Political Prophet Predicts the Next Phase in Iran, Trump’s War Plan, & Israel’s Plot to Sabotage It

Professor, thank you very much for doing this.

We've never met, I don't know a great deal about you,

but I have seen a number of your videos in which you make remarkably accurate predictions.

“So that's what I know about you, and I'm impressed by that, by your ability to call events before they happen.”

So with that in mind, let me ask you, where do you think this war in Iran is going? And how will it be resolved and what are the consequences likely to be? Well, thanks so much for inviting me to talk about my huge fan. I've been on your work for a number of years now. Thank you.

So I think that this war in Iran will be very similar to the war in Ukraine. Meaning that this will be drawn out, be a war of attrition.

Neither side will concede defeat, even though it is in the best interest to reach a ceasefire

and this will have dramatic consequences on the global economy. And this war could drag on for years and years. Already we're seeing major repercussions on the global economy. And that flights are being canceled. In Southeast Asia, they ran out of fuel, so they're asking people to stay at home.

And in a few more months, experts are predicting a food shortage, meaning that nations be forced into food rationing. And today, there's a major escalation in that this really struck the largest gas field in Iran. Iran retaliated by attacking energy infrastructure of the GCC. And Iran has said it that its purpose, its goal, its strategy, is to move oil to turn it off as a barrel,

which will have a really significant impact on the global economy, because the global economy is based on access to cheap energy.

“So unfortunately, I think that we can expect this war to drag on for years and years.”

Eventually, America will send in ground troops. Eventually, they're sure almost will be contested. Eventually, this will spread all across the world. Eventually, other nations will be drawn in. So Saudi Arabia is thinking about declaring war on Iran,

and Saudi Arabia has a neutral defense pact with Pakistan. So Pakistan will be drawn into this war. So things are spawning under control. And just recently, Aliyah La Regini, who is the defector head of the Iranian War effort, was assassinated. He was a traumatic out of statesmen in Iran who had the authority to negotiate a ceasefire.

Now that he's gone, there really is no more off-wrap. So both sides are committed to a long war of attrition. And the consequences for the entire global economy are quite dire. That is, I wouldn't say that's the worst case scenario. Maybe the worst case scenario would include a nuclear strike by one or more actors and

the destruction of the oxamos complex in Jerusalem, which would spark a religious war. So that's as bad as it could get, but you've just described one step before the worst, which is protracted, destructive, impossible to stop. So my question is, because there are so many global players, big global players, the

“U.S. and China, I think, who would be hurt by this?”

Why is there not an incentive to get it settled quickly and why can't that happen? Right. So once this war starts, it achieves a momentum and logic of its own. So the United States doesn't really have an off-wrap, meaning that if it tries to negotiate

the ceasefire with Iran, Iran would ask for reparations about $1 trillion, basically.

It would ask for the United States to leave the Middle East permanently to ensure its long-term survival. If the United States were to do that, then the GCC nations would collectively become climate states of Iran, because only Iran can guarantee their safety, as well as use of the shared homoose, the GCC is the basis of the petruder.

So what the GCC does is it sells well in your stollers, and then recycles this money back into the American economy. So if the GCC were to abandon the petruder, and this would have severe repercussions on the American economy, also there would be a chain reaction in that Japan and South Korea would look at what's happened in the Middle East and decide that the United States can

longer guarantee their safety.

to the possible China threat.

And then you have Europe, and then you would look at what happened in the GCC, as well as

“in Southeast Asia, and they would be like, why are we fighting Russia?”

We want to be in our best interest in negotiate a peace treaty with Russia as soon as possible. What this would mean the collapse of the US dollar as a global reserve currency, remember that America is sitting on $39 dollars in debt. And so the American economy is a conscious scheme that relies on foreign nations to continually buy US dollars.

So the US economy would not be able to stand essentially American withdrawal from the Middle East. So the American just stuck where they are right now, unfortunately. What is the Chinese perspective on this? I mean, it seems like China has an interest in peace in the Persian Gulf with those seven

oil-producing countries, why wouldn't China step in and try to settle this?

“So both the United States and China benefit from the status quo, and China has an interest”

in seeing a very quick solution to this war in Middle East. China imports about 40% of its energy needs from the GCC. So not just Iranian oil, but also the Tory natural gas. So as you point out, China very much wants to see as soon as possible a ceasefire. Unfortunately, it is a nature of the Chinese government not to interfere in foreign affairs.

China doesn't really have a global framework, a grand strategy, it really believes in global trade. It doesn't really have a framework for how to resolve armed conflict. So Chinese policymakers are really stuck. And in fact, Chinese policymakers have come up publicly saying that they would like the

carnage, the violence in Middle East to stop as soon as possible. And so let's try to move to open up, but unfortunately, as I pointed out previously, when war starts, it achieved a momentum in a logic of its own. It's very hard to stop a war once it starts. So if your prediction is correct, and I've prayed that it's not, I'm sure you do too,

hope that you're wrong, but if you're not wrong, and this continues to grind in the way that it is now, destroying energy infrastructure, just really destroying the civilizations of the region and Iran and the GCC, what does that look like in, say, two years globally? What's the effect on the global economy? Right, so this war, it will accelerate three major trends, and nations will have to adapt

to a new reality in which energy is longer cheap and accessible.

The first major trend is the industrialization, meaning that right now, you just have

too many people living in cities. And you can do that as long as you can import cheap energy and cheap food, but when cheap energy and cheap food are gone, then you need people to work the fields to grow food

“for your economy, so you have to be industrialized and reduce your energy dependence.”

