It's All True: Live w/ Karl Dahl

You can reach great listeners like yourself with podcast advertising from libsynads choose from hundreds of top podcasts offering host endorsements, or run a pre produced ad like this one across thousands of shows. To reach your target audience and their favorite podcasts with libsynads, go to libsynads dot com. That's l I B s y n ads dot com. Today.

Joe can't resigned, right. Well, we're not going to relitigate that here. But he said, you know what I'm done, And okay, you know I haven't support him. I think he's a good guy. Every thing I've heard about him has been you know, very positive, but you know, I can understand how some people would disapprove. But to be honest, right, a cabinet minister resigning, dude, it's not the end of the world, right, it's it's you know, okay, maybe the

reason he did it is notable. But even if you are, shall we say, you know, an art scientist, you're a big fan of you know, our geopolitical relationship with Israel. I mean, really that big of a deal. Even if you didn't like him, he's gone now. So whatever. However, that's not been what we've seen in the press. No, no, the coverage has been absolutely absolutely historyonic. So I made a discovery relatively recently that Alan Dershowitz as a substack.

He actually has quite a big substack. He's been on the app for what five or six years, fifteen thousand subscribers, which is notable. It's you know, many times what I or you have Carl as a sidebar issue, who is actually other than me subscribe to someone like Alan Dershowitz on substack? You just read them in the New York Times.

I was sending it around largely because it was just completely histrionic. But let me just start off. We're gonna have to kind of go through this clause by clause because he makes sweeping statements as sort of premises. Okay, premises implies an argument. Yeah, in just like parenthetical phrases, declarations as it were, baseless decoration declarations. Okay. So this is from March seventeenth, twenty twenty six, the Alan Dershowitz newsletter.

I'll just read the title h neo Nazi Jew hating Israel basher quits administration of childriddance to bad garbage, So you know, we kind of know what his opinion is. I know, I said we weren't going to uh re litigate the Joe Kent thing, but I'm almost I will actually just pull it up.

Trump is anti Semitic? I highly doubt it, based off of his actions, his family tree and everything out. Uh So, okay, we'll go off with that. Also another one, he has anti Semitic as two words with no dash. The history of that word and it's how it is written is actually relatively controversial. Not going to get into it, but again, Derschwitz, shall we say, not the best writer. Okay. So as part of this he includes the Iraq War, which then Prime Minister of Israel actually opposed. Kent is a liar,

bigot and Nazi lover. Okay, So I really got nothing on that, right. That is the conclusion. It's basically Joe Kent bad. Anything else completely indeterminate. It's good that he's gone. He should be relegated to the waste spin of history where he joins others of his disgusting ilk. Anyone who supports this evil man and his bigoted views should join him. Good riddance. So that's his entire take on it. I will say the comments to this are kind of funny.

real argument, it's not a real discussion being had. What's especially interesting is that, for all of his faults, Dershowitz is actually a very cogent thinker on other subjects, which is what makes this so interesting. He's sort of a bizarre figure. He is sort of the archetypal neo con in the sense that he is sort of out spoken about his support for socially liberal causes in America while being a sort of ardent blood and soil nationalist for the Nation of Israel.

You know, these sort of stuff that has become sort of typical, very irritating about a previous era of you know, so called neo conservatives. But the reason that I bring up that Dershowitz is actually, in other settings remarkably sober. For instance, he defended President Trump, and when he sat down with I keep mentioning the New York Times, but it does it is still relevant, and he basically said, like, this is clearly political. It is absurd to you know,

charge him in this setting. It's going to create massive political problems. And he was correct. Not only was he correct, and I say that as someone who's not like the maximal Donald Trump fan. You know, I'm not a plan truster, I'm not some maga guy. But effectively he was able to look at that in a non emotional way basically say these are the problems it's going to bring up.

