Israel’s Moral War — Gouda, Netherlands | Yaron lectures

He will say a few words at the end of a program regarding the upcoming European conference in Berlin in March next year on objectivism the philosophy of iron. Obviously, I like to thank the people of Mandeville Academy for their help in organizing this event, in particular highly in Yosvina, although they are not yet here. But then I had

to say a few things nice to them. They are both amazing and very dear to me, and I'm happy for them that they will get married in June next year, and it pleases me that that shows my birthday as their wedding day. Of course, and you'll thank you for coming and showing interest in the application of objectivism to a very important issue, the conflict in the Middle East. So now my formal introduction. Last year's topic was how to be the protagonist of your own life, in other words,

how to fight for happiness in your personal future. This concerns you as an individual. Thissier topic concerns you as a member of society. I have asked Sharon to talk about probably the most complex conflict in the world, the conflict in the Middle East, and my request was that you will give us his ideas about creating a lasting piece, in other words, how to fight for happiness and the

future society. As a thinker and admirer of Finnrant and offer philosophy objectivism, I'm always looking for fundamental insights into complex issues and for fundamental solutions based on creative ideas. And when I have insufficient knowledge myself, I go to a specialist that I respect with the aim of being educated. For today's topic, I expect we will be educated by you. Last year, myself talked about the functioning of man's mind

based on Iran's epistemology her theory of knowledge. I presented my model called the frame of reason that consists of four blocks. There is the perceptual problem, representing a block at the bottom left of the model, indicating something you perceive in reality which you evaluate as a problem. I gave the example of a man experience a headache. It is something real and perceived, and he considers it as

a problem. What he wants is some approach to arrive at a perceptual solution represented by the bottom right black block in the model. He made use by imitation to take a painkiller. Usually then his headache will be done, but sometimes that approach does not work. Then he goes to a doctor who identifies who identifies the cause of the problem, which we call the conceptual problem, represented by

the top left and block in a model. I suggested last year that the doctors diagnosed in this case is that he identifies a brain tumor in the man's head. From the identification of the conceptual problem, the doctor analyzes all kinds of treatments and based on the specific situation, you will decide on the best approach to cure the problem that is called the conceptual solution, represented by the

top right hand block in the model. So objectivist thinking moves from the identification of a perceptual problem by abstraction to the conceptual problem, by logic to the conceptual solution, and by action based on the conceptual solution to the concretization of perceptual situation. Start with realityply reason with your own rational interest in minds as we go into the topic of today, how to fundamentally resolve the conflict in the Middle East. In my opinion, the approach should be similar.

Start with a problem abstract to the fundamental nature thereof, apply logic to identify the potential solution on the conceptual level, and act to realize that solution. Again, I like to compare the approach needed for this issue with the approach of going to a doctor. First, one has to identify at the perceptual level why there is a problem. The doctor will ask you what are the symptoms and what are your complaints? So perception and evaluation. This is the

identification of one's personal evaluation of the situation. My personal evaluation of the problem in the Middle East is what I will present to you first. But before that, what the doctor is doing next is comparing the specific situation of some particular patient with the general theory of the functioning of a man's body, both physical and mental Thus he applies his theoretical base that he got from university. That theory is fundamental and applied in general. Thus it

is an objective foundation. He will also compare it with his personal experience as a doctor, thus with his practical knowledge. We all know that experience is key in translating general knowledge to practical circumstances to come up with the right diagnose. And when the diagnose is there, the doctor will come up with the right approach, which in general consists of a medical operation and after that a recovery treatment, so

that the result will be lasting. The use of a fundamental objective base is the second part of my introduction. I will come here with the objective foundation as the base to identify the problem that we discussed today. The objective foundation I will find in Irn's philosophy, which confirms the value of philosophy in general and of objectivism in particular. Iron Rent wrote an important article called the Roots of War,

from which I will give you some important quotes. The translation of the general theory combined with his professional experience to the issue of the conflict in the Middle East, I will leave to Yarin, and also he will do the reasoning to present us with the approach to the conceptual solution, thus to lasting peace. In this case, he is, in my opinion, the most appropriate specialist. Okay, First, I like to discuss my personal evaluation. My father is a

peaceful man. But when I was a child, we were once near the German border, which was still closed at the time. I remember of that occasion the sudden feeling of hate is my father for Germans. It was based on what he had experienced as a child in the Second World War. That war lasted only five years, but the impact was enormous. The conflict in the Middle East

exists not for five years, but for centuries. Next point, when one of my daughters was fifteen years old, she went for the first time to a hallow evening here in hardar storried for my emotion, at the Saint John Cathedral. She was beautiful, formally dressed for the first time in an evening gown. I dropped her off by car at about thirty meters from the entrance, which she had to walk.