Okay, that's one major trend that would you see very soon. Second major trend we should see is militarization in that, before we have tax americana, where America basically guaranteed global peace, and America basically prevented nations from going to war against each other. For example, Trump broke a ceasefire between India and Pakistan because these two nations

have much hostilities against each other. But now that America doesn't longer have the aura of invisibility and ability, now that the American military does not come across as almighty, then America doesn't have the power to stop kids from attacking each other on a playground anymore. So nations have to re-motorize, especially nations like Japan, which, before we like to

heavily on American military production, okay, so that's number two, the re-motorization of the world.

And the third major trend we should see is mercantilism, meaning that now that global trade

is disrupted, nations, especially advanced industrial nations such as Japan and Germany, they need to create their own independent self-sufficient supply chains. Fortunately, America doesn't have this issue because the Western Hearst Hemisphere is extremely wealthy and abundant in natural resources. But if you are Japan and Germany, then you have to reach out and expand your borders if

So these are the three major trends we should be seeing very quickly.

Well, here's something that thieves count on security cameras usually stop where Wi-Fi stops, right? Makes sense. So if you've got a barn, a job site, equipment parked outside, long drive way, criminals does a good chance that nobody is watching this because there's no Wi-Fi.

“And that's why we like defend by tactical, it's a new sponsor of this show.”

Defense cameras don't run on Wi-Fi, they run on cellular, just like your phones, they work everywhere. If you've got self-signal, you've got security, middle of nowhere, edge of your property construction site wherever you need it. You don't need Wi-Fi, big difference, and you can see why it matters.

So we use these cameras in places where Wi-Fi doesn't reach, instead of a super simple, you mount the camera, open the Defend app, and you are alive. You get clear footage, night vision alerts, sent right to your phone. It's great for construction sites, ranches, farms, or anyone with a property that stretches beyond a router.

And here's something we really appreciate. Defend does not sell your data, not to tech companies, not to advertise, not to China, no one, your footage belongs to you, and that's big. Plan started about five bucks a month, no contract cancel any time, visit DefendCellCam.com, that's DefendCellCam.com.

I mean, we've, of course, seen this exact dynamic very famously in the last century. And I do think Japan is the big question mark, because traditionally, you know, erasing power, a great power like China, just kind of intuitively demands hegemony in its own region, like China controls the east. I would imagine that's the Chinese perspective, but in the way of that, our Japan, the

historic enemy, and South Korea, but particularly Japan. And I know that people in your country are very focused on Japan. So is it plausible that China allows Japan to become, say, a nuclear-armed power at this point? Right, so, from the surface, it seems as though Japan has a lot of structural weaknesses,

okay? So, for example, it has an aging population, it has the oldest population in the world. That's a huge constraint on the future, growth potential of Japan. Another problem for Japan is that it is resource-dependent. It relies on imports for its resources.

“And Taiwan, it blocks all the shit of Malaka, right?”

Because Japan requires most of its energy from the GCC for the shit of Malaka, and Taiwan would be a barrier.

So if Taiwan were to reunify with China, then basically Japan can be blockaded, and they

can be starved, and the other major issue, which Japan is its economy, where for the past 30 years, it's in a deflationary spiral, because of its excessive debt burden. So there are fundamental weaknesses to Japan, but I'm a historian and I study historical patterns. And what I've seen is that the Japanese people are incredibly resilient.

You go back to the 30th century, and the Mongols made it not once, but twice. And at this time, Japan was very much a fielder nation divided into different fiefdoms, and they can gather as a people to defeat the greatest empire in the world at that time, not once, but twice. And you go to the middle of the 19th century when China was being carved up by these Western

industrial powers, and it seemed as though Japan was what they carved up as well, but the Japanese engagements have called the Meiji Restoration, and in 20 to 30 years time, they went from a feudal backward nation into an industrial power that ultimately defeated Russia in the rest of the Japanese war of 19th century. And then you go to World War II when American devastated Japan, not just nuclear strikes,

but also the fire bombings. So at the end of World War II, Japan was completely devastated, but in 20 years time, in a generation, they became the world's greatest manufacturing power. So I would not cut the Japanese out. There's something about their culture that is extremely resilient, extremely entrepreneurial.

“And I think that given crises, they will come together with people, not adapt to these challenges.”

So if I work too bad, if you give me like a billion dollars and said, in East Asia, you can

invest your money either in China or Japan, or you can invest half and half, well, talk or I'll be honest with you, I wouldn't invest all my money in Japan. That's a what a fascinating analysis. I agree with you, I just, I mean, intuitively I agree with you, but I, I just wonder if China can tolerate that, given the history between the two countries and the focus, and

just the growth of China, can they really allow right in the middle of East Asia, a competing

Right, so the major issue with China is that it's the opposite self, the middle kingdom, you know, China, the middle kingdom, yes, which is to say that the Chinese believe that they are a universe onto themselves. What happens outside China doesn't really impact China. So it's important is to maintain a national sovereignty of China because it is a self-sufficient

nation that has been no interest in the outside world.

Japan has completely opposite in that it is an island, and it requires, it basically needs

to be struck resources from other nations in order to survive as a nation. So these are two very different qualities where China is very much in agricultural, self-sufficient nation that is insular and conservative, and Japan is an outward-looking sea-faring nation. Interesting. It sounds like they can co-exist or you just said it, you're not betting against Japan.

What about South Korea, which has the one lowest of not the lowest birth rate in the

“world in contrast to North Korea, and is basically modeled itself on the United States?”