Clearly he's an intelligent guy. You know, he's had a long career despite his show, we say, significant moral failings he has alleged to receive or he is alleged, right, excuse me, and let me say that more clearly. He has admitted that he wrote around on Jeffrey Epstein's airplane, but he says I only got massages. Right, So whatever,

Let's take the man in his word. But it is notable, right that when he is talking about what should be a huge deal, right, charging the president or former president rather of the country with crimes, right, impeaching him, claiming that he is some agent of a foreign power, that he's able to maintain this very serious, very sort of buttoned down professional tone. So for our country, right, good or for ill? There's sort of a you know, a a very measured tone. But when it comes to something

that's on its face is relatively inconsequential. Right, How many of you know the name of Joe Kent's predecessor.

really important question. Well, Alan, why do you care so much about this? Why do you care so much about this, you know, minor personnel issue. And I mean, the answer is not hard to the answer is not hard to surmise, right, The answer is that is his top priority, right, seemingly cares way more about the foreign policy goals of the State of Israel than he does things that happened in our nation, right, the place where he is a lawyer, the place where he has been one of the most

famous lawyers in the nation. And look when we dig into it, when we look at what can actually said, does it smack of you know, Adolf Hitler? Does it smack of Jew hatred? No, it doesn't. What he basically said, and many people have read it is effectively Israel and its lobby in the US pushed us into this war.

you know, anti Polish sentiment, something like that. But of course we understand that Israel is not ethnically homogeneous, right. You have populations from Spain, Italy, you know, Eastern Europe, but also you know populations from you know, Africa, from from other places, Ethiopians most prominently, though there's a Somalian group as well, and so okay, well in that case, I guess it's not racial. It's like, well, then is it religious? Is this a form of religious discrimination? Well?

Also clearly not, because there are you know, prominent leaders, the country is largely secular. And then also we have another uncomfortable question, which is to what degree is Israel as a nation synonymous with Jewishness? And look, uh, I'm not the one bringing these things up, right, Alan Dershowitz is because in Ken's Peace he says nothing about you know, world jewelry. You know, he says nothing that you can

imagine from you know, Lewis Ferricon. He makes a claim about the nation state of Israel, which is a country. They go to Eurovision, they have national sports teams in the Olympics. So unless these things are synonymous, right, which Alan Dershowitz apparently thinks they are, there should be nothing anti Semitic about opposing the nation of Israel, right if it's simply a nation state. But at least according to

this guy, and others. You know, we've already mentioned Levin, We've already mentioned pod Horriz, like they seem to not only view the existence and the sort of promotion of that nation as their top priority, but they seem to do so out of a sense of ethnic solidarity. And so when you hear people like Levin saying, you know this, this touches on anti Semitic tropes. When you hear them saying like, oh, are you saying that we have dual loyalties?

I quote Pat Buchanan, just dual loyalties would be an improvement, because clearly you are much more emotionally invested in this other nation than you are in ours. He's far from alone in that sentiment. And if you know you are, perhaps you know, worried about that. Don't take it up with me, right, don't take it up with Joe Kent,

Take it up with Alan Dershowitz. There are several other things that I want to that I want to address in this because big picture, one of the notable parts of this, and this is coming even from the heads of state, is it it is very very clear that Iran and Earth that excuse me, obviously, Iran and Israel have different goals, but the US and Israel have different goals.

You're seeing this currently with the fact that you know, according to all reliable reporting, Trump is in ties or is in talks rather with the Iranians and the israel The Israelis are still bombing, right, They're not acting as

one unit. So that's interesting, right, if that is an anti Semitic trope, if that is borne out of some sort of irrational ethnic hatred, you know, if that is only a sort of dark, shadowy conspiracy, like well, I mean, if we were on the same page, if we wanted exactly the same thing, if we did this together because our it was in our best interest, well, why aren't we negotiating together?

is here, which I've heard from many sources. He is a member of their government, so i'd imagine he knows. And obviously, even setting that aside, even from the sort of sources on the ground in Israel, it's very difficult to tell what's actually going on. I'm sure you, Carl noticed the dramatic censorship right when this war happened.

