move. |
| 8 | “Pentagon in 2007 told Bush they didn’t have escalation dominance over Iran — that’s why Cheney’s strike plan was stopped.” | U.S. planners warned that limited strikes could spiral because Iran could hit U.S. assets. | • Contemporaneous reporting confirms Pentagon brass resisted Cheney proposals for IRGC strikes in 2007 over escalation fears (commondreams.org). Thus largely accurate, though framed as an absolute veto (“stopped”) — planning continued, strikes simply weren’t ordered. | None. |
Where Dave Smith Slides into Moral Relativism
-
Equating Proxies:
Quote: “Is Hamas now a proxy of Israel?”
He treats Israeli-approved Qatari stipends as morally equivalent to Iran’s direct arming, training and command-and-control of Hamas and Hezbollah — flattening qualitatively different relationships. -
Nuclear Double-Standard:
Quote: “One government in the Middle East has nukes outside the NPT and it ain’t Iran. It’s Israel.”
True fact, but Smith uses it to argue Israel forfeits the right to fear an Iranian bomb, implying symmetrical legitimacy/illegitimacy. -
Causation Flip:
Constant refrain that U.S./Israeli policy “forces” Iran’s behavior (e.g., enrich to 60 % because “they can’t get this one wrong”) shifts moral agency away from Tehran.
These moves do not necessarily invalidate his empirical points; they do show the characteristic relativist pattern: If everyone violates norms, no one has moral priority.
Bottom Line
- Substantiated: Smith’s citations of IC assessments, Netanyahu’s long-running predictions, the Mossad-Qatar cash pipeline, and Pentagon worries about escalation.
- Partly Accurate but Incomplete: His debt figure (slightly high), uranium “latent deterrent” framing, and portrayal of Iran’s enrichment as purely defensive.
- Overstated / Weakly Sourced: “One million” Iraq deaths (upper-bound of studies) and the claim that an Israeli-funded study drove the “seven-countries” plan.
- Relativism: Present where he levels Israel’s undisclosed nukes, or its tactical missteps, to argue there is no meaningful moral distinction between Tehran’s annihilation rhetoric and Jerusalem’s regime-change goals.
Summary
Debate Overview
In this hour-long Piers Morgan Uncensored segment, Dave Smith (libertarian commentator) and Konstantin Kisin (British commentator, co-host of TRIGGERnometry) spar over two linked questions:
- Should the United States (or Israel, with U.S. help) escalate militarily against Iran?
- Are Iran and Israel morally comparable, or does one side bear overwhelmingly greater blame?
Piers Morgan moderates but is excluded from this summary, as requested.
Dave Smith – Case Against War With Iran
Smith’s position can be distilled to a broad “anti-intervention” principle plus a specific reading of recent history.
| Core Claim | Supporting Points & Examples |
|---|---|
| 1. A U.S.–Iran war is reckless, not in America’s interest, and could be catastrophic. | * The U.S. is already $37 trillion in debt, politically fractured, and still dealing with costs of earlier “forever wars.” * Iran is far stronger than Iraq (2003) or Libya (2011); escalation dominance cannot be assumed (he cites Pentagon warnings from 2007). |
| 2. The “nuclear threat” is overstated and keeps shifting, just like Iraq’s WMD claims. | * CIA and Director of National Intelligence assessments since 2007 repeatedly say Iran is not actively pursuing a bomb. * Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu has predicted an Iranian bomb is “1-3 years away” for three decades—“either mistaken or lying.” |
| 3. Israel’s leadership (and U.S. hawks) want regime change, not self-defence. | * Cites Netanyahu’s 2002 testimony urging U.S. to topple Saddam, Gaddafi, and Iran—appearing again in present rhetoric. * Smith labels L. Graham, J. Bolton, et al. “neoconservatives” and says their stated end-state is an Iranian regime collapse, inevitably drawing America in. |
| 4. Historical pattern: U.S. regime-change wars devastate civilians and breed more chaos. | * Iraq: ~1 million dead, sectarian civil war, ISIS. * Libya: state collapse, slave markets. * Afghanistan: 20-year occupation and Taliban return. |
| 5. Double-standards & moral relativism objections are misplaced. | * Israel secretly possesses nuclear weapons outside the NPT; Iran remains an NPT signatory. * Funding proxies is common: Israel itself enabled Qatari money to Hamas; the U.S. arms Israel—so labeling Hamas a pure “Iranian proxy” is selective. |
| 6. Political risk to Trump & U.S. right. | * Major MAGA figures (Tucker Carlson, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Steve Bannon, Charlie Kirk, Candace Owens) publicly oppose escalation; a ground war would “destroy his coalition and legacy.” |
Overall framing:
Smith argues from American self-interest, non-interventionism, and empirical skepticism after 20 years of failed Middle-East wars. He portrays an Iran conflict as another preventable quagmire sold with recycled WMD-style rhetoric.
Konstantin Kisin – Case That Iran ≠ Israel Morally and Israel’s Response Is Justified
Kisin does not overtly call for U.S. boots on the ground; his focus is on moral asymmetry and Israel’s right to strike.
| Core Claim | Supporting Points & Examples |
|---|---|
| 1. Iran is an expansionist, theocratic regime that openly seeks Israel’s destruction. | * Tehran funds and trains Hamas, Hezbollah, and Houthis (State Dept. estimates ≈ $100 M/yr to Hamas). * Iranian leaders repeatedly vow to “wipe Israel off the map.” * Historical example: Iran-Iraq War child-soldier “human mine-sweepers” demonstrates regime’s extremism. |
| 2. October 7 placed Israel in a de facto state of war with Iran’s proxies. | * Hamas massacre → Hezbollah rockets → Houthi shipping attacks—all Iranian-backed, so Israel’s counter-strikes are wartime actions, not unprovoked aggression. |
| 3. Uranium enrichment to 60 % is a red-line. | * Civilian reactors require ~3–5 %; medical isotopes ~20 %. * Jump to 60 % signals intent or readiness for “breakout.” Israel “cannot afford” a miscalculation; existential risk trumps outside observers’ doubts. |
| 4. Moral distinction between “regime change” and “annihilation.” | * Israel wants the government in Tehran replaced; Iran wants the state of Israel eliminated. These are qualitatively different. |
| 5. Limited, precise action preferable; West should assist but avoid large-scale occupation. | * Advocates U.S. help with air defence and possibly specialized ordnance, not ground troops. * Frames this as consistent with U.S. public opinion: stop Iran’s bomb but “no boots on the ground.” |
| 6. Strategic upside: Weakening Iran helps Ukraine. | * Iran supplies drones to Russia; tying Tehran down helps Kyiv indirectly. |
| 7. MAGA divide is overstated. | * Grass-roots Republicans remain pro-Israel; online splits exaggerate real-world fracture. |
Overall framing:
Kisin roots his case in Israeli security imperatives and moral non-equivalence. For him, enrichment plus decades of proxy warfare prove Iran is the aggressor; decisive Israeli (and limited U.S.) action is defensive, prudent, and potentially region-stabilizing.
Key Points of Clash
| Issue | Smith | Kisin |
|---|---|---|
| Iran’s nuclear program | Intelligence shows no active weapon push; enrichment = leverage/deterrent. | 60 % enrichment is de-facto weapon intent; existential threat to Israel. |
| Proxy warfare & responsibility | Funding proxies is common (U.S./Israel do it); doesn’t justify war. | Iranian financing/training makes Hamas–Hezbollah direct arms of Tehran. |
| Historical analogies | Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan: proof regime-change fails & harms civilians. | Israel faces unique annihilation risk; can’t gamble on worst-case error. |
| U.S. involvement | War is against U.S. interests; Trump risks coalition and national stability. | U.S. role can stay limited (air-defence, munitions); Americans mainly oppose ground war, not support to Israel. |
| Moral assessment | Both sides commit wrongs; nukes & terrorism charges cut both ways. | Iran’s stated goal to erase Israel removes moral parity; regime uniquely evil. |
Concise Takeaway
- Smith warns that another Middle-East intervention, driven by dubious threat inflation, will bleed America and the region—as Iraq and Libya did—and that Israel’s own covert arsenal undercuts the nuclear panic narrative.