When I picked her up at the end of the evening, she told me that during that short walk a group of young Moroccan guys had hissed and ceased to her and called her a whar. She was really frightened and upset. It made me incredibly angry, and I identified the fact that I was capable of killing when someone you love is deeply hurt and you want to protect her. And then I saw on TV the horror of October seventh

last year in Israel. Young people innocent and vulnerable were attacked, raped, killed, and kidnapped, and I thought, suppose these were my own children. I know what I would have liked to do, but probably wouldn't have done. Get into personal action. What would you expect from your government when your daughters and sons would be victimized like that? If some terrorists would be domestic, you would expect the police to capture the terrorists and

the court to pronounce the appropriate sentence. When the terrorist comes from abroad, you would expect the government of that particular country to act for justice. But if the government of that other country participate in those acts of terror, you would expect your own government to go to war as a way of protecting you and your loved ones against that terrorist government. If a doctor decides that the medical operation is required to remove a threat to someone's health.

Any surgeon would tell you that the operation must be focused on the threat, must be carried out swiftly, and must be carried out complete. No surgeon will suggest that the operation may take months in duration, or that the partial elimination of some threat as form of appeasement is sufficient. All the bed cells must be eliminated, and every surgeon knows that collateral damage cannot be avoided. Here in the Netherlands we also have had some intensive terrorist attacked many

years ago, the kidnapping of a train. I know a woman who was in the train. She has learned to live with that experience, but it's carter for the rest of her life. On that occasion, our government did act. The military attacked their train and the kidnappers were killed. That was the appropriate response, in my opinion. In the public discussion of the Middle East conflict now I hear primarily emotional responses of the use of violence without the

proper ant pallasis based on reason. The difference between the initiation of force by terrorists and the retaliation of force by the government is not recognized. The difference between a destructive purpose firing rockets to a neighboring country and a constructive approach building up a prosperous society is evaded, and the difference between an offensive violence strategy eliminating Israel and a defense strategy building a protection dome is also neglected.

To me, this is all a demonstration of the neglect of the objective use of reason and of the evasion to identify the effects of reality. This explains why I am on the side of Israel, although I do see false like they're accepting a partial destruction of the enemy's potential rather than complete and now of appeasing to let their enemies recover their strength, as this event today originates. In my purpose to explain the value of objectivism, I will now turn to Iran's general theory in o RN

to call the roots of war. Of course, she starts with the general context of the problem. In what kind of society and in what kind of political system does war originate? And when does it?

to lose. Ideologically, the principle of insual right individual rights does not permit a man to seek his own livelihood at the point of a gun inside or outside this country. Economically, war costs money. In the free economy, where wealth is privately owned, the cost of war come out of the income of private citizens. There is no overblown public treasury to hide that fact, and a citizen cannot hope to recoup his own financial losses such as taxes or business

dislocations or property destruction, by winning the war. Thus his own economic interests are on the side of peace. She underlies this identification with the reason why, and here is my second quote. The trader and the warrior have been

fundamentally antagonist throughout history. Trade does not florish on battle fields, factories do not produce under bombardments, and profits do not grow un Rubble capitalism is a society of trades for which it has been denounced by every would be gunman who regards trade as selfish and conquest conquest as noble let those who actually are concerned with peace observe that capitalism gave mankind the longest period of peace in history, a period during which there were no wars involving the

entire civilized world, from the end of the Napoleonic Wars in eighteen fifteen to the outbreak of World War One in nineteen fourteen. Politicians now all call for a two state future as a means to solve the conflict and wars in the Middle East, but I don't think that this is by any means. A foundation of peace. Is the roots of the war in the Middle East that have to be fought, from which the future of peace

and prosperity can be built. I expect that capitalism is the best social system according to objevism will have to be aimed for, although I do not know how and what and when this can be achieved and what steps will be necessary. With this in mind, and will now ask Aron to present his ideas on the conflict in the Middle East and how lasting peace can be created.