certainly with the nation state of Israel. But yes, they control not only the information that can be shared regarding missile strikes, et cetera, but also just like political their internal political conversations, you must you must bend the knee to certain political parties, and they ruthlessly suppress protest and discourse on the topic as well.

sides that it's sort of difficult to tell. But I think it's important to mention and Carl, you and I have spoken about this. I've spoken about this in other venues while speaking about this war, that the US goals have not been made clear, right, that what our objective is has not been clearly stated.

because of Israel. Uh. They they were asked what the strategy was, and what the you know, what what the goals were, what what what clear objectives do you have for this whether what are the victory conditions? And they literally had none. It was we had to do this. And it's really obvious they that they thought it would be something like Operation Midnight Hammer, which always is an operation name that makes me laugh. But anyway, that they thought it would be something like that where they hit

some targets and declare victory and leave. But again, you're dealing with Israel. You declare a cease fire, and of course Israel continues bombing in provocation.

It's clearly not the case. And it's incredibly frustrating when when we look at this because obviously these aren't real arguments, you know, obviously these aren't you know, the sort of well reasoned, genuine, you know, sort of I guess you could say, conversations about this. It is quite simply flexing power, right, we are going to do this and you're going to shut up. And this is something that sort of aligns with what that and I should look up what the

guy's name on Tucker was. And like I said, you know, I did not even really enjoy this. I thought it was particularly annoying. Uh yep, I'm berg I think is his name. You can find that on Tucker's seat. But one of the things that he mentioned that I thought was particularly interesting is that it was his contention at least that Israel doesn't have a great plan. And when he said that, he wasn't saying in like a macro sense, but in like an immediate sense that effectively their default

solution is violence. Their default solution is bombing, and if they have a problem, it's sort of the first tool they reach for. And so I think that, again, regardless of the source, that claim seems to match up with what we are seeing, that the problems, the very real problems for both Israel and America that have resulted from this war, which were easily identifiable with people who were opposed to this war and the weeks leading up to

it pointed out, which have come true. Well, quite possibly it might simply be that, well, we don't like Iran, we have this issue. I don't know, man, throw bombs at it. To me, that seems at least an approximate sense. We're not talking about like over years, over decades to explain a lot of the kind of nonsense we see before we go on a super chat from Arthur in Cali. You can find them on substack for twenty dollars. Appreciate it.

Why does it feel like Iran? Like the Iran affair is planned on the fly, like a random night in Vegas, the hangover for in Shily. Yeah, exactly, That's what I think it is. I think that basically, looking at what happened, effectively, Israel is managing certain variables, and one of those is that they have had the ability to basically call in the US like an attack dog, to get a lot of things done for them. Due to certain functions of

their population pyramid. They're incredibly casualty averse, and so getting someone else, particularly the most powerful army in the world, to blow stuff up for you, is a pretty good deal. So that's obviously a huge asset. But that is a

diminishing asset for a number of reasons. Just the kind of fortunes of empire is one, but also public sentiment in the US even before this was turning dramatically against them on both the political left and the political right, and Trump was to a certain degree a willing partner in this right. They figured, well, if we want to get something done, this might be the last chance, it's

sort of a short bet. And when you combine that with what we're hearing from sources inside Israel that effectively they kind of just like blowing stuff up. That's their default option. Like to me, that explains a lot of this.

And again what I've said repeatedly is just because Israel gets what they want in an immediate sense, does not mean this ends up well for them, because and Carl, sorry, I've been monologuing at you for twenty minutes now, but to me, the very real problems facing Israel, like those don't go away regardless of you know, how much you've

ruined Iran either way. And so clearly I think that we're seeing a lot of short term thinking, and there is a long term goal, you know, whether you you know, you can look at kind of the Greater Israel project, right this desire to destabilize and sort of you know, turn nations around them, their rivals into sort of you know, Libya esque failed states. Well, sure, like you can do that, maybe you can do that, but I don't think that accomplishes the end goal of creating this sort of you know,

Israeli Laban's realm. So sorry, I'll give you a chance to reply to that as well.