- Kisin counters that Israel’s survival threshold is fundamentally different: Iran funds genocidal proxies and is edging toward bomb-grade uranium, so swift, focused Israeli (and modest Western) action is morally justified defence, not elective imperial war.
The debate turns on risk tolerance (existential for Israel vs. strategic for the U.S.), evidence standards (intelligence assessments vs. enrichment trajectories), and whether past regime-change disasters rule out any military move against Tehran today.
Transcript
0:00
why is it by the way that this is always a one-way street iran said this Iran
0:05
threatened this this is about a regime change war why are we doing this yes I
0:10
think it’s quite clear that Benjamin Netanyahu wants regime change in Iran but that is not the same as the regime
0:16
in Iran wanting to destroy Israel what was overthrowing Mar Gaddafi was that
0:22
simply replacing the leader or was that destroying the country let’s stick to Israel in Iran no the Israelis say we
0:29
want regime change the Iranians say we want to wipe you off the map do you guys think Benjamin Netanyahu has been
0:34
mistaken for 30 years claiming that Iran is a year to 3 years away from a nuke or
0:40
was he lying israel was surrounded by many many countries who don’t believe that it has a right to exist so I’m the
0:47
moral relativist but then when I point out what one side actually did you run away from it are you an Israeli why are
0:52
you constantly running cover for them because I believe in speaking the truth and being honest instead of dragging in
0:58
stuff that is irrelevant so the American government is so gullible that they just go around invading countries on the say
1:03
so of Israel this isn’t a secret he’s advocating that we fight more wars and I’m telling you that this war which we
1:09
do not need to fight which is not in our interest has the potential to be devastating
1:16
nothing divides opinion more than war and wars are often both launched and ended on the strength of popular
1:21
supporter opposition when the stakes are so high and the consequences are so significant everybody gets a say in my
1:28
view that applies even if you haven’t been to the place where it’s happening much of the debate about the Iran crisis
1:33
and others seems to boil down to some big themes morality versus reality idealism or pragmatism intervention
1:41
versus isolation populists or lobbyists for a big picture debate on a world at war i’m joined by two of our favorite
1:48
uncensored contributors who often trade respectful barbs on these matters and more constantine Kissen is an author
1:55
satist and co-host of Trigonometry dave Smith is a libertarian commentator a comedian and the host of Part of the
2:01
Problem well welcome to both of you dave great to have you back so soon uh as you know after your last appearance um I got
2:09
chewed up and spat across cyberspace um which I found quite an amusing thing to
2:15
watch go down what did you make of it oh I thought it was just so pathetic i mean
2:21
you know I I had mentioned this before but if you as I’m sure you do recall but after my uh my friend Daryl Cooper was
2:28
on Tucker Carlson’s show and he made some comments that you objected to and I was defending him and giving my point of
2:34
view on it you had me on a panel it’s probably the most contentious that me and you have been on the show um you you
2:41
had me on threeon-one with um it was Seth Dylan and then a worldrenowned
2:48
historian uh from the House of Lords you know like the leading expert
2:54
yeah yeah and I uh you know I took my lumps i tried to make my argument as
2:59
compelling as I could it was I didn’t go online and just throw a for the next week over how unfair it was
3:06
it’s just pathetic and I’m sorry but Natasha was just lying through her teeth the whole time and she she was and and
3:12
lies that as you pointed out insult the intelligence of the host and the viewers and I thought you were absolutely right
3:18
to give her push back for that so it was I I thought number one I thought you were right on the show obviously
3:24
admittedly I’m a little bit biased on the topic but I thought the reaction online was just truly embarrassing you
3:30
know what was interesting if they’d actually just said to me it you know what Pier did you go a little bit too far in the interrupting could you have
3:36
ra 10 20% i probably would have said yes probably i conceded that to some friends of mine yeah probably slightly overdid
3:43
my mother’s always a good lit test she was like you did go at her a bit you know i was okay but then I was reminded
3:48
that a she was telling massive whoppers with real consequential elements to them
3:54
denying you know appalling things like the the killing of the nine out of 10 children in that one air strike and so
4:01
on or at least trying to cast doubt over whether it had been proven which I just found so reprehensible um but but also I
4:08
just felt this is somebody who purports to be an international barristister in this area who’s clearly not has got a
4:16
horse in the race right because it’s it’s it’s lawyers for Israel who she represents if you can’t handle a bit of
4:23
interrupting from someone like me you’re probably in the wrong profession is what I thought it’s like this supposed to be
4:29
part of your job literally arguing with people often in an animated way anyway
4:34
let’s get into let’s get into this argument um because this this was precipitated for those who don’t follow
4:40
you guys as assiduously as I do and I’m a big fan of of both of you uh Constantine you called out Dave Onx for
4:47
accusing the actor Rob Schneider of talking with confidence on topics he doesn’t necessarily understand you said
4:55
that’s exactly what Douglas Murray had accused Dave of doing when they had a spat on Joe Rogan and you said uh Onyx
5:02
I’m not trying to be a dick but this is exactly what Douglas was saying to you he was saying you talk about things you
5:08
don’t understand with a level of confidence that is inappropriate and you pretended he was calling for censorship
5:13
you You can’t have it both ways um okay you’ve got Dave sitting here you don’t
5:21
want to be a dick which I appreciate because I’ve had a festival of that from George Galloway this week um so let’s
5:26
not get into dick measurement contests but uh this whole argument really about
5:32
people who are supposedly ill equipped to talk about things
5:38
whether it’s Dave because he’s a comedian by Stock and Trade uh whether it’s Rob Snder whether it’s anyone
5:44
really um explain where you come from on that well first of all you say it’s been precipitated by this i think the
5:50
disagreements between Dave and I run about as long as the Iran Israel conflict so and and probably longer so
5:56
we disagree on a lot of stuff uh you’ve invited me on your show many many times over the the last year i’ve always said
6:02
no when talking about this stuff because I don’t consider myself an expert on these issues which is why I’ve
6:07
consistently turned it down the only reason I’m here tonight by the way is you said to me I’m not going on your show until you come back on mine and I
6:14
thought that was actually fair enough so particularly given that you have me here with somebody who’s also not an expert
6:20
this is essentially two guys in a bar in a pub chatting about their opinions so that’s fine uh however I think the
6:27
reality is that an issue of this complexity and seriousness should not be addressed by a former comedian and a
6:32
current comedian i don’t really think that’s the right approach but my point to Dave is something else my point to Dave is whenever he wants to take a
6:40
shortcut and disagree with someone who’s saying something that’s different to him he will resort to exactly the same thing
6:46
that Douglas said to him which is “You actually don’t really know what you’re talking about you don’t have the
6:51
expertise to talk about this you haven’t been to the region you haven’t read enough you haven’t done this you haven’t done that and that’s exactly what
6:57
Douglas was saying to Dave now you can agree or disagree with whether that’s right or wrong but the fact that Dave is
7:04
violating his own standards is seem seems to me to be pretty hypocritical dave you’re a rank hypocrite
7:11
that’s saying it not me i did I did not add the word rank yeah he would have thought about a bit no there I’m I’m
7:17
sorry there’s uh for the record uh I just want to say me and Rob Schneider made up i’ve always been a big fan of his we message back and forth and we’re
7:24
cool um but no I’m I’m sorry obviously this is ridiculous and there’s no
7:29
hypocrisy here at all it is if I were if we were to come to a debate and what I brought to the debate was I just said
7:36
“Shut up.” And that was all I did for the debate was just tell you to shut up and I had no argument and I didn’t
7:42
counter any of your arguments but I just told you to shut up and you were to say “Man that was a really ridiculous way to debate.” And then I pointed out that you
7:48
had also told someone to shut up once in your life that that wouldn’t mean you’re guilty of hypocrisy it’s a completely
7:54
different standard to be dismissive to someone on Twitter than to agree to debate them on the biggest show in the
8:00
world show up in front of tens of millions of people and your argument essentially is just to dismiss them your
8:06
point doesn’t matter so no and and also clearly I wasn’t telling Rob Schneider because he’s a comedian he can’t have an
8:14