happened that day. But it was truly true horror. And yet much of the response of the world, much of the response of commentators, was, you know, this is just another skirmish in a long battle, and who knows who started it. You know, you have to go back decades, and there's right on both sides, and they're bad people on both sides, and they're good people on both sides,

and a real moral equivocation. Many as we saw on American campuses, and I think much of Europe actually celebrated and sided with the Palestinians on October seventh, I mean on October eighth, there were already letters at Harvard University in support of Ramas and articulating the case. And again the story went something like, yes, it was barbaric, it was horrible, but what do you expect from people that have been oppressed for so many years? This is all

Israel's bolt. Others, of course, cited with Israel and said, yes, no, this is really bad. Israel needs to do something about it. But almost always once Israel did something about it, they argued for a strain and not doing too much and not overreacting. And everybody, I think is overwhelmed. Those seems overwhelmed with the complexity of what is going on in the Middle East, right, I mean, there are many players.

You've got Hamas and Gaza, You've got the Palestinians in the West Bank, You've got Grizabella and Lebanon, You've got the Iranians, and you've got all these other Arab countries in the Middle that's not clear exactly what stand they have,

and it's just it's overwhelming. And then people tell you, well, it's one hundred years of history, and then you have to go back and understand exactly what happened over those hundred years and exactly the consequences and the sequence of events, and people just give up there, They throw up their hands and they give up. It's too complicated, it's too hot.

And yet it's not and it shouldn't be, because even if you don't know anything about the last hundred years, even if you don't know about the whole configuration of the Middle East and exactly what happens and who are the players are and everything else. What you do know and what you can discover fairly quickly is the nature, the fundamental nature the character of the parties that are at war right now in the Middle East. One can look at Israel. If everybody's visited Israel, people can visit

as well. They can see it, or they can read about it. And Israel today forget about the last hundred years. Happy to talk about that as well. But in a sense, it's irrelevant. What kind of society is Israeli society today, it's fundamentally Western, it's fundamentally free. People have equal rights in Israel. People have the freedom to speak, they have property rights. They live relatively speaking, very European lives in a positive sense, in the sense of we respect people's

rights in Europe for the most parts. I wish we'd do more than that, but for the most part, there's a general sense of individual liberty in Israel. Even if you're not part of their majority group, if you're not Jewish, you still have property rights, your freedom of speech, you can still engage in movement and action, and there are very few limitations that are exclusive to you as an Arab. Let's say you actually have one privilege that Jews don't have.

You don't have to serve in the military, so there's no conscription imposed on you. You can volunteer, but you're not forced. Jews and Israel are forced to go to the military eighteen. But there's true of Christians and Muslims and Jews and any other subsect of people within Israel. They're treated like people are treated in the Western worlds. They're treated with respect as individuals. Is just far from a perfect society. Certainly by the standards of objectivism, they're

far from a perfect society. They could be more capitalists, they could respect individual rights even more. But given the standard that we have in the world, they're relatively free. Given the standard of history, this is one of the freest countries in history, and in particular if one looks and contrasts them with if you will, the other side Gaza, where the conflicts this time erupted. Gaza has been ruled by Hamas since basically since two thousand and six. Israel

left Gaza completely. In two thousand and five, it literally evacuated its own citizens out of Gaza. There were Israeli villages in Gaza. The Israeli military went in and dragged people out of their homes and evacuated them from Gaza. Basically, the idea was, we can't defend you here, so we need you out. If you stay, we have to devote resources to defending you, it's obligation. We can't do that, so we're going to force you all out. And as All did that, and it handed over control to Gaza

to the Palestinians. Whoever wants to control it, right, Palestinians had a choice on how to do it. There were elections Ramas won. We expected them to win, but they won and h then there was a civil war between the Haramas and the PLO, and they kicked the PLO out and Haramas dominated the Gaza stript. By the way, one indication of what was to come happened the day after all the you know, Jewish civilians were evacuated from

Gaza because they had left behind in these villages. They had left behind their lives, but they'd left behind economic assets. They'd lift behind, you know, small factories, they'd lift behind, greenhouses, very advanced technologically greenhouses. You know, Gaza's the desert, yet they had grown stuff and they'd created a Becausin left the greenhouses and you would expect that the Palestinians say, whool isn't this great? We now get to use the greenhouses.