Jenkins charging in and blowing everything up. You know, you can't, you can only do this for so long and the past twenty five years, like the vast majority of the veterans of you know, the g WATT are explicitly anti Israel at this point, the vast majority then they understood, they understand what took place there in who it was for, and they had personal experience with all those things. There.

There are people among them who are kind of like whatever, They're not super passionate about it, but in general they know, they know what this is about. And we have the documentation going back to the nineties explaining these plans and in various formats, and the declarations of various people who are involved behind the scenes in such discussions. You know, seven countries in seven years and so on, with Iran

being like the last one. Well, at this point, the jig is up, and the the biggest challenge that net Yahu has apologies for my stroke out there, the biggest problem he has is that if his state of emergency ends in Israel, like he can, they have elections and

he's lost. He lost the previous his coalition lost the previous several elections that they were able to essentially scramble because of because of the various crises going on, So them lashing out and bombing residential neighborhoods in their amongst their neighbors to try to take out you know, the head of the snake. Well it's been utterly it's been

utterly and effective. And at this point, you know, they're just their options are up, and so the moment sustained ceasefire turns into the end of a war for them, whether it's you know, kind of a stalemate with the US having to then negotiate with the Gulf States who were all at this point basically like look, dog, you got to get out of here, like it's it's more dangerous for us to you to have you here to host you because of one Iranian missiles and two our

people have had it right, like, none of this has anything to do with us. It's certainly not for our benefit. You know, Israel is blowing up people in the Gulf States as well whenever they feel like it, Like they attacked Doha to stop the negotiations between the US, Israel and Hamas. And every time the US you know, cultivated you know, a conversations about peace and discussions and diplomacy, the Israelis ended it by murdering the people who showed up.

So the US is completely discredited in that neighborhood. And so the question is are we going to leave because there's a carrier group at the bottom of the sea and we literally can't suspane, We have no way of going in, we have no way of continuing to send forces, or are we going to negotiate before that happens. Same difference, Israel's finished and the most importantly is Bebi's coalition is finished.

And yeah, I know people are gonna say the usual things, but you really have to understand that the people there one like, like you said, doctor Burden are extremely casualty averse. So they want victory, they want bombings, but they don't want it to come back to them. Well, guess what those days are over. You can be reached, you can be touched, and you know you're you know, your iron dome is a joke. It's very expensive and it literally just can't It doesn't cut it. People think that there's

some magical technology one and there is not. They've been surpassed by multiple generations, frankly of technical development that we weren't able to focus on because we're busy doing their bidding with counterinsurgency in the Middle East for decades. So good luck. And they didn't successfully They didn't successfully get Whitey back on board with their plan, which frankly was the goal of a certain faction of them in throwing

their support behind Donald Trump after October seventh. I'm one hundred percent positive of this because they need sustained They need sustained wins for us for decades to get us back and board on board with the overall project. You can't be like, well, we got Donald Trump and therefore let's go to war again, which a lot of people warned about and it's it's quite pathetic that that they went for it anyway, because this is completely an Israeli,

completely Israeli timeline at this point. So pretty great, pretty pretty frustrating. But in the end, I don't want to say it's a good thing, but it's much more positive than a lot of people seem to think.

I don't know if that's true, that's a rumor I've heard, but I can imagine the Gulf States are probably not hot on the idea of the US having bases there, particularly when we put bases there with the stated goal of protecting them exactly, and then not only did those bases get hammered, but the cities that they are you know, stashed in, also got hammered. The satellite footage of these bases, which admittedly is coming from the Chinese. So who knows, it could all be fake, but I doubt it just

from what we're hearing directly. The kind of casualty figures, other kind of you know, bits of information seems to indicate that many of these bases have been severely hampered. Right, they've been bombed, thankfully as of yet, places like barracks have not been hit. But a lot of the you know, massively expensive, you know, multi billion dollar radar arrays, the things that take decades to build and I metse amount