I mean, down to the most basic level, the U.S. pulling back from East Asia is, I mean, that's going to be a transformative thing I would think for South Korea. What happens? Yeah, South Korea is in a very precarious position, partly because of North Korea. So once the United States is forced with draw from Southeast Asia, then North Korea can

take the initiative. The problem with this conflict is that the largest city in South Korea, it's only 30 minutes away from North Korea and artillery, so in like a whole day, North Korea could flatten Seoul, and so South Korea is in a very precarious position. Also, if you look at the economy of South Korea, it's a very classified, very corrupt system, where there's a few companies

control the entire economy, and this is what's led to intense competition in South Korea, which has led to the extremely low birth rate in South Korea.

“So South Korea is in a very precarious position, but what I will say about the South Koreans”

is that they are fanatical workers, they work really, really hard, and they have a long memory of colonial persecution from both the Chinese and the Japanese, and these are fiercely independent people. So I would not be surprised if North Korea and South Korea would have come to a compromise at some point, because both nations aspire for national unification, and because China

Japan would be in conflict with each other, then the Korean people could actually navigate this conflict to the benefit. That's very smart, I sense you're absolutely right about that.

Let me just ask you about an observation you made parenthetically a second ago, which

is because South Korea's economy is ossified and centralized, it's a monopoly economy. It's birth rate as low. What's the connection between economic monopolies and low birth rate? Yeah, a great question. So when you have an monopoly, what you do is you quit a hierarchy, right, because everyone's

trying to get into these companies, because these companies are most prestigious in South Korea and South Korea is a very much a confusion culture where face is everything. So the problem though is how do you get into these companies? It's a very prestigious position where everyone's trying to get in, right?

“And so you should get in through the college entrance examination, which allows you to”

get into prestigious university, right? So if you are in South Korea in couple, your strategy is either not to have children, because you're kind of a forward to play this game, because you need to send your kid to cram schools,

get the best tutors, basically force all your resources on ensuring the child does well on

the college examination so that he or she can get into some sort. Or you can choose to have, so you can choose not having children, because it's too expensive for you. If you choose to have a children, you can only choose to have one kid, because it's much much more strategic for you to put all your resources into one kid and spread it over through

your four kids. So that's why I'm not going to be not going to lead to a low birth rate. So what you're saying is intense competition for resources, scarce resources produces an incentive that results in low birth rate. Exactly, because everyone sees themselves as competitors against each other, and you lose

a sense of community, right? Because you have a lot of children, because you want to contribute to the community and grow as a nation. But when you see your neighbor as your enemy, then that we, we just, you're incentive to have

Interesting.

“So what will be the economic effects on China, and also on the, on the rest of Asia and”

Southeast Asia, you know, Philippines Vietnam, if this energy crunch continues in the Middle East.

The reality is that this war in the Middle East is having a severe impact already on the

entire Southeast Asian economy. So in the points about six percent of its oil from the GCC, Pakistan, also reports on the majority of its oil, depends on the points about seven to five percent of its oil from the GCC. China is quite about 40 percent, okay?

So all these continents are being impacted and already Thailand Vietnam are running a fuel. And you, you go like gas station, there's just a more fuel for you for your motorbike. And now people are being forced to work from home, there's fuel rationing, there's no jet fuel. So this is impacting all of Southeast Asia.

So the question isn't like who will be impacted because everyone's impacted.

The question is, who will be most resilient and the most willing to innovate and adapt

to this new reality? Because we're not talking about short term war, we're talking about long term change with the way economy.

“And I think that China, where should we, the least resilient and the least ready to adapt”

to this new reality? Because for the past 30, 40 years, China has gotten very wealthy because of the global economy where it imports cheap energy and exports manufacturing goods. And the entire Chinese economy is clearly based on this model. Now for the past 20 years, China has been moving towards a consumer-based economy and

more of an invasion-based economy, AI. But unfortunately, AI itself is dependent on cheap energy. And Chinese consumers are refusing to spend money for a variety of reasons, primarily because they are not that optimistic about China's growth in the future. So Chinese households savings is about 4%.

And the less the government is able to get Chinese to spend more money than it's going to be very hard for the Chinese economy to move towards a consumer-based economy. So all of these ASO will be impacted and I think China will be impacted the most in a long term. Maybe on the short term, because China still has access to a rating oil, I am going to stop

that and now say that they will live sanctions on a rating oil in order to make sure the global economy is not too impacted by this war. In a long term, the Chinese economy is now much to focus on export and manufacturing in order to shift to a much more diverse body economy. Right.

People seem to be more inflamed, just not just emotionally, but physically and more tired than ever, and food is part of the reason. Bad food. Ah, tastes good, but not good for you, for most of human history, people eat actual food. Stuff that your body recognizes, but now you eat a tonic chemicals.

Paleovali is the solution to this. Paleovali's bone broth protein is made from, let's see, a hundred percent grass fed and finished beef bones. That's it, no fillers, no additives, no weird industrial buy products. It's actual food turned to something you can consume every day.

Most people use it the way we do, you blend it into a smoothie or coffee. The chocolate flavor is topped here, it actually tastes awesome. They also have vanilla and salted caramel, plus they make a savory, original, two-maric ginger and an unflavored version you turn to soup rice or even just mix with hot water and drink like bone broth.

You can do any of those things or all of them. Americans use paleovali to support joints, digestion, recovery, paleovali verifies sourcing and tests for pesticide, and that does matter, you don't want to drink pesticide that you probably do and inadvertently.

“If you want to add something genuinely useful to your diet, visit paleovali.com and use”

the code Tucker for checkout, 20 percent off your first order if you do that.

That's paleovali.com code Tucker for 20 percent off. So it's not just the west that is locked into the current arrangement where we consume the east produces. It's the east, they're locked into producing. So this is a massive reorientation for everybody, as I think is what you're saying.