These people, you know, built you out because we don't have any Next day they went to the greenhouses, they went to factories and they destroyed them all. They destroyed them all, which gives you an indication of kind of their inclination. It's not to build, construct, improve Hamastakova. And now we can judge, okay, what was life like in the Gaza strip under Hamas? Are individual rights respected? Is their free speech? How? How do people live in Gaza

under this regime of Ramas? Because is what was out of it. And it turns out not surprisingly at all if you know much about Palestinian history or the Arab world generally, because this is true of the Arab world more broadly, that in Gaza there are no individual rights people are. You know, Ramasa is a dictatorial power. It's authoritarian to the core. It dictates everything. If you oppose them, you are killed. If they don't like you, you are often killed.

You know, you see these signs in the United States, maybe seeing them in Europe as well. Gaze for Palestine right. Ramas was known for taking gaze to tall buildings and throwing them off the building. The Quran says this is the punishment, so does the Old and New Testament, but the Muslims take it seriously. So no freedom as a consequence, no economic progress. The people remain poor to the extent that there was anything. You'll you'll see pictures of Gaza

before the war looking quite nice. But anything nice that existed in Gaza was because people in Katar and people in Iran and Saudi Arabia sent the money. It was nothing was actually produced in Gaza. There was no real economic activity. Again, contrast that to Israel, which is booming, has been booming for years now. Is the you know, I think second in the world only to Silicon Valley in terms of entrepreneurship and innovation and technology. It's not

an accident. The country that basically respects the individual rights of its citizens, basically leaves them alone, allows them to pursue their happiness, is a country in which there will be economic activity and people will achieve real economic success. A country that oppresses its population, you will see no economic progress. A Israel as a secular country, yes, there is a lot of religion, and I think in the news we see more religion than there really is in Israel.

But generally it's a secular country. There is not as much as I'd like it to be, but there is a separation between state and church, between state and religion. All religions again have equal standing before the law. Comas there's a theocracy, it's a theocracy of Islam is inspired by the radiant regime and the role of religion in their license. Religion dominates every aspect of what they do, in how they governance, again in the attitude to gays

or their attitude to individuals. Israel, as a relatively individualistic society, people are treated as individuals. In Gaza, people are treated as members of groups, tribes. Tribal identity is what is important.

So even without knowing any history, even without knowing all the details of how it is always founded and what happened and how it all played out, and every Palestinian leader in a row, and what the Palestinians did over many of those years, all one has to really do is look at the reality as it exists today, accessible to almost any human being on planet Earth today. The information is right there, it's not hard to discover. And

what you find is good and evil. What you find as a country that is basically a good country with flaws and a country that's fundamentally as a police galant at the evil with nothing positive, nothing positive. And if you understand it in those terms, then what does evil have to what is hamas in order to sustain its authoritarian ways? What does it have to do? What do authoritarians really every way ultimately have to do because their

failure is domestically the economy of Gaza didn't exist. Again, all the money they got, they got them overseas. What did they do, by the way, with all their money, they came a little bit, improved the streets and their buildings a little bit. But what mostly did they do? We know now. They dug tunnels, They bought weapons, They put weapons into tunnels. And the tunnel system is amazing.

I mean, in America you cannot build a tunnel right because of all the environmental regulations and all the rest. It cost a gazillion dollars, and Gaza was no problem. They dug tunnels everywhere, much faster and much more effectively than they do in the American cities. So if that's what you're doing, if that's how you're spending the money, if that is what gives you legitimacy, the building of tunnels and the arming of the people, then war is

necessary for you. It is a justification for your existence. There's no justification in creating an environment in which your people can thrive. The only justification is hatred of the other's, hatred of Israel. So while for me, October seventh was truly shocking in its barbarity, and we should remember this was pure barberism, it was not surprising at all. It

was not surprising that it happened. It was just a matter of time before Hamas was going to do something like this, And it wasn't that surprising in terms of the kind of violence that it could because that is the kind of culture they've created and goes. It's a kind of culture that we haven't seen in the West in probably three four hundred years, probably the last war there was that barbaric in a sense of just you know,

face to face combat and rape and pellage. It's probably you have to go back probably to the eighteenth century of the seventeenth century, so that is where we are there are two sides to this conflict, a good side and a bad side, a side of righteousness and a side of evil, a side that is trying to protect itself and defend itself, and a side that wants to kill and slaughter and destroy. Hamas does not offer some kind of long term vision for how to live side

by side with Israel. Palestinian people do not believe in a long term vision to live side by site Israel. Their vision is to replace Israel. The River to the Sea means exactly what they say. They want a Palestinian state from the river to the sea, with no Jews between the river and the sea. And by the way, the river most of the kids who yelled the river to the sea have no idea what river and what sea. But you know, it's it's the Jordan River to the