of money have been completely destroyed. So I mean there's at least a chance, right that effectively this involves a major US pullback from the Middle East, which would be great for any number of reasons. I think it's interesting that there are some on the more conspiratorial and who say, you know, this is all according to plan, This is exactly what the Israeli government wanted. I don't believe that doesn't seem to be accurate. That seems to hamper the

capability of in the US and Israel coalition. Yes, yes, generally, like I would much prefer to have left the Middle East on our own terms, but we're leaving, or we might leave which is, uh, you know, in current times, better than nothing, I guess, but yeah, it's it's sort of an interesting thing that so as we kind of, you know, get to the closing half of the show, just bite popular rumors. I do not work for free. If you want to send questions or comments, just send

a super chat. We'll get to them. There's enough going in the chat that we can't really keep up with it. But yeah, just a kind of I guess warning bell there, we're gonna wrap up in an hour. Unfortunately, as much as I love talking to Carl, I have to record after this again. But yeah, it's honestly, as we kind of pivot back to the Iran war, it's been interesting because so much of the polling you see is sort

of deliberately constructed. Since for instance, Carl, I'm sure you've seen the North Korea esque approval number floating.

means in boosting this stuff, it's an op. Part of it is to be like, we're going to blame the right, you know, for this. But at the same time, this is also CNN who who prepared the anuses of the libtards leading up it leading up to the twenty twenty four elect with very frank conversations about problems with Biden and the Democraocratic Party, as well as interesting critiques of Israel from kind of a Ukraine loving Libtard centric angle.

So there's some really interesting stuff taking place in the cy War battle space.

of build out what's happening. Yeah, and to me, the fact that continually, really since this started, the attitude has been obviously not from CNN, but from sort of within the camp has been blame is really interesting to me. Yes, and I noticed that on the woke right issue, right, these people who say, oh, you know, MAGA had this great coalition, but we let too many of these dangerous radicals in, you know, these people who believe that abortion

is an absolute and total sin. You know, are there are other issues as well, you know, people who are you know, too aware of issues of race or you know, are too aware of you know, the power of the Israel lobby for example. Well, they're gonna break this up.

They're the reason. Right people are scared off by how extreme you know that that these people are, and we're going to lose, right, you people, the woke right are just as bad as the left, and you're gonna do the same thing, deliver a historic defeat and sure that narrative has been around cynically for a very long time, right, because obviously these people have a vested interest in making sure the conversation stays in a certain sort of band

of acceptable discourse. And also right and also to me, I think there was a general assumption that, oh, there's going to be a backlash and how are we going to spend this. You see a very similar thing happening with the Iran war, right blaming whoever we want or why this isn't going well, so very early with vpg'd vans right, the desires to blame him. Now, I'm not the biggest Vance fan, but at the point that you know certain people are attacking him, it makes me like

him more. And also I think that there's definitely something to what you're saying about the whole CNN thing right to turn this into Trump's war, and you know, as it inevitably becomes more unpopular right outside of that core group, because as far as I can understand, and there's no standardized definition of MAGA Republican, but when I looked into it, it seems to be self described. Right, do you describe

yourself as a massive Donald Trump fan. Yeah, well, if you describe yourself as a massive Donald Trump fan, a simple logic would indicate you're probably a pretty big fan of Donald Trump, you know, just kind of experimenting with this, Carl.

And so I think that that's a very interesting shift, because one you're further creating the very echo chamber that Kent mentioned in his resignation when he's you know, directly wrote to the President and said, you know, I think you've been placed into an echo chamber where you were only hearing alongside of this argument, and you were only

hearing effectively, you know, positive pulling from those people. And so to me, I don't want to be overly conspiratorial, but like that one hundred percent approval rating, which look, man, in a country the size of ours, do one hundred percent of people agree on literally anything?

years is going to happen. I'm excited for the TV show that I was promised, Like that's it. No one thinks that this is geostrategic genius, Like no, nobody actually believes the copes that are put out there, the explanatory copes there. No one believes it. It's it's purely it's purely nonsense, and we can't even do it, like we can't do the thing that they think that they're selling us on.