Yeah, and I would say, look, the east is going to be much more impacted than the west because I didn't like the west hemisphere, America, I mean, the wealth in the west hemisphere is just tremendous, I mean, the west hemisphere is so sufficient, but that's not true for Southeast Asia, Southeast Asia is very dependent on energy from overseas. This is a fact to Africa, right, so with this war in Ukraine and with this war in the GCC,

experts are saying that in the worst case scenario, you could have famine in Africa because so much of food and energy sustains the African economy.

What does that look like in five years? Right, so unfortunately, the biggest looser of this war, regardless of how it turns out, even the Americans were to win, the biggest looser is the GCC because for the past 30, 40 years,

the GCC is basically built on a marrage, because it's essentially a desert with very little

access to fresh water and very little agriculture, and so it can really sustain a large population. But with the pressure dollar and with a molecular production, then the GCC nations felt

“free to invest in technology that allowed them to go to population, right?”

So these these salination plants, modern infrastructure, so you sort of saw this massive growth in Dubai, in Qatar, in Riyadh, and what this war has done is shattered this marrage and revealed the limitations of the GCC, so for example, look at Dubai, so Dubai for many years as part of itself as this safe, very cosmopolitan, very open tax haven, so a lot of wealthy people immigrated to Dubai, but because of this war and we're talking about a few

drones hitting hotels, it's really shattered the image of Dubai, and once you're shot at this

marrage, you can never ever rebuild it again, so the idea of Dubai as like the future New York

or London, the financial capital of the GCC, it's this marrage has evaporated. Iran in five years? So Iran is being devastated right now, so the Israelis and Americans are attacking critical infrastructure, so this release attack the largest gas field in Iran.

“I did this salination plant was destroyed, but we also remember what is being hidden from us,”

and what's being hidden from us is a fact that this release in Americans are trying to destroy the capacity of the state to govern the nation, basically destroy the state monopoly on violence, and so what we're hearing are attacks on these officers, militant installations, and there's talk, all special forces going into Iran and starting to fund ethnic groups, like the Kurds and the Palakis in southeast Iran, so no matter what happens

in this war, it's maybe very hard for the government to maintain national control, even if they were to survive this war, and also another huge issue for Iran is that for the

“past few years it suffered drought issues, so as agriculture was heavily impacted,”

they were actually talking about moving terrain, like moving these music people out of the city of Iran because the capital can no longer sustain this large population, so this war will only

exaggerate these environmental issues, especially with the attacks on critical civil infrastructure,

for example, dams, reservoirs, and it's a thick years and years for Iran to recover from this war as a nation, you have basically the storing of ethnic sentiments, you have the destruction of the state's capacity to do the basic services, but the good news for Iran is that it seems as though they will be able to maintain the control of the shrimp humus, and that is critical because now they're able to charge a toll on anyone who uses the shrimp humus, and they're talking about

10%, which in general, about 800 billion dollars a year annually for Iran, so the nation will be destroyed in this war, but if it's able to harness the pride of the Persian people, if it's able to unify the Persian people, and it's able to leverage the resources of the shrimp humus effectively, then we can expect Iran to rise again in like 10 to 20 years time. Where is Israel in a few years from now? So, if you look at the mean beneficiary of this war,

it is Israel, because Israel has an ambition called the Greater Israel Project, which is what they believe that they're God, Yahweh promised to their ancestors, Abraham, and so they believe that Yahweh promised Abraham, all the lands from the Nile in Egypt to your fridies,

and even into Saudi Arabia. So, if you look at what's happening, well, it's convenient in

“that the GCC is being destroyed, Saudi Arabia will probably draw into this war, this possible”

Turkey will be drawn into this war as well, and this war allows Israel to remake the Middle East in its own image. Also, if you think about it, according to Game Theory, the main constraint to issue achieving the Greater Israel Project is actually not Iran, but America, because America guarantees the military safety and protection of the GCC, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait, Buran, UAE, these nations, and so if issue is become dominant,

it's being on the edge of the Middle East, it needs to figure out how to remove America from the equation, and quite honestly, this war has shown the limitations of American power, it's really a northern American people, the American people do not want this war, and American people don't even understand why America is in the Middle East, and so it's very possible that regardless of what happens in this war, America's force withdraw from the Middle

East, which case Israel is able to achieve its Greater Israel Project. Standard security cameras cannot prevent break-ins, they can help catch burglars after they've done, but that's a little late, no? They can steal your stuff, scare your family, maybe hurt you, you need a security system that will stop home invasions before they occur.

“That's why we always recommend simply safe. Simply safe is a whole home security system backed”

by 24/7 monitoring agents you can rely on, even when you're gone. Proactive crime prevention, it's not reactive, and that makes the difference plus no required long-term contract that gives you flexibility to switch if you don't like it. That's unlikely, though, because we think simply safe is excellent, and they're so confident in the protection they

back it with an anti-ff guarantee. Use by over 4 million people, 20 years of experience,

named Best Home Security System of 2026, it's the peak of the industry. And right now, listeners to this show can get 50% off their new simply safe system at simplysafe.com/tucker. It's simplysafe.com/tucker. There is no safe, like simplysafe. It was clear to me that that was part of the motive that Israel understood this, and rope denied states into this war in order to get the United States out, in order to hurt the United

“States, and get the United States out of the Middle East. Do you think that will be successful?”

I think the way this war is going, this plan will work. And the reason why is they were, they were going military has not fought a real war for decades.

Do you think this war in Iraq was not a real war because I'm who's saying, basically gave up.

He didn't have air defense because those egg and extensions had destroyed his economy, and his logic was this. Let the Americans invade. They can't possibly invade because if they destroy us, that would make Iran, which has hostilities against America, the regional power. So why would America do this? It is self-defeating. It is not logical. It is not rational. So I'm not worried about them attacking me, and he was surprised when they did attack because it was not logical.