opinion on this i was telling him that I don’t really think he knows what he’s talking about on this issue and then I
8:20
which is exactly what Douglas said to you yes but he didn’t back it up with anything that’s the point
8:26
no one would have had a problem the the whole point was that Douglas had an opportunity to demonstrate his superior
8:33
level of expertise and did not and this is the overwhelming opinion not just I don’t think that’s quite true i think on
8:39
a lot of the subjects you debated he actually did give very good reasons why he disagreed now I as you remember I
8:44
wrote an article at the time talking about that situation and I did concede that I thought Douglas should have lent more into the arguments the way you and
8:51
I have always debated has been on that basis right and I think that is true but I don’t think this argument about
8:56
Twitter really works because when you go and our mutual friends Joe Rogan show you’re in front of millions of people
9:02
when you and I are exchanging or you and Rob are exchanging arguments on X we’re also in front of millions of people
9:07
we’re also having a debate i don’t understand what the difference is you don’t understand the difference
9:13
between like dismissing someone on Twitter and agreeing to debate them and
9:18
showing up with nothing made a series of arguments on Twitter to you in front of those same millions of people that saw
9:24
you on Joe Rogan and instead of addressing his arguments with counterarguments which is the standard
9:29
that you normally apply and you demand that other people apply to you you instead basically said “Shut up Rob uh
9:35
you don’t know what you’re talking about just because you read one book doesn’t mean you know what you’re talking about.” which is exactly what a lot of
9:41
people said to you and you got very upset about it and pretended they were trying to censor you no okay there’s a
9:47
couple different things here number one PICE as I told you I think you I believe were my first appearance after the
9:54
Douglas Murray debate on Joe Rogan and the first thing I said to you was that I go look there’s been a lot of people who
10:00
have been challenged to debates who say I’m not going to debate that guy he’s beneath me i’ve done that with other
10:05
people and then there’s been people who accept and show up to the debate i said Douglas Murray’s fatal flaw was that he did both he he accepted and then showed
10:12
up and said “I’m above you i shouldn’t even be debating you.” And it backfired on him now as far as um your your I’m
10:20
sorry what was your your second point there i had another response to that what was the other thing you said Constantin i don’t remember the sequence
10:26
of the points that I made what do you mean exactly well I’ll tell you what i’m going to I’m going to save you both because I think we’ve probably dealt
10:31
with the the element about whether you should be debating or talking about these things you’re both here to talk
10:37
about stuff enough about 9 to5 what about the most important bit the 5 to9 it should be the
10:43
most comfortable part of your day and today’s sponsor can help cozy Earth’s bamboo sheets are temperature regulating
10:50
and designed to wick away both heat and moisture so you can sleep several degrees cooler they’re soft breathable
10:56
and guaranteed to give you a more comfortable night’s sleep they also have high quality breathable clothes for all
11:02
day luxury you can try it all risk-f free with Cozy Earth’s 100 night sleep trial and a 10-year warranty if you
11:09
don’t love their products you can return them hassle-free but trust me you won’t want it luxury shouldn’t be out of reach
11:16
go to cozyear.com and use code peers pie rs for up to 40% off cozyear’s
11:22
bestselling temperature regulating sheets clothes and more you will feel the difference on the very first night
11:28
that’s cozyear.com promo code peers stay cool
11:34
costas let me start w with what you said donald Trump you believe has played an
11:39
absolute blinder in the Middle East dave to put it mildly does not agree and
11:45
thinks he should now be impeached for betrayal so first of all Constantine why
11:51
in your estimation has Trump played an absolute blind just to put this in context I said this I think on Friday I
11:57
spent that week when these initial strikes happened in Washington DC and the point I was making is I don’t think
12:03
there certainly none of the people I met in Washington DC with any insider knowledge thought that Benjamin
12:08
Netanyahu who’d ordered these strikes without at least a wink and a nod from President Trump so President Trump is
12:14
doing something that I from what I remember he said it between 30 and 40 times on the campaign trail which is
12:20
Iran must not be allowed to to to get a bomb and he’s achieving that outcome while not taking any of the black any of
12:26
the blame or any of the flag for it that was the case on Friday obviously the situation has evolved since then and
12:32
there’s now a much bigger debate but at that time he had absolutely played a blinder in allowing Benjamin Netanyahu
12:39
and the Israeli military to achieve the military objective while also sort of claiming that he’s not involved and kind
12:45
of at that time getting he now gets involved as the jungle drums seem to be suggesting that is a massive moment for
12:52
Donald Trump I would say I mean you could argue that is the most important decision he will have taken as a
12:58
president and maybe the most important decision he ever takes if he actually starts bombing with American forces Iran
13:05
that is a massive thing to be doing do you think it’s as Tucker Carlson says something that could imperil his
13:11
presidency we are in the unknown so nobody knows how this is going to play out i think we should all be honest about that and and and and be fair what
13:18
I think it really fundamentally depends on is what you mean by the word involved if you mean that America is going to
13:25
help Israel shoot down ballistic missiles uh I don’t know that that will be such a major decision or will be seen
13:30
as well let me paint the picture where they use a B-52 bomber and they drop one of these buster bombs to try and get to
13:37
the nuclear sites that they that the Israelis can’t get to because they haven’t got that technology if they were
13:42
to do that in other words directly use American forces to do the bombing would
13:49
your calculation about Trump change these are all hypotheticals the one thing that I do know and I think Dave
13:54
will tell you this himself is the thing that people in the United States from talking to people there are most concerned about is any sort of boots on
14:01
the ground scenario they do not want American soldiers in the Middle East i think they’re right not to i genuinely
14:06
think that and so fundamentally it really depends on what happens and the way that it happens and you’re right it
14:12
is a big decision uh but I I I think it it’s uh you know all this stuff you know I mean Dave’s calling for President
14:18
Trump to be impeached over this when this is something that he promised the American people 30 to 40 times on the
14:24
campaign well okay on that I would I would clarify that he he said that number of times that Iran should not be
14:32
allowed to have a nuclear bomb that is indisputable he also has consistently portrayed himself as a man who wants
14:39
peace not war i’m going to solve the problem in Ukraine solve the Middle East and so on this would go against all of
14:45
his claims to be that person and of course the big debate behind all this is
14:51
that Tulsi Gabbard his own director of national intelligence the IAA
14:58
uh director last night they both said in very recent times including 24 hours ago
15:05
in the case of the Atomic Agency that there is no evidence that they’ve seen that Iran is anywhere near progressing
15:13
to an actual nuclear weapon and I think that that’s the key point of this so uh I like Tulsi Gabbard we’ve had her on
15:19
trigonometry i think she’s a great human being which is why I did her the courtesy of watching the full clip uh of
15:25
her testimony that she gave and what she says in that testimony is that Iran is not pursuing the nuclear weapons program
15:33
but what Iran is doing is enriching uranium to 60% and beyond which is a
15:38
clear indication of their desire either to actually make nuclear weapons or to move much much closer to a position to
15:45
be able to make them as I think Dave would concede from all the nuclear scientists what they’re saying is you
15:51
need about 3 to 5% enriched uranium for civilian purposes they are now enriching uranium to 60% and by the way this is
15:57
also in the IA IAEA report and no one’s talking about this they’re using their
16:03
20% uranium to make 60% uranium which is again an indicator of the fact that they’re moving either towards attempting
16:10
to make nuclear weapons at some point or to be in a position to do so and that is the threat and there is no other reason
16:16
for them to be doing that so yes they don’t have the exact bomb ready to go
16:21
but they’re moving in that direction and Israel is in a position to deal with that threat for the first time in a very long time and I understand why they’re
16:28
doing it okay Dave um before we get to your response to that just explain to people why you have called what Donald
16:35
Trump is doing a betrayal and why you think he should be impeached well I think we’re he has brought us
16:43
into a war with Iran now how much this war escalates we will see um and I think
16:48