incredibly frustrating. You look at this because there was a chance, whether you view that as positive or negative, for MAGA to become a multi generational project, right, to become something that lasted past the lifetime of you know, a current Sean Hannity viewer, and you could look at the sort of synthesis of you know, the anti war movement, the sort of MAHA like you know, anti pharma kind of like you know, pro I guess you could say, kind of pro food policy as a way in which kind

of disparate concerns were brought into a platform, clearly an ellectorally successful platform. And again, right, obviously immigration was at the forefront. There was a certain amount and this was kind of a protest vote. But you know, also one of the biggest demos to go over was young men, and where young men go, the nation follows, right, we

understand how this works. And so to see this thrown away so quickly, and to watch the narrative be distorted so much where it's you know, one hundred percent of this very specific slice of the population that was going to agree with it anyway, you know, to see it

all thrown away. And at least if you know, this was all being traded for some grand strategic goal, right, if we had you know, marched in, you know, we had turned Iran into some sort of like Roman Latin fundia, you know, full of slaves, plundered their treasure, enriched the country, and gas was a dollar a gallon. It's like, okay, well, maybe that betrayal was worth it. Maybe you exchanged political

capital for real capital. I'm not saying I agree with it morally, I'm not saying I would, you know, sign off on it if I was the man in the chair, but you could at least understand it right. You could at least see a decision was made. This yeah, you know, turned out to be in you know, someone's benefit. But when it is that sacrifice has been made, the war seems to be going badly, and the people cheering it on most do not have the best interest of this

nation at their heart. It don't even seem to particularly care about this nation insomuch as it affects the fate of a foreign people, the fate of a foreign nation. It's it's I have to be careful in this one, Karl. It is not good.

with a chair. That indicates that you don't have any ability to control what that guy does. Similarly, as far as the you know, the nuclear thing, I could be fully convinced that the guys in the room thought that, you know, that they were genuinely concerned that Israel would go nuclear. But what we've seen from you know, the Iranians is they basically said like, hey, look, if you don't knock this off, we're going to escalate. We are

going to hit certain targets. And these include desalinization plants in the Arab States, which you know, you don't have to be a genius to figure out that's pretty much how they get their water. Let alone, you know, there are targets in Israel. They have a desalinization plant, they have a nuclear plant obviously, you know, there are a number of religious sites which have almost been hit, but

not you know, thankfully directly. So I mean, in a situation like that, like if we can imagine and I realized, the Iranians are not great at keeping their word right. They tend to make dramatic proclamations and then do nothing. But escalation is both a rational and a mathematical possibility

in their current situation. Well, okay, if Israel was so desperate about this that they were right on the edge of losing nukes, well you know what happens when a bunch of you know, mansions in the hills get blown up. What happens when Israel doesn't have a reliable source of water anymore, what happens when their nuclear power plants are hit? Like, okay, do we think that they are not going to you know, escalate?

Like to me, that seems to be rational. So I mean, and it goes back to that kind of proximate versus larger discussion of what their goals are. So what are our goals? Well, you know, if you're doing this to prevent the Israelis from losing nukes, and you know, three months later, they're in a position where they've decided they're going to use nukes. It's like, well, you chipping in didn't really make a difference there, Right, they're crazy apparently,

you know. It's it's the guy at the poker table, you know, with a gun pointed at you under the table, and you know, according to internal sources, right, the guy at mena tucker. And then also my observation, they seem to be a little trigger happy, to put it mildly, Carl, I'll give you a chance to response, well.

wiped out, right. So uh. The the other thing I want to point out is that this America as a limiter of Israel is is a cope and it dates all the way back to Gnome Chompski, who's who's framing was always because again the idea was you weren't supposed.

like you should look at the history of it. It means something different, But it's a there're leftist copes in America during the Cold War that this is that this rhymes with. So it's a good question. Jay expressed it pretty well. But I just wanted to explain the origin of this kind of this kind of strategic strategic lying.