It was not rational. But they did attack. It was a cakewalk. It took about two weeks. America achieved air supremacy very quickly, and they were going to the Baghdad in a very, very quickly and toppled with the regime. So that was a very quick and easy war that fit the American military, not talking about shock and awe. It ran as simply the different. And the American military does not want to fight this war because they've wargamed this, countless times.

And each wargamed they discovered that they built they lose because the American military, it's too bulky. It's not as nimble and resilient as the Iranian military. And we're seeing that playout right now, where you have these devastating carriers. They've been Lincoln, Metro Ford, threatening Iran. But not actually doing anything because they're afraid of getting too close to the coast of Iran because then they become susceptible to drone strikes as well as

hypersonics. So the Iranians are preparing this for 20 plus years. They know the entire American playbook and they have the proof of strategy to counter the American playbook. So America will have a really tough time win this war. The great problem, the big question now is, will America send in ground troops? Because once America sends in ground troops, then it becomes part committed. It's mission creep. Some hostile, let's see. It would be like

Vietnam over. So right now there's talk of 2500 Marines coming in from Okinawa. There would

but the rumor is, the intention is for them to take the card island, which is the main well depot for Iran. So Iran exports 9% of its oil from that facility, the island. And if the Iranians were to take it, it would be great optics. Now Trump would look good on TV. It would be a

great boost for the up for American morale. The problem is that you can take it, but you can't

hold it because it's too close to Iranian coast. And Iranians can attack with artillery with drones.

“Which means that you now have to take up take on the coast. You have to occupy the coast in”

quite a forward operating base. But then you're exposed to the cycle of mountains, right? Which means that you're now forced to occupy the mountains as well. So it's mission clip. It's exactly the end of where in 1965, 3000 Marines went into Daqnan to occupy an air base. And like 45 years later, you have a half a million troops, right? So sort of off as a very limited self-defined mission,

but then it just balloons. So America could find itself in the situation very quickly.

If you were the Commander-in-Chief of the United States, what would you do at this point as of today? Commander-in-Chief, meaning Donald Trump? Yeah. You get to make the decision. Or what is America do next? If it's acting in its own interest, if it's trying to preserve

“its power and wealth, at this point, what does it do?”

Well, first of all, I would acknowledge that all these events are interconnected, right? So this should work with China, this war in Ukraine, this war in the Middle East. It's all interconnected, because the American Empire is too overstretched. And it has its fingers on everything. And so it

allows its enemies to provoke it into these never-ending wars. So what I would do is basically

sit down everyone, including Russia, China, Iran, and say, it's time for a new world order, where we are partners in this relationship, right? Before America was a hegemony, before the U.S. Pollard was a world reserve currency. But now what we want to do is open a dialogue where everyone is respected, where America is not going to bully, but a winning partner in creating a new economic order that benefits everyone and not just a few.

I think that's the wisest possible advice and probably the only path that preserves civilization. But the one country's standing in the way of that is Israel, which is the only beneficiary of this war, as you just said. I think that's true. Can you think of another beneficiary other than Israel of this war? Well, Russia benefits, right, because Russia is going to win this one in Ukraine. That's correct. And America is forced to live well-sanctions. And so now Russia is now able to take

all these war profits, right? And then help the Iranians finance the Iranians in the struggle against the Americans in the early. So the Russians also benefit tremendously from this war. But fair point, Israel has to be constrained by the United States in order to do what you just recommended it do. Is that possible? Does the American president have the authority to control its client state? So if you look at the domestic situation in Israel, Israel no longer behaves

rationally. It is overtaken by a psychological fever, right? So if you look at videos coming out of Israel, there are rabbis growing around saying that this war in the Middle East, even though it's a strange Tel Aviv, it's good for us because this will lead to the coming of our Messiah. So they believe that it is when Israel is under the most strain, when Israel, when the very existence of Israel is threatened, then God will intervene because the Jewish people will come

together as a nation again and commit themselves. We knew their faith in God. And once God sees the blind, trusting, after the faith of the Jewish people, then it will save his people by sending his Messiah who will then redeem the Jewish people. So another thing this is, secular,

“temple matters don't really matter. This is one of the Middle East, not an issue. What matters is divinity,”

what matters is our relationship with God. Yes, so what matters is faith. In nuclear bombs go fly, doesn't really matter. What's so interesting is that 25 years ago at 9/11,

there were Wahhabis. There were a lot of Islamic radicals around the world. And for a bunch of reasons over 25 years, that hasn't disappeared. There still exists Islamic radicals, but it's not

“an important political force anymore. At the same time, as Islam in general has become much more”

moderate and the GCC has, the most obvious example of this, there has been a rise of Jewish Wahhabism and evangelical Christian Wahhabism. So to speak, I mean, you've seen this eschatological extremism among some American Protestants, Christians and some Israeli-American Jews. What, how did that happen? What is that? Right, so first of all, I don't think we can have ever overestimate the influence of eschatology in American politics. So I'll give you an example

where about a quarter of Americans or evangelicals, and a lot of them are Christian Zionists.