that this is um the it is the most profoundly risky and reckless policy he
16:56
could have pursued or just about um I think this is uh very likely going to lead to a catastrophe much like all of
17:03
the other terror wars including the one Pierce that you heroically uh led the opposition in the UK to in 2003 of
17:10
course referring to the war in Iraq and as you remember well Pierce from that war the justifications just kept
17:15
constantly changing and then when one fell away they’d move to the next one oh he was in on 911 okay he wasn’t in on
17:22
911 but he’s got weapons of mass destruction okay it doesn’t have weapons of mass destruction but we have to liberate the people or bring democracy
17:28
and I’ve already seen that it’s it’s remarkable how sped up it is i’ve already seen so many of the war hawks
17:33
bouncing back and forth between all of these different justifications but of course in the end there all of the
17:39
justifications failed not only did he not have weapons of mass destruction not only was he not in on 9/11 but we also
17:46
didn’t liberate the people the worst thing that ever happened to the people of Iraq was George W bush’s war there
17:52
and as far as Iran enriching up to to 60% yes it’s true that they only need I
17:58
think between 3 to 5% uh for civilian nuclear purposes and maybe some like around 20 to 25% for some medical needs
18:06
but that is what is known as a latent nuclear deterrent there is another reason why they would have that they
18:11
want to demonstrate that they can get the bomb but they don’t have it right now to stop something like this
18:17
happening but the bottom line is that since 2007 our CIA has said they’re not
18:22
uh they don’t have nuclear weapons and they’re not striving to achieve them tulsi Gabbard not only in her testimony
18:28
but in the director of national intelligence as her capacity serving in that role in the annual threat uh
18:33
assessment just put out a couple months ago reaffirmed the same thing and so is the global community iran has been
18:39
willing to negotiate this entire time and maybe the negotiations haven’t been successful but even Benjamin Netanyahu
18:46
in his interview with Brett Bayer the other day couldn’t even manage to lie and say that they’ve broken out and
18:52
they’re pursuing he said “Maybe a year.” The same thing he’s been saying since I was 7 years old lying over and over and
18:59
over again for the because he wants a regime change war here and he’s he’s said this in his own words and so have
19:05
all of the neoconservatives look right here on your show Pierce which I think might be the most fascinating moment in
19:11
the history of uncensored when General Wesley Clark reaffirmed that not only
19:16
had he seen the plans to overthrow seven countries in 5 years but that it went all the way back to the early ‘9s and
19:22
that it was revived in his words in a study paid for by the Israelis they’ve
19:27
gotten the six other ones this is the seventh one this is not This war is not about nukes that Iran doesn’t have and
19:35
just one more point I would make as as the great Scott Horton said the other day look I mean even if they were
19:41
developing nukes which they’re not you know um Truman knew that the Soviets
19:47
were developing nukes he didn’t launch an aggressive war against them for it and and Johnson knew that Maetong was
19:54
developing nukes he still didn’t launch an aggressive war against the country and the point is that you could sit here
19:59
and say just like they did with Moar Gaddafi in Libya you could sit here and say “No no no we’re just going to have a
20:04
no-fly zone we won’t have boots on the ground we won’t have this look Iran has already demonstrated already in a few
20:11
days that this war has been going on that they’re more capable than all of the other countries we picked on in the
20:16
terror wars they’ve already hit Israel and killed people there what’s going to happen when a few Americans get killed
20:22
hopefully this doesn’t but what’s going to happen if that happens what do you think Donald Trump’s going to do
20:28
many of us carry around bulky worn out wallets that are uncomfortable and full of junk the big question is why ridge
20:34
wallets can hold 12 cars plus cash with zero bulk they’re made from premium materials like aluminum titanium and
20:42
carbon fiber and they’re built with RFID blocking technology to defend your cards against digital theft ridge offers a
20:48
lifetime warranty so this might be the last wallet you ever need the same lifetime guarantee applies to their key
20:54
cases suitcases and rings all of them come with free shipping and a 99-day
21:00
trial for a limited time get 10% off at Ridge by using code peers pie at
21:06
checkout just head to ridge.com and use code peers after you purchase they will
21:11
ask you where you heard about them so please support our show and tell them I sent you
21:17
i think that is is an amazingly big question uh Constantine your response to that well it’s fascinating so the
21:23
Iranians are willing to the negotiate to negotiate but the negotiations aren’t going anywhere that’s very strange way
21:29
of looking at it look there’s so much to address there because first of all you got to think about this and understand
21:35
this from an Israeli perspective in the situation a lot of people think that Israel has just launched a war in Iran
21:40
that’s not how Israel sees this at all israel has been at war with Iran since October the 7th when an Iranian proxy
21:47
Hamas attacked them on October the 8th an Iranian proxy Hezbollah began to fire rockets into Israel then the Houthis
21:55
another Iranian proxy began to attack shipping and also Israel right uh now
22:00
what has happened since then is Israel is eliminated those threats to they was
22:05
going to say deballed but decapitated Hezbollah they dealt with the threat of Hamas and they are now in a position to
22:10
deal with the threat they’ve always been concerned about now why is Israel so concerned about this well first of all
22:16
Iran has been saying for a very long time they don’t want regime change in Israel they want the state of Israel not
22:23
to exist now think about the fact that in the post October 7 world they cannot
22:29
take the risk that they’re only enriching uranium to 60% because they
22:34
want to threaten to have nuclear weapons that is not something they can do and by the way Pierce there’s something that
22:39
people don’t seem to understand about you know we struggle in the West i really do think we all struggle in the West to understand the fundamentalist
22:46
mindset and let me give you an example of what the regime in Iran is like so that we can all understand what the
22:52
threat here is after the Islamic revolution happened in in Iran in 79 the
22:57
war broke out between Iran and Iraq and in that war Iran was at a disadvantage it was militarily backward it wasn’t
23:04
financially able to deal with that and you know what they did they attempted to mitigate that by recruiting as many
23:10
child soldiers as they could didn’t know how we don’t know how many because they didn’t bother to count but it’s hundreds of thousands and because some of them
23:17
were too young and too weak to fight they didn’t send them to the front line they sent them to sweep minefields with
23:24
their own bodies that is what this regime does now if those people are willing to do that to their own children
23:31
9 10 11 12 year olds what do you think they would do to the children of their
23:36
enemies if they get a nuclear weapon or if they get close to or if they’re allowed to continue funding proxies
23:42
around the Middle East in order to attack Israel as they’ve already done dave Smith okay can I can I respond to
23:48
some of this Pierce because as I always insist when I come on your show it’s all I’m always ironically I get called a
23:54
moral relativist when I criticize Israel but I’m the one who’s always asking for an objective standard here that we can
24:00
judge all sides on because it’s just Yeah you can just focus on the horrible things that Iran did in the 1980 war
24:05
with Iraq which Saddam Hussein launched and the US backed Saddam Hussein as he was using chemical weapons and so that
24:12
justifies using children to walk into minefields no that is not what I’m saying let me finish my point here
24:18
instead instead of just straw man Well I was about to say so let me finish it okay by the way Israel never killed any
24:23
children as you know Pierce right they have the most Israel is not sending its own children into minefield it’s a
24:28
massive difference okay let me Constantine let me finish my point and then you can respond to it and see if
24:34
you can you can take it on now when you sit here and say that um they’ve been at war with Iran since October 7th because
24:41
Hamas is their proxies what exactly you know proxy means that I would think you
24:48
have operational control over them or something like that well actually let me let me let me explain what I think that
24:54
means because I’ve been arguing that point in terms of understanding where Israel comes from on this which is that
25:00
there there can be no doubt I don’t think Dave you would cast out on this that it Iran has financially and
25:08
militarily given active and sustained support for a number of years to
25:13
Hezbollah to the Houthis and to Hamas i mean you wouldn’t dispute that right so
25:19
Pierce then by your logic and Constantin’s logic is Israel our proxy
25:26
they just attacked Iran well I would say that Israel is actually you could well argue given the amount of support that