and totally untenable. There shall we say diplomatic attitudes to all of their neighbors are untenable. Again, just the amount of water, let alone the kind of political situation on the ground. So I don't view this as sort of like an eternal issue. But the problem is basically, as that system falls apart, how much do they drag us into And at least so far, and apparently Joe Kent agrees, the answer is they have dragged they have the ability to drag us into a lot. And that's sort of

my primary, at least immediate concern. So we have another one. This is more relevant to our other recurring topic from Eagle Scout, Warlord, Best Bear Defense caliber and pistol with ten plus rounds Grizzly and or Black Bear, so Black bears are not super dangerous. You kind of have to work to get one to attack you, and in most cases it's sort of like like the the recommended response to a black bear is like make a lot of

noise and look scary. Now, obviously, you know there's a situation where you need to shoot a black bear, so those stipulations and look, I'll be honest, man, I don't know anything about bears. I don't I live in black bear country. They're not threatening, Like I've had one run past me, just unbothered. When I was like eight years old.

ten millimeter, right. You know, obviously the forty four mag is sort of the default choice, but you're not getting ten rounds in that there's an interesting discussion to be had about bullet selection.

that is the answer. Yeah, obviously there's other like super specialty and if you know what you already like, get that, Like if you like, if you're an M and P guy, they make one do that instead, but knowing nothing about you at all, no offense. That's what I go for. It's cheap, they work, they're remarkably pleasant to shoot, actually, like I think that the big frame glocks handle the recoil pretty well. But honestly, depending on your situation, Like if you're just out on your farm, just go for

a twelve gage, dude, that'll work. Like yeah, big magnum slugs, like that's better. But obviously, like if you're hiking, turns out people tend to get slightly uneasy if you're carrying a if you're carrying a you know, a shotgun with you. Obviously you know there are other things like you know, forty five super and forty five plus P. But if you're asking that question to me on the internet, that's not for you, right. If you've already arrived at that position, great,

you'll be a weird autist out in the woods. Awesome, But it's just kind of a I don't know what to get. That's probably your best bet.

I literally have to think about it. So we have a family upland hunting area that has grouse and dove and pheasant in various areas, and grizzlies were reintroduced by the federal government, and you cannot carry a rifle and you can't even have like slugs in during those seasons because they over overlap with like elk and the like, and and it is extremely risky to be because you're dealing with game wardens, and you can very easily get raped over at Cole's if you're if you're in violation

of those whether it's carrying slugs or buckshot, which is a bad idea. You want slugs or a rifle. So that's where the ten millimeter mania is the answer, unless you just want a forty four magnum or of four fifty four castle. I agree. John C. Barsoom pointed out HK forty five will run the hard cast forty five plus P forty five super like all those various there's there's a bunch of variations that are super high pressure

that the hks will run, which are great. But to your point, mister burn in ten milimeter.

I heard one the other day that it just absolutely drove me wild when someone said they were walking on egg shelves, right, and like, look, I realized correcting someone's grammar while you're talking to them is like, okay, kind of poor form. But at the same time I was just dumbfounded. I was like, what do you think that means? Like, what is an egg shelf? Why would you walk on them.

twelve hundred minimum new. They're well made, they're over built, they're incredibly heavy and chunky. You probably want to have someone who knows what they're doing help you with the action because they're manufacturing is rather shockingly sloppy, but it's easy to fix with like washers or what's the term shims excuse me for the for aligning the hammer in the in the trigger or so that.

boardroom should be definestrated. But if you're looking for a whimsical option, you have the Henry six mL A forty four magnum Mare's leg Lever Action Revolver Pistol, which I mean, I'm not going to say, is a great option, but if you pulled that out from under a duster to finish off a grizzly, that'd be pretty cool. Or if you're going at the opposite end of it, you could always go for the four thousand dollars or forty two hundred dollars excuse me, custom Courth mongoose if you're interested

in German revolver autism. But I will say again, if you have course revolver money, send me more than five bucks, is all I'm saying.

it's just pleasingly made. Or they make Fortnite guns and nothing in between.