So they believe that Israel is crucial, the lynchpin, to achieving God's plan, and to return

“of Jesus. And so a very prominent figure that you probably know very well is John Haji, who runs”

something called the Christians United for Israel. It's 7 million members. And these are the people who are financing a lot of the conflict in the Middle East, in Israel, because they're the ones who are funding Westback settlements. And so Christian Zionism, it is an extremely powerful political force in America. So your question is, how did this happen? And yes, the issue, the issue is that this is a plan that has been in motion for centuries. And it's a very complicated

history, but it involves different religious groups among the Jews, something in Frankus, Shabbat Luba Rich, which you've talked about, but also it involves three maisons, the Knights Templars, the Roast of Crucians, it involves the Jesuits. So you have these different different religious societies, different religious organizations, we're going together for the centuries to achieve this plan for the end of the world, which crows the Macedonic age. And they're

different components of this plan. But the basic components are one is the creation of the

“state, the nation's state of Israel, which happened in 1948. And then you need to have the building”

of the third temple, which requires the destruction of the Arctic mosque, which is actually,

which could happen during this war, given what we've seen so far. So the Israelis have close off the Arctic moss, as well as other religious sites like the Church of Holy Sepicur, tutorials these past few days, there's rumors that for the past two years, the Israelis have been conducting these archaeological digs under the Arctic moss to basically destroy the foundations of the moss so that they can conduct a controlled demolition of the moss and blame it on

a missile strike from the Iranians. And there's actually talk among the Israelis of using this plan to ignite a war between the Arabs and the the Persian. So the Arctic moss needs to be destroyed for the third temple. They also talk about this war of Gok and Maghag between Israel and the entire world, then the coming of the Jewish Messiah, the creation of the greater Israel project, the return of all Jews from the diaspora. So there are different components to this plan.

If you just observe geopolitical events, we're seeing these events converge together today.

I mean, all these events are playing out. So it seems as though there are these very powerful

shadow forces working behind the scenes, we don't know who they are, but it seems as though they're able to control the opposite manner as to fulfill their as it also, as it allows for script. What what role do you think Donald Trump plays in this? That's a really hard question to answer. So let's look at the possibilities. The first possibility is that he's been employed as an actor. And he's just following a script and this isn't really know where this movie is going. He's just

doing his part, but he's been manipulated behind the scenes by people around him. And you know,

which includes civil coffee, Jared Kushner, Peter Hexaf, Marco Rubio told him that the Iranians were

so close to getting a nuclear weapon. And that the Iranians were attacked first, and so I was

“basically misled. And I think that's probably true in that Trump surrounds himself with certain people”

that have a certain political, eschatological agenda. So that's one possibility that he's just he's just an actor. Another possibility is that he himself has a Mesonic calling. And what I mean by that is if you go back to during 2021, he was politically dead, right? Because during six rides happen, he was in Peach twice. And then after he left office, there was law for him to conduct the against him. And he went bankrupt. So it was also the entire world went against him.

But now he's president of the United States. And so how would he personally understand this? I think a lot of it is, God has asked him to serve. There's a call to serve. And he has to fulfill a mission. But what this mission is, whether it's to save Israel, whether to save America, whether it's a part

“of a grander scheme, only he and his heart knows. And I think no one except him knows. So I think that's”

another possibility. And the third possibility is that this is all issues doing,

that an Yahoo is the one who's forced him into this sort of situation, because Israel is attacked first. And Marco Rubio said this where, you know what, we wanted these negotiations, but the Israelis were planning to attack. If the attack, the Iranians would be compelled to attack both the Americans and the Israelis. And we did not want to put our soldiers in harm's way, so we attacked with the Israelis. Okay? So it's possible this all an an Yahoo and all his machinations.

And another fourth possibility is they have, they have co-opted him, like there's blackmail on him, there's, and he has up to no choice, but to do what he says, because he's compromised in a certain way. And maybe his family is under threat. So all four are possibilities. And quite honestly, I have no idea which possibility is the most correct. Yeah, I don't, I don't think anybody does,

and I've really tried to keep, you know, speculation too many of them you always want to believe

that people's motives are transparent, they state whether they're doing what they're doing, but of course you can never know what's inside a man, right? Even in yourself, it's hard to know you're on motives very often. So I think that's a, that's a wise take. What happens to North America, United States, and I do want to include Mexico and Canada, we don't think a lot about those countries, but they're both massive, land masses, and they have big populations, and

“there are neighbors. And so if the world is reorienting, I think you need to think in terms of”

continents, rather than just nation states. What, what does that look like in three or four years? Right. So, from a global perspective, if America is forced to retreat back into Western Hemisphere, it needs to worry about resources. And so it isn't the best interest for America to eventually take over and call an ice, both Canada and Mexico. Yes. Mexico for its labor supply, Canada for its resources. You know, Canada's part of the wealthiest country in the world. I know.

And so from a global perspective, if the world is retreating into self-sufficiency, if there's, if there's trade barriers, the America has absolutely no choice, but to ensure its own supply networks. And that means eventually taking over Greenland, Canada, Mexico, Latin America, Cuba, Venezuela. So America doesn't really have much choice in this matter. The same time, what we're seeing is that this war, as was other events, are causing global fissures in America,

especially between left and right. So we miss what happened in Minneapolis in January, right? And so we can expect that as this war continues, and there's a strong possibility that Donald Trump will cope in actual draft in order to ensure the manpower to fight this war. Then you have riding in the streets, you have massive violence, in which case the National Guard is deployed, there's a plan to deploy the National Guard to all major American cities by April. And so

unfortunately, America is probably going to suffer a long many years of sectarian violence, not a full-fledged civil war, but maybe something along the lines of the troubles in Ireland. I'm not sure if you're seeing this terrible movie we call one battle after another.

look like where you have these insertion groups fighting against that the state. So yeah.

But you expect United States to hang together as a coherent nation state. Well, listen, Tucker, United States is the greatest nation in the world. The people are open, generous, entrepreneurial, energetic. The resources of America are infinite. America is a kind of a fortress so that it's protected by two oceans. America doesn't have a pair of competitor in North America and South America. And so I mean, America, we got us what happens.