25:32
America gives Israel militarily and economically yes I think
25:39
one person’s ally is another person can I make some points on this but hold on hold on let me just Yeah I think
25:46
Can I flesh out your Dave i I’m very happy to hear a counter argument can I just flesh out Pierce’s point a little bit if that’s okay so here’s what we
25:54
know uh according to the State Department’s own figures Iran gives Hamas about $100 million a year latest
26:01
figures they’ve been funding Hamas since the early 1990s yahwa said in 2017 that
26:08
Iran is the single biggest military and financial backer of Hamas Hamas’s
26:13
military wing in September 2023 a month before October the 7th
26:19
500 Hamas fighters and Palestinian Islamic Jihad fighters were being trained by the Islamic Revolutionary
26:25
Guard uh abroad i can’t remember if it’s in Lebanon or in Iran proper and there are numerous chronicle documented
26:32
meetings between senior uh commanders of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and Hamas and Hezbollah fighters in the
26:39
leadup to it what do you think they were doing talking about world peace and swapping hummus recipes this is
26:44
something that they’ve been involved in very heavily and they continue to be involved in and Hamas and Hezbollah are
26:51
the sword hanging over Israel’s neck that is Iran has used in order to prevent the very thing that’s happening
26:56
now dave okay so to be clear here it’s an outrage that um Iran has sold weapons
27:05
and given money to Hamas and therefore Hamas is their proxy yet as we all know
27:10
Pierce and you me and you have discussed this two weeks before October 7th Benjamin Netanyahu sends the head of
27:16
MSAD to Qatar to make sure that the funding to Hamas continues yet is Hamas
27:22
now a proxy of Israel is Israel at war with itself well I certainly I think on that point I I certainly think that
27:29
Benjamin Netanyahu when this is all over is going to have a monumental day of reckoning not just in the corruption
27:35
courts but I think he’s going to have a monumental day of reckoning about how he allowed this to happen on his watch how
27:42
Mossad so spectacularly dropped the ball no one can give me a good explanation for why they can carry out this kind of
27:48
attack on Hezbollah with the pages and carry out so precise an attack in Iran but didn’t know didn’t apparently know
27:55
that Hamas were spending 20 years building a tunnel system and didn’t know 3,000 of them were about to pour over
28:01
the border i will never defend Netanyahu in this i think he’s going to be a busted flush i suspect he sees this
28:08
attack on Iran as being a a chance to avoid being a busted flush for a little
28:14
longer than it might have been the case but there’s going to be a day of reckoning for him and the fact that he actively encouraged billions of dollars
28:21
to be funneled to Hamas to create a divide and rule strategy between Hamas
28:27
and the Palestinian Authority has also turned out to be one of the most catastrophically wrong things that an
28:32
Israeli leader could possibly have done so look that’s where I think would end none of this makes Hamas and Israel
28:38
proxy right okay fine fine fine well yeah i mean it did kind of by the definition primary source of their
28:45
funding and support oh oh okay fine okay it’s got to be primary just being Okay fine whatever uh anyway the point is
28:52
this right obviously right now Israel has taken out uh much of the Hezbollah
28:58
leadership the Houthis have been bombed i think they’re still a bit of a problem for them they’ve been absolutely
29:03
leveling Gaza and so they think this is the moment and of course Bashar al-Assad fell as well there so now they think
29:09
this is the moment for regime change in Iran it’s the same reason why people like Ben Shapiro were celebrating when
29:14
Bashar al-Assad fell um yeah now uh the Shiite crescent is no longer supplying
29:20
weapons from Iran to Hezbollah but I’m not an Israeli i’m an American i’m not
29:25
I’m not cheering when the Amir of al-Qaeda takes over uh in in Syria and
29:31
listen oh whatever you put the risk at here which if this thing keeps escalating the risk of this going to a
29:36
real ground war another war in the war on terrorism I am I am let me be very clear when I say this i don’t know that
29:43
America will survive this we went into the terror wars in a much stronger place than we’re going into this one and this
29:49
is a much tougher opponent than Saddam Hussein or or Moar Gaddafi we didn’t go
29:54
into the terror wars $37 trillion in debt we didn’t go into the terror wars with with the cultural and political and
30:00
racial divides we have mass protests in the streets right now over Donald Trump trying to enforce his immigration policy
30:07
this is going to be this has the potential to be an utter disaster and why should any American or or um British
30:16
person for that matter why should any of us support this war because Israel thinks it’s in their interest israel has
30:22
attacked Okay look I would I would argue it’s not just in Israel’s interest i
30:27
think Iran is an evil regime that oppresses its people uh that has funded
30:32
terrorism so Saddam Hussein Well yeah I agree i agree but in Saddam Hussein’s case I never believed Saddam Hussein
30:38
never funded terrorism well I never I never believed that Saddam Hussein had never funed terrorism i think the difference there was no terrorism in
30:44
Iraq until we got rid of Saddam actually tax day has passed but for millions of
30:50
Americans that’s where the trouble begins the IRS is now ramping up enforcement for those who miss the April
30:56
deadline or still owe back taxes well today’s sponsor Tax Network USA can
31:02
still help if your books are a mess if you’re self-employed or if you’re a business owner Tax Network USA
31:09
specializes in cleaning up financial chaos and getting you back on track quickly they say the IRS is applying
31:15
enforcement pressure at levels they’ve never seen before but even after the deadline it’s not too late to take
31:22
control your consultation is completely free acting now could stop stop penalties threatening letters and
31:28
surprise levies before they escalate call 1 8009581000
31:34
or visit tnusa.com/pers that’s tnusa.com/perse
31:43
let Tax NetworkUSA make the next move not the IRS
31:49
no no no no i’m sorry just to be clear I said that before I heard Pierce Morgan make that point i was saying about being a brutally oppressive uh a brutally
31:56
oppressive dictator i I I think you can’t hold any truck for this Iranian regime i think a lot of Iranian people
32:02
would agree with that i think they would love to get rid of them i think that Israel has every right to feel
32:08
threatened by Iran’s tentacles and the way they supported three different terror groups right on their border
32:15
so so I’m not I’m not saying that you’re not right that this might all backfire let me just ask you i’m not saying I’m not saying it may not backfire i’m just
32:21
saying I do understand why Israel has decided to do it now i think they sense
32:27
that Iran’s regime has never been weaker because of what’s happened in Syria because of what happened to Hezbollah
32:33
you know what’s been the most significant moment of the last week probably Hezbollah saying “We’re not getting involved in this.” Right i mean
32:40
that to me was a very significant moment and that may well have emboldened not just Israel to continue pummeling uh
32:47
Iran but also may have emboldened Trump to think well actually if we’re ever going to deal with this regime now is
32:53
the moment now it it that’s not to say Dave that you’re not right that this could all backfire horrendously and if
33:00
and if America gets sucked into a ground war then it will be a complete nightmare i’ve got no doubt about that yes but
33:05
would you also concern Would you concede though if you allow Iran to uranium that
33:11
also could backfire yes I I was about to say that and also I was about to say that Russia is now making pretty
33:17
worrying noises that if America gets involved it’s not going to tolerate it so you can’t ignore that given what’s
33:23
what’s happening in Ukraine um but yeah I think in your point uh Constantine yes
33:28
I I when I saw the IAE uh report I read it and I thought they’ve gone from 3% to
33:35
60% uranium enrichment and there’s only reason one reason you would do that either you take Dave’s view which is
33:41
they’re doing that because they want to have a form of nuclear deterrent without actually having a bomb or if you’re
33:46
Israel you’re like “These people have been funding terrorism against us for decades and now they’ve gone from 3% to
33:53
60% way more than is needed for any civilian use clearly they are on a fast
33:59
track here to be a nuclear power and we cannot allow that to happen.” So I do Well I’ll let Constantine respond first
34:06
but I do that’s why I do understand Let’s be honest why Israel feels the way it does well exactly and let’s be honest
34:12
about something here Pers the three of us are sitting in comfortable airond conditioned studios on the other side of
34:18
the world from the region where this is happening we have the luxury to pontificate about the real reason that
34:25
Iran is enriching uranium to no near weapons grade israel does not have the
34:30
ability to get this wrong and then go “Well I apologize i got this one wrong.” As Dave has done with President Trump he
34:35
supported him being elected and now he’s go I got it wrong guys let’s impeach him israel if it gets this wrong gets