Mediterranean Sea. It's that it's what Israel today and what used to be called the West Bank, that whole area. They want the destruction of Israel. And it's not that they say, you know, once we get rid of the Jews, we're going to establish a prosperous, free, you know, a capitalist, wonderful society. No, that's just step one towards they go. Remember, these are people are theocratic. They have adopted the idea of ISLAMI and the goal ultimately is Sharia law over

the entire world. Step one is destroy Israel. Step two make our way to Europe. It's closer ultimately the US. And they believe this not tasked. It seems ridiculous, but they really want world conquest. They want world conquest. We live in the twenty first century. They do, and they think Allah is on their side and they think that they can be successful, that they can achieve this. Step one is Israel not the final step. No Ramas, no

Risbella ultimately are not nationalist movements. Both MS and Chris Bala ultimately international movements. These are movements dedicated to world domination. Again, as ridiculous as that might sound, just all you have to do is read their charter. They modify their charts. Chris Boala as original Charta talked about Sarilo over the

whole world. And then they've they've waded it down because they tried to become a political force with it, and Lebanon Stay wanded it down to present themselves more as nationalists. But ultimately what they want is what Uan wants, what's in the constitution. If you want, which is the spreading of Islam on a global scale, Well, you know, we can talk about Saudi Arabia. Ask me in the q and A of Saudi Arabia, because we could go in a lot of directions of this talk. There's a lot

of content we can cover. So the question fundamentally is what do you do because if somebody really wants to kill you, there's no nothing to negotiate, or you can take half my life, just don't take it all. I mean, there's no there's nothing to compromise over. It's not that the Palestinians today want a Palestinian state. Everybody talks about a two state solution, but the Palestinians don't want a two state solution, and they've never wanted a two state solution.

They want a one state solution from the river to the same, a one state solution with no Jews in it, or if they are Jews in it, it's a small minority and they are treated a second class citizen. As the Qur'an dictates, what do you how do you negotiate, how do you come to terms? How do you establish peace with people who want to kill you, who want to kill you. This is their goal, this is their aim, and this is what their religion demands of them. And

it's not just the Palestinians. We just we just heard about a ceasefire with Risbelan. Husbella is A is a Lebanese entity. It's different than Rahmas because they are Shiites Ramas Assunis. They are directly linked to Iran. Gisbellah was established by Iran in the early nineteen eighties, and again this is part of an Iranian goal of domination. Chrisbella allied with Hamas because they have a common enemy, not

because they like each other or they share goals. Again, Studis and Chiites don't particularly like each other, but they know they both hate the enemy, which are the Jews in the Middle East. Prisbela is in the same position. They will not be satisfied as long as there is a state of Israel. They will not be satisfied as

long as you know there is an Israeli state. It's not that they are they want a smaller Israeli state, or they want a few pieces of the Galilee, and then they'll be happy, and then they'll be peace for everybody. Chrisbela's goal is to dominate Lebanon and to establish the real law of Lebanon, which is hard for them because they are they have been historically a minority in Lebanon, they haven't been a majority, so they're fighting a battle within Lebanon. And then they would like to see Israel

wiped out as part of this again global ambition. How do you sit down with and negotiate terms when this is their goal which they have not changed, and they have not modified and will not change and will not modify because this is part of the wild view, This is part of the philosophy. And then of course behind Hamas and Rizbla and behind almost all the terrorism in the world today, sits the state of Iran, the State of Iran, which is a state created with this mission

in mind. It's in its constitution, it's in the very nature of the state. And remember Ion has, I mean, this is a I don't know many examples in history where you see this. Ion has a supreme leader, not just a leader, the supreme one. So it is a dictatorship, it's an authoritarian state. It is a theocracy again dedicated

to a particular goal. The spread of these ideas on a global scale, as long as you want is there and has money, and has money because it has oil, it funds all these other elements in the Middle East to keep promoting this ideology going. And not just in the Middle East. They found a lot in Europe. They fund all over the world. They're funding ideological allies in order to spread these ideas. How do you establish peace with you on How do you establish peace with Isabella