America will still come out doing pretty well just because of the pure energy, and creativity of its people. See, you mentioned Canada, most Americans don't even know the

capital of Canada. Canada does not appear on their radar. It doesn't figure in their thoughts.

“But you described it as probably, quote, probably the richest country in the world. I think that's”

objectively true. And yet Canada, it's not a rich country. In fact, it's getting poor. Its life expectancy is declining. Its GDP is declining. And that's on purpose. The nation of Canada has been suppressed on purpose. Its population is being killed off by the state through its assisted suicide program, and its population is changing through mass immigration against the will of the population. So, that country is being held down on purpose. And my

question is, by whom, and why? Sure. That's a very question. And it's something that I struggle with all the time, because I am a Canadian citizen. I want to school there. So, my

answer is that Canada was never within the nation state. It's more of a glorified, we should

“call on the British to see the city of London. And the reality is now that the British are under”

glossed strain, the city of London is under a lot of financial pressure. It sees place like Australia, New Zealand, and Canada. And what do you do if you have financial issues? When you cooperate with structure, you change the middle management. Historically, the British got along very well with the Indian elite. They went into India and stole turns of the others from the Indians. And the elite, the Indian elite, were perfectly happy to help them. So, why not use the same model

for Australia for Canada? So, there are millions of Indians who immigrated to Canada the past five years. And it's put a lot of strain on the Canadian economy, because housing prices are, you know, have exploded. And so, all of your Canadians can longer afford to buy a house. And it's put China's pressure on the Canadian workers welfare system on the Canadian economy. And you would think that the proper strategy would have a moratorium where they're like,

you know what, we've had too many immigrants. And we need to close the borders and absorb these immigrants, because we want to ensure that these immigrants have proper housing. They have decent jobs, right? You would think that that would be the right strategy. And instead, Mark Coney goes to India and says, we want more Indians. And also, we'll give you scholarships to come to Canada to study for free. Meanwhile, there are a lot of Canadians who are

homeless who are unemployed. And you cannot put food on the table, but hey, we want more Indians.

“So if it's not corporate restructuring, if it's not trying to access Japan, I believe don't”

understand this strategy for this. Well, I mean, it's a kind of genocide, right, against Canadians, people who's ancestors built the country. But you wonder what the purpose is, like, this is because it is happening all over the West, all over the English-speaking world, in the white countries. And it's not an accident, it's not organic. So it's a big picture that spans from Australia to Ottawa. And what is that? Do you know? Right. So let's go Europe. Because in 2014,

this is a major turning point in Europe because you have these tens of millions of refugees trying to escape these wars in the Middle East, created by America's wars in the Middle East. And they were trying to reach Europe. And at this point, Europe had a choice. It could choose to close its borders and maintain its cultural identity or could open the floodgates. And Angel Marko, the Chancellor of Germany, she says something really, really famous, which stuck in my mind,

which is, we can do this. We are Europeans. Somehow, we can take in these millions of refugees.

You've got millions of these refugees who fled into Europe, not these of their choice, by the way.

“But because their nations were devastated, Libya, Syria, Afghanistan, Iraq, we're all devastated”

in these wars against terror in the Middle East. So they go and these are proud Islamists. They love their religion, they love their family, they love the community. And so they're not going to absorb themselves and assimilate themselves into Europe. And today, you know, you were looking at population replacement in a lot of cities. You go to certain places in Britain and you might think you are in Cairo or Baghdad. And this is a cost of three minutes conflict throughout Europe.

I want to be surprised, if like two to four years time, you have civil war breakout in surgencies breakout in place like Britain and France. So the question is, why is this happening throughout the world at the same time? Why isn't that these different nations, whether they're

“European, whether the Canadian, or Shulian, why are they adopting the same policies? Not just”

terms in terms of COVID, right? Laws in terms of like immigration. And so that's one of the great questions that we have to ask about the world we live in today. It seems as though it's almost a controlled demolition of Western civilization, right? The Engelsphere, Washington, Europe. It seems as though these nations are being destroyed purposely for what and I don't know. But I would just say there's a certain pattern that is emerged and the result can only end up

in the controlled demolition of these societies. I don't think I don't even think that's up for debate.

I mean, of course, just look at the bottom line numbers. Of course, the white populations are

being killed on purpose and the question is, why? And I don't have the faintest idea and

“I know there's a lot of speculation as to who's doing it. I'll just say bluntly, I don't know.”

I mean, I know who the instruments are, of course. But carestarmers not in charge of great Britain. Macron isn't a charge of France. I'm not sure how many leaders really do have control of their countries. I don't know how many countries actually have sovereignty. I really don't know the answer. But something is going on. Is there any precedent for this industry? Have you ever seen anything like this as a historian? Right. So you look at what's happening in Ukraine,

where the war is lost. It was lost two years ago. The Ukrainians have lost over a million

funding men. A lot of their people have fled overseas. No matter what happens in this war, Ukraine is finished as a nation-state. It is no longer viable as a nation-state. And rather than omit defeat and come to a ceasefire with Putin, what the Europeans are doing is just saying that we're going to draft our men and have them fight in the trenches of Ukraine, which will be suicide because the Russians dominate the battlefield with their drones and artillery and trenches in Ukraine.