34:42
annihilated they do not have the luxury of that now Dave I think the point you make about the American people I have
34:48
the greatest respect for for the American people and they should determine the course of America themselves they’ve elected Donald Trump
34:55
uh and that is the reality no one here peers found out I think with some
35:00
history that Americans don’t like being what told what to do by foreigners uh and I’m certainly not going to do that it’s up to the American people i know
35:06
the American people don’t want boots on the ground and neither do I and neither do sensible people i think I think the
35:13
extent of Americans involvement should be to help Israel defend itself against the missile attacks and let them get the
35:19
job done themselves i agree with you this is Israel’s war they should prosecute the prosecute it to the best of their ability and they should deal
35:25
with the threat that they face from Iran i don’t want a a massive involvement of the West i don’t think that’s what we
35:31
need and by the way P just one quick point slightly tangential but that’s very important for those people who care
35:37
about what’s happening in Ukraine this is brilliant for Ukraine because Iran has been one of the biggest suppliers of
35:42
drones the suicide drones that have been raining down in Ukrainian cities and killing civilians and military personnel
35:49
there the fact that Iran and Russia are now having to deal with this situation takes a lot of pressure off Ukraine and
35:55
it’s good for that reason as well all right Dave um you know the one thing I would quibble with about what you said earlier was about the way that Iran has
36:02
responded they always threaten annihilation when they get attacked right or when they’re involved in any
36:08
kind of skirmish we’ve heard it towards the end of last year and nothing really happened we’ve heard it again now and
36:14
although yes they’ve got through the the Iron Dome several times they’ve killed some civilians in Tel Aviv this is
36:21
indisputable so they technically have done better in terms of their revenge attack than than other countries have
36:28
fared against Israel i accept that but I also think we are far removed from seeing any kind of you know huge
36:36
resistance coming out of Iran in fact what you’re seeing is their bluff potentially getting called here that a
36:42
lot of it has been rhetoric built on sand literally and that they don’t actually have the military capability to
36:49
even tackle a country onetenth its size in terms of population let alone if the
36:56
United States was to get involved so I I I think what you’re seeing is actually the opposite of the way you
37:01
characterized it i don’t think you’re seeing a massive response from Iran i think you’re seeing as good as they can
37:07
do and it’s not very much well look I mean this is this is what
37:12
remains to be seen and we don’t know but in 2007 when Dick Cheney was trying to push George W bush into uh war with Iran
37:20
it was the Pentagon who stopped George W bush from doing it and it was them who said that we do not have escalation
37:26
dominance over Iran essentially meaning that we have you know we still have thousands of troops in Iraq right now we
37:32
have bases and embassies all throughout the region that they can touch now the We’ll see i guess Pierce I guess we’re
37:39
going to play this game i guess we’re going to play this incredibly risky game it’s high risk no for no reason
37:45
essentially from the United States of America’s interests and you know look this stuff I’m sorry I just find this to
37:51
be too ridiculous all of the intelligence is saying that they don’t have nuclear weapons and they’re not pursuing nuclear weapons there is one
37:58
country one government in the Middle East that is not a member of the non-prololiferation treaties that has
38:03
nuclear weapons secretly and it ain’t Iran it’s Israel it is so ridiculous well I agree it’s absurd as you know i I
38:11
agree i agree i don’t understand how Israel is allowed to continue pretending they don’t have and also What are you
38:19
saying are you saying Iran should develop nuclear weapons to compensate for that reality or No no no what I’m
38:24
saying what I’m saying is this okay whenever you guys talk about this even already and Pierce I got to say I
38:30
thought you were a little bit guilty of this right after October 7th understandably perhaps so but even right
38:35
now whenever we talk it’s all about the Israeli perspective as if we’re all Israelis oh Israel can’t take the risk
38:41
that they have 60% enrichment israel can’t get this wrong the way I could change my mind about supporting Donald
38:47
Trump i guess Israel can get it wrong when they lure America into a war when they pump out propaganda saying that
38:53
Saddam has weapons of mass destruction that’s okay when they get that one wrong but they can’t get this one wrong okay
38:58
fine why are you blaming Israel for that it was your own government lying to us about that i was protesting against the
39:03
war in Iraq exactly the same way you and Peter we all oppose but it was our government’s lying to us it wasn’t about
39:10
Israel why is everything that happens in the world the fall of Israel day this is such a blatant straw man i didn’t say
39:15
everything in the world is the fault of Israel i’m saying they were also guilty of this why are you putting the emphasis
39:20
on when George W bush and Tony Blair were using their bully pulpits to make this point to a far wider audience than
39:27
some guy in the Middle East called Benjamin Netanyahu if you think that I am removing any of the blame from George W bush or Tony
39:34
Blair I assure you I assure you you’re wrong and you don’t know what you’re talking about i’ve been blasting them
39:39
for years the war criminals who should be in the head that is not the issue we are talking specifically about the
39:45
nation of Israel right now so I’m talking about their responsibility and why is it by the way that this is always
39:50
a one-way street you know that that I hear all the hawks constantly being like Iran said this Iran threatened this what
39:57
about the threats in the other direction maybe Iran feels like they don’t have a choice to look iran is on the list of
40:05
seven countries that are supposed to be overthrown the US government went and overthrew both of their nextoor
40:11
neighbors invaded the countries and destroyed them after putting Iran on the axis of evil list when they had nothing
40:17
to do with 9/11 and then when Mar Gaddafi denuclearized they went in there and overthrew him in the most violent
40:24
brutal way was sodomized to death by a pack of madmen maybe Iran also feels
40:29
that they can’t get this one wrong why are we doing this this is a country that poses no threat to the United States of
40:35
America and if you guys want to like try to like uh hang on the fence here and go “Hey I’m not telling Americans what to
40:41
do i think Israel should do it on their own.” But that’s just a fantasy land they’re not doing it on their own
40:46
they’re doing it with our weapons with our intelligence support with our money with us protecting them from a
40:52
retaliation strike and at least possibly with our president using negotiations to
40:59
dupe Iran into thinking that they weren’t at risk i mean that’s what Benjamin Netanyahu says and that’s what some other reporting says maybe that’s
41:05
not the case but either way he pretended like he was afterward so no none of this is being done without America this is
41:11
this is about a regime change war they all of them said it in their own words they’re on record do you guys think
41:17
Benjamin Netanyahu has been mistaken for 30 years claiming that Iran is a year to
41:22
three years away from a nuke or was he lying well I think I I think listen
41:28
listen I think the reality is the thing that struck me was going from 3% to 60%
41:34
suggests an intent this is just an incontrovertible no one no one the only country but
41:41
nobody disputes that Iran has gone from 3% to 60% in your immersion right so so
41:48
that so that is all unlike with Saddam and the WMD that didn’t exist that is indisputable it’s just how you interpret
41:54
what what they’re intending to do with that now let me ask you can I just one quick thing on this so first of all
42:00
those regime wars you’re talking about are the fault of the US and other Western governments who pursued them that’s who’s responsible that’s who
42:07
should be to blame and as you say should be prosecuted for that but the reason people rightly call you a moral relativist Dave is that you don’t seem
42:14
to understand the difference between Yes I think it’s quite clear that Benjamin Netanyahu wants regime change in Iran
42:19
but that is not the same as the regime in Iran wanting to destroy Israel
42:25
there’s a big difference if the Mullers in Iran wanted a different prime minister of Israel that is not the same
42:31
as wanting to destroy the entire country and the reason Israel is as paranoid about these things as it is let’s be
42:37
honest it’s surrounded or at least wasn’t until recently when opinion in many Arab countries changed towards
42:42
Israel thanks to President Trump’s Abraham Accords Israel was surrounded by many many countries who don’t believe
42:49
that it has a right to exist and that’s the difference and that’s why people call you a moral relativist well okay
42:56
well that’s totally ridiculous and makes no sense at all and it only works I’m about to answer Constantin let let me
43:02
just finish uh because it only makes sense when you only say I ascribed the worst of intentions to this regime and
43:08
the best of intentions to this what was what was overthrowing Gaddafi was that simply replacing the leader or was that
43:14
destroying the country turning it into a failed you brought in a different conflict let’s stick to Israel and Iraq
43:19
no the Israelis say we want regime change the Iranians say we want to wipe you off the map like
43:27
I’m Hold on so I’m the moral relativist but then when I point out what one side actually did you run away from it and
43:33
say “Oh no no no we can’t talk about that.” Your government that destroyed Libya is not Israel
43:39
do you know anything about this israel israel was lobbying for us to do this for years who made the decision to do
43:45
that years our government and I hold them criminally responsible yes constantin constantin why are you are
43:52
you an Israeli why are you constantly running cover for them because I believe in speaking the truth and being honest
43:57
instead of dragging in stuff that is irrelevant no no no no it’s not irrelevant at all what are you talking
44:03
about yes my government is criminally responsible for the war that they launched and the is and the Israeli
44:08
government is also responsible for constantly trying to lure my government into more wars that’s what I’m standing
44:15
up against right now so the American government is so gullible that they just go around invading countries on the say
44:20
so of Israel again what a straw man dude benjamin Netanyahu came to America in
44:26
2002 and testified before Congress that the US should overthrow Saddam Hussein
44:31
Muar Gaddafi and the Iranian regime this isn’t a secret he’s advocating that we fight more wars and I’m telling you that
44:37
this war which we do not need to fight which is not in our interest has the potential to be devastating to our
44:44
country let alone the region what What is What is the moral relativism in any of that i’m not saying the Iranians are
44:50
good people is one side wants to wipe the other one from the map the other side wants not to have people who want
44:55
to do that in charge of that country but Pierce do you not get my Let me just see pierce do you get my point here this is
45:01
what they said from the very beginning of the war in Gaza israel doesn’t want to wipe Gaza off the map israel just wants to retrieve the hostages and get
45:08
it but they are wiping it off the map so why do you just get to have this standard where you decide what they want
45:13
to do i can’t base it on their track record we can’t look at Iraq we can’t look at Libya we can’t look at Afghanistan evidently as all the hawks
45:20
can say we can look at World War II everything is just like World War II but it’s not like the last
45:26
countries off the map left and right they’ve done their track record yeah as you know I’ve been increasingly critical
45:32
of the Israel strategy in Gaza it makes no sense until you hear people like
45:37
Smodri talking brazenly and openly about ethnic cleansing i mean it doesn’t make any pretense and at that point I do
45:44
think that there are certainly people on that uh in that government at senior level who absolutely want to get all the
45:50
Palestinians out of Gaza out of the West Bank and if that has been their plan all along from October the 8th then I was
45:57
duped and people that feared that were correct and we’ll have to see how that how that plays itself out i hope I hope
46:03
that is not going to actually be the case and the people who say who say on the Israeli side they say to me well you
46:09
know Smidge isn’t the government well he’s a pretty senior member of that government and he’s not even hiding what
46:14
he thinks should be happening um before we finish this guys I want to just talk about the the politics here for Trump as
46:20
well because it’s really interesting to me um Constantine you’ve got you’ve got the conservative right in America
46:25
absolutely split down the middle uh you’ve got Tucker Carson on one side and a lot of people who agree with him that
46:31
this could be a disaster for America for Trump they shouldn’t be doing it um obviously Dave and Tucker Carlson now uh
46:38
unusual bedfellows on this but uh there’s always a first time for everything but you also have a lot of
46:43
people on the conservative right you know Lindsey Graham John Bolton others who are absolutely gung-ho um to get
46:50
stuck into Iran here is there a danger that politically this really does
46:57
fragment Trump’s base support and what does that mean for the Republicans for
47:02
MAGA for Trump for the future for JD Vance and people who are aligned with
47:07
Trump maybe at the next election and so on well I should preface this by saying I’m an outside observer in the United
47:13
States i do go there a lot i spend a lot of time there i speak to people there but I certainly wouldn’t claim to to be you know the the the greatest expert in
47:19
the world about what’s happening in America my sense unexpert sense of this is that actually I think your
47:25
presentation of it is is a very online focused presentation i think if you look at the polling the vast majority of
47:30
people in America are basically in the position I described earlier which is they don’t want Iran to get anywhere
47:36
near or continue to get closer to developing nuclear weapons and they don’t want American boots on the ground
47:41
and that’s the the dilemma that Donald Trump has to navigate uh and if he can do that well there’s a third dilemma so
47:47
this is where it gets more complicated because I don’t think he’s even thinking about boots on the ground but I do think
47:53
he is thinking probably as we speak about whether he allows an American B-52
48:00
to take a 30,000 bomb and drop it on the nuclear sites which Israel hasn’t got the ability to get to i think that is
48:07
probably more likely more likely than not right now anybody may order that happens and it’s successful and it
48:14
doesn’t lead to an escalation everyone’s going to love it because Americans love to win and they love to bomb right
48:19
let’s be honest that’s that’s the history of the last 20 years and if that happens they’ll be very happy and if it
48:24
if it goes in a different direction they will be very unhappy so you’re right it’s a big call and I don’t think anyone sitting here or frankly anywhere knows
48:31
how it’s actually going to play out or whether it’s a good idea and you know I’m not sitting here advocating for that
48:37
necessarily i think uh Israel seems to be doing enough damage to significantly
48:42
degrade any attempts Iran is making to uh to have a nuclear enrichment program
48:48
and I hope that’s that’s the the the thing that we pursue by the way I think I don’t think it’s split MAGA down the
48:54
middle at all that’s what it appears like on X i really don’t think when you talk to ordinary people that’s a situation in America especially in the
49:01
Republican party which is overwhelmingly pro-Israel and has been for a very long time okay Dave Smith
49:08
um there the there’s no question i mean I I largely agree with Constantin there i think if Trump can thread the needle
49:14
here and not lead to a catastrophe that he can survive this politically i do think he’s downplaying the the split a
49:21
little bit um it’s uh again it’s not it’s not just about like polls about how
49:27
people feel about boots on the ground which obviously the American people are largely opposed to and yes it is true
49:33
that most of the Republicans do support Israel although m uh poll after poll has
49:38
demonstrated that this is really changing with the younger generation but look I mean you have a situation right
49:44
now and you know uh yesterday like I started the day by uh denouncing Donald Trump and I was you know taking a lot
49:51
trending on Twitter and getting a lot of praise and a lot of insults and all that stuff but by the end of the day it was
49:56
like Tucker Carlson was being insulted by Donald Trump for not even criticizing him really just criticizing the policy
50:03
while heaping praise on Donald Trump but Steve Bannon Charlie Kirk I mean some of the most influential conservative voices
50:10
in the United States of America have all come out and really drawn a red line that we do not want to have another war
50:16
here so the the point is that if it does get to that and that’s a big if but if
50:22
it does come to that point um like a real boots on the ground war Donald Trump will absolutely destroy his
50:29
coalition and his legacy along with it as well as his entire domestic agenda i mean you need as much political capital
50:35
as you can get when there’s people out on the streets protesting against his immigration policies and he’s he’s
50:41
risking squandering all of this for something that’s absolutely no threat to the United States of America at all on
50:47
the side of the country who secretly developed nukes and is not in the non-prololiferation treaty against the
50:53
country who doesn’t have nukes and is in the non-prololiferation treaty it’s it’s the the most reckless madness a policy
51:00
could possibly be johnson well he’s not pursuing that policy this is what the the point I keep making to Dave what you
51:06
keep doing Dave is taking to the extremist position no one’s talking about boots on the ground except the
51:11
usual Lindsey Grahams who no one is in the Trump cabinet takes seriously on these issues at all i don’t know about
51:16
that they they don’t the conversation that that’s happening is about what is the right level of America’s involvement