So it's almost like a suicide mission. But not any of that, but the Germans have said that, okay, we can only draft German men but not Islamic men because we're afraid of the loyalty, which means that you have a situation where local men, like British, French, German men, are being sent to die in the trenches of Ukraine. And you know, back at home, you have these immigrant population that have not assimilated into your culture. So it's a really weird strategy and I don't

know who comes up with this sort of stuff. And look, there's no historical present for this. There's isn't. I mean, there's been essence of mass immigration. You go back to the fall of the wrong empire and how these, you know, hordes of immigrants flooded the romance. And it's almost impossible to assimilate so many people. Eventually, there's going to be a cultural takeover. Eventually, with so many people who are insistent on meeting their cultural identity, eventually because they

have more children than you. Eventually, they're going to overwhelm your cultural identity. Yeah, and I do think that is the story of history. One population replacing another. There's no such thing as multiculturalism or is it dominant culture that, you know, the insistent on dominance. Of course, I just don't think there's ever been anyone who thought this could happen globally,

pretty recently. But it would be interesting to know what the plan is. There's clearly like a plan behind that. There's a plan behind everything. How many Americans do you think understand what's

“actually happening in the world right now? You know, unfortunately, I think that if you are educated in”

America, you know, I went to Yale and so I know a lot of these Ivy League people. Yes, unfortunately, we've been inboxing it to believe certain values. And these values are not questionable. So,

so for example, there's a court case that went to Supreme Court about the third of action at the

University of Michigan. And a third of action is clearly against American values against the idea of American meritocracy, right? But the Supreme Court said that the firm reaction was good because diversity isn't inherent good, okay? And it's interesting because if you go to place in Yale or Harvard or any of these Ivy schools, there's actually very little diversity. I'm talking about intellectual diversity. Yeah, I mean, like there's different skin color,

but if you actually look at the ideas that they engage with in a classroom, it's a very conformist setting. So it's one of these great avenues where a firm reaction is supposed to bring diversity

to the classroom. But if you go to any classroom in an elite setting, it's extremely conformist.

You're not allowed to be up this issue, it's about population replacement, immigration,

“because then you become, you be called a racist. Because, and that's the worst thing we call,”

right? It's, I mean, like, you're better off being called a pedophile. Yeah, pedophiles are more right now than than racist. So unfortunately, it's not just what's happening in current events. It's also what's happened in the classroom where, and in the culture, where people are not even allowed to ask questions that are like, blindly obvious. It just walks the streets of any, you know, Western city. You've lived around the world. I think you're now in China.

Does the rest of the world see this more clearly? Yeah, I mean, if you're not in the West,

and even not, if you're not subjected to this brainwashing, an alternation that they feed you in the schools, it's, I mean, it's obvious. Again, it's blending obvious to anyone, if you just walk the streets of any major city in the West. So there's a joke in China. And, and so, probably, so Chinese don't actually like to go to Canada for tourism. And, um, someone asked, why don't, why doesn't anyone recommend Chinese going to Canada? And the response was,

well, would you recommend someone going to India, right? So it's a bit racist. It's, it's very racist, okay? But, I mean, I mean, you know, it's obvious to people. It's just interesting because, like, I'm not defending the whites. I am white, of course. But, you know, white people have done a lot of bad things. Just like getting people do a lot of bad things. But in general, people like to go on, as you just noted, vacation and white countries, because they're pretty nice.

“So I think you'd have to say if you took the emotion out of it and just like, look at it, net net.”

White's have been, you know, pretty big addition to the world, invented a lot of stuff, created a lot of beauty, created places, people like to go in vacation. Which really is a good test. So why would you destroy all that? Look, so in my school, I teach a great books. I teach Western civilization. I teach Homer, Bailey at the Odyssey. I teach Plato, the republic. I teach Donative and Vank harmony. I just

the Bible. And my students love it. Because Western civilization, it's, it's, it's it's just not about people being white. It's really about what it means to be human, right? And what it means to be spiritual and to have connections with the line. So it's unfortunate that just when the world needs Western civilization and the most, the West decides to destroy its own civilization. I mean, Homer, Dante, Plato, Shakespeare, the Bible. These are timeless classics

that speak to every human. I know these, I teach in China to Chinese students, gradually no exposure to Western culture yet they fall in love with Plato, Dante, Homer and Shakespeare. And why is that? And it's, it's because there is eternal truth embedded in their, in their words. And so universities, Western universities ought to be the places, the fortresses, that are the greatest offenders of Western civilization. But if you go again to these elite universities, Yale,

Homer and Dante, Plato. And it's like, if you don't teach these classics, what's the purpose

“of the university? I always thought the university was the heart and central civilization, right?”

It's like, what masteries were in the middle, middle, middle age. And I thought these professors,

they would dedicate their lives to promoting the classics. But instead, they now promote complete

nonsense like D.I. and yeah. Of all the, this is my last question, Professor, and thank you, it's been a wonderful conversation. And I hope it won't be our last tonight. And I hope we can

have dinner when we're on the same continent. But this is my last question, since you've traveled

so much and lived so many places and speak multiple languages, where would you say the part of the world that's most hostile to Western civilization as you described it is? Try to understand where this hostility is coming from? Well, I would say, Canada, Britain, Western Europe. I would say, these places are the most hostile towards Western civilization. Chinese people have tremendously spat for Western civilization. In fact, in China's, you know, in the process of promoting the

classics played a former Shakespeare, it would in China because Chinese recognize the tremendous cultural value and immense eternal truths embedded in these classics. So, so we're in a very witch situation where the West is destroying itself by abandoning what makes it great, which is,

“you know, these classics. I think if we talk longer, I'm going to start to cry on camera, so I'm”

going to take an emotional break here. Professor, thank you. Okay. No, what's I do not mean nothing. I'm half kidding. No, it's emotionally resonant for me because I know that you're telling the truth and it comports with everything that I've seen. And so it's hard to accept something

“that's true, but I think what you're saying is true, unfortunately. So bless you for this and I hope”

to see you again soon. Thank you. Yeah, I really enjoyed it, Tucker.