51:22
we will see what that is and by the way look I I haven’t seen Charlie Kirk who is genuinely influential I think within
51:28
the MAGA movement criticize President Trump i think he’s been kind of balanced in his commentary all the other people
51:34
the Candace Owenses the Tucker Carlson’s etc the vast majority of people within the conservative movement in America are
51:40
not taking their opinion on this issue and the polls bear that out tucker though hold on i would say
51:48
huge audiences well I’m not saying they don’t have huge audiences but I’m saying a lot of those audiences are not within
51:53
the conservative movement but when Tucker chewed up Ted Cruz for example and did it pretty skillfully I have to
51:59
say it made Cruz look pretty illinformed about Iran that’s got a massive amount of mainstream media attention today you
52:06
know I think that you can’t ignore i mean it’s interesting to me look at the split you know the MAGA names against Trump candace Owens you Dave Marjorie
52:14
Taylor Green Alex Jones Matt Walsh um Tucker Carson obviously then you got the ones for Charlie Kat’s been pretty
52:21
balanced like you said Lindsey Graham Ben Shapiro Dave Rubin Mark Lavine i mean I’ve not seen that kind of split on
52:28
many issues and this is potentially the biggest issue of all can I just just
52:34
even responding to what Constantin just said because I thought I made this point pretty clear at the beginning but let me let me try to make it clear you can sit
52:40
here and say nobody’s talking about boots on the ground all you want to this whole thing is about a regime change and
52:47
all of the major players have admitted this in their own words even Benjamin Netanyahu wasn’t saying that Iran was on
52:54
the cusp of having nuclear weapons that could be regime change that could be regime change as we saw in Syria towards
53:00
the end of last year in December when after a long and bloody and awful civil war suddenly the downfall of Assad
53:08
happened incredibly quickly and it didn’t involve boots on the ground in any conventional sense it involved
53:14
actual Syrian boots from civilians that’s right and they were able to
53:20
that’s why I I see you know I don’t think it can be ruled out that if enough Iranian people feel that their regime
53:27
has been humiliated has actually been exposed for not being able to hit back in the way they’ve always vowed to um
53:34
feel that they’re weak and um disgraced and so on you you know why couldn’t there be an uprising like we saw in
53:41
Syria at the end of last year I don’t think it could be ruled out I mean listen listen so Pierce just to be clear
53:47
because you are right about that there are the models like Libya and Syria where it didn’t require long occupations
53:53
and nation building and all you got was a failed state with open air slave markets a massive refugee crisis into
53:59
Europe and now you have al-Qaeda in charge of Syria and excuse me as an American my beef is with al-Qaeda not he
54:07
is not look he is not behaving like an a member of al-Qaeda now he’s a leader of
54:12
the country he appears to be so I’m not I’m not taking any I’m not listen I
54:18
don’t take any as Donald Trump once says I don’t trust anyone right so let’s see I’m not saying trust trust here hold on
54:25
hold on Pierce I’m not saying trust this man was fighting against America in the Iraq part of the insurgents killing our
54:33
boys so why am I supposed to care about
54:38
Listen Nelson Mandela was on the UK’s prescribed terrorist terrorist under
54:44
Margaret Thatcher and went on to become one of the greatest people in history and led his country to a more unified
54:49
place in other words Trump is taking a bet that this new leader in Syria actually is a reformed character and
54:56
certainly so far you would have to say that the signs are reasonably encouraging given the apocalyptic
55:03
feelings that some people had that he would simply be Mr al-qaeda presiding
55:09
over over complete mayhem one thing is worth adding by the way on this is that Iran has a history Iran just quick point
55:16
D very quick Iran has a history of 25 years or maybe 26 years of living in in
55:21
a secular and relatively liberal free society so uh the people of Persia have
55:26
a very different history to to the countries you’re talking about this is not to say that regime change or the
55:32
change of a regime does not lead to catastrophe i mean I and there’s no obvious I mean someone wrote a very good piece about this week there is no
55:39
obvious savior waiting in the wings other than the sha’s son who is a quite
55:45
you know divisive character i’ve interviewed him I like him personally but divisive character but there’s no like Mandela figure that you could point
55:52
to and say is waiting in the wings to potentially come and rescue Iran that person so far hasn’t been identified can
56:00
I just make a couple quick points on this okay so like number one we launched 25 years of what they are dubbed forever
56:08
wars on the justification that al-Qaeda came over here and murdered innocent
56:13
American citizens and now I’m supposed to make up with al-Qaeda and forgive them for that because he put on a
56:20
three-piece suit while I focus on Israel’s enemies i just find this to be like a crazy ask of the American people
56:26
and then you know look it’s real easy to sit here and say “Oh yeah they had a strongition a tra tradition of liberalism and everything’s going to
56:33
work out this time for the first time we’re going to have a regime change that’s going to work out really smoothly iran is so weak the people hate them so
56:40
much this regime has been in power since 1979 spending the vast majority of that
56:45
time having the most powerful governments on the in the history of the world hellbent on ousting this regime
56:53
and they’ve survived this long maybe you guys are right this time but you know Pierce come on man i mean you remember
56:59
the mission accomplished banners you remember remember when they had the first elections in Iraq and it even fooled John Stewart and he was
57:05
celebrating oh I guess George W bush was right and then we went on to the most brutal and bloody eight years of civil
57:11
war that saw a million innocent people die the country absolutely destroyed massive um displacements and horror
57:19
stories and so you know it’s like I I don’t know if you guys have noticed this and maybe it’ll make you a little bit uncomfortable but the amount of people
57:25
celebrating this thing four five days into it like oh my god Israel took out all their targets look how easy it was
57:32
we’ve been here before i’ve seen this movie i’ll be honest with you Dave as someone who’s not pushing regime change
57:38
or American involvement as I’ve said in the way that you think people are trying to do I am celebrating the fact that
57:45
Iran is no longer enriching uranium to 60% i think that is worth celebrating i think that’s a good thing i think we
57:51
should all be relieved that that’s happening yeah I kind of agree but I also concerned about I also agree with
57:58
Dave Smith when he says this could go horribly wrong but that’s what we’re all saying i’m saying that too yeah I agree
58:04
this is war no one knows how it’s going to turn out exactly i agree i agree i mean I’ve gone wars of choice well I’ve
58:10
gone as far as saying I think that unlike the Iraq war in 2003 I I I feel like this seems a justified action by
58:18
Israel to protect its people from what is clear fastmoving acceleration of
58:24
uranium by a lethal enemy that is wedded to terror groups all over its border who want to kill it i understand that it
58:30
seems justified now does that mean I think it’s going to work and isn’t going to cause huge problems no and I think
58:37
the jury is very firmly out on that and it’s going to be an extremely fascinating and turbulent few weeks and
58:43
months ahead and I think right now Donald Trump probably the loneliest man in the world sitting in the White House
58:49
working out what does he actually do now and if he does press the button on attacking Iran that will go really
58:55
against pretty much everything he said other than specifically Iran cannot be
59:01
allowed to have a nuclear weapon on in terms of starting a war in the Middle East that is really antitheical against
59:07
everything he’s he’s said he stands for so it’s a really interesting uh momentous decision for Donald Trump to
59:14
be taking and the consequences could be enormous but uh gentlemen I’ve really enjoyed this debate thank you both for
59:19
agreeing to do it i think it was constructed in the the right tone we didn’t descend into ad hominemum attacks
59:25
um can I just say I have a much bigger penis than you Pierce and you Dave
59:30
that’s actually not that’s actually almost certainly not true callaway episode yesterday and Dave
59:37
Smith we all know is the is the most well hung of the three of us so why don’t we just leave it with Dave Dave Smith for the win
59:44
thank you guys thank you Constantin thank you Pierce thanks brother i appreciate it guys thank you very much
59:50
pers Morgan Uncensored is proudly independent the only boss around here is me if you enjoy our show we ask for only
59:56
one simple thing hit subscribe on YouTube and follow Piers Morgan Uncensored on Spotify and Apple podcast
1:00:03
and in return we will continue our mission to inform irritate and entertain and we’ll do it all for free independent
1:00:10
uncensored media has never been more critical and we couldn’t do it without you