and Ramas? And the answer is you can't, not as long as they hold this ideology. That is, one cannot have peace with one's enemy. The enemy has to stop being the enemy for peace to exist. So the only way to have peace, what do we call it lasting peace in the Middle East, is to not have an enemy anymore. The Uranian people are not necessarily Israel's enemy. Some are, some are not. I would even argue that are the right circumstances. The Palestinian people as a whole

are not necessarily Israel's enemy. They are right now, but that's not necessity. There's nothing in the genes or the blood or the ethnic group that necessitates hostility. They are individuals just like anybody else. But right now they're individuals guided by destructive, horrific, evil ideology, so that ideology has to be defeated. But then there's a question, how do you defeat an ideology? How do you change people's minds

about ideas? How do you get them to reject they all ideology and embrace something new, because what they need is something new. If the Palestinians were more like the Israelis, if they recognized the value of the individual, if they upheld secular government and secular society, if they wanted prosperity and they were willing to recognize the value of markets,

peace would be relatively easy. How do you get them to change when they are stuck on an evil ideology that is destructive and is the opposite of all these things. I mean, I know a lot of people who write and argue constantly they can't do It's impossible. You can't win an ideology, you can't beat an ideology out of people, and yet it turns out you can. It's happened before. I mean, you mentioned going to the German border. I

don't know when this was. I assume in the nineteen you were six, so in the nineteen sixties, and there was still some hate and fear and anger towards Germany, but Germany already by then was a completely different place. I mean, for all intentsive purpose, there will no Nazis and many anymore. The Nazis had been defeated, not just militarily, but the Nazis have been defeated ideologically. The ideology of Nazism was gone. Now we can talk about whether it

might come back, but it was gone. How did that happen? How did the German people just give up an ideology that they were willing to die for. I mean, many, many, many Germans died fighting for Nazism, and and you know, people could tell you stories about it's only a small minority of Germans were really Nazis. I called bullshit. It's just not true. I mean, it's a small number of

the population that joined the Nazi Party. But the Nazi Party could not have done what it had done without massive support from an overwhelming majority of the German population, whether they were members of the Nazi Party or not. They you know, think of all the soldiers that pulled those triggers. What about Japan World War two? Again more

common history. Right. World War two, Japan was dominated by a collectivistic, you know, an ethnic driven ideology that basically said the Japanese was superior to everybody else in the world. They were driven by the idea that Japan was the most important, valuable place on planet Earth, and they would dominate the rest of the world. They would dominate China, they would dominate Asia. Asia was theirs, Europe was the Germans, and they had divided up the war between the two

master racers, if you will. And they really believed in this. I mean, remember the number of Kamikazi pilots who were willing to fly their airplanes and kill themselves in the name of the emperor, in the name of an ideology. Suicide bombing was not invented by Islam. Japanese were doing it and they were I mean, it seemed that they did it with a with a passion and a focus. It seemed brainwashed. How do you get that out of them? How do you change it? And yet Japan today is

an amazing place. People there incredibly friendly, very much more individualistic than a lot of other places around the world. You know, nobody's flying it planes at the building in the name of Japan. The emperor is there, but it's symbolic and kind of cute. And everybody goes toe that sees the palace to see the beautiful gardens and the beautiful buildings. But nobody takes the amput too seriously. In Japan, nobody's dying for the emperor. The idea of Japanese imperialism

was defeated. The idea of Japanese you know, superiority was defeated. How by being defeated, the two things happened. And you need to do two things to defeat an ideology. One you need to defeat it in the field of action. You need to defeat it. Militarily, you need to crush it, so there's no doubt about next time we'll do better. One of the reasons we had a World War two is because the Germans were not crushed in World War One.

So Hitler and others who returned from the battlefields of World War One went back to Germany and said, we could have won this, We will win this. You know, we weren't defeated. Our political leaders betrayed us, our generals maybe betrayed us, but we could have won this, and we should have won this, and the ideology only got stronger of German nationalism not weaker because they were not defeated. They might have been humiliated, but not defeated. They weren't

what to their knees. They didn't get the message that they had no chance of winning. After World War Two, the Germans got the message. And by the way, part of the reason, and I know this is controversial today in Europe and the US everywhere, one of the reasons Dresden was flattened was to make sure they got the message. It was explicitly Churchill's goal to break the German spirit completely.

And if you've seen pictures of what Germany looked like at the end of World War Two, it was just destroyed, its flattened. Almost every German city was flattened. And as a consequence of that, the Germans got it, we can't win. Something we did was wrong, something about what we the ideology we had was bad. Maybe we don't get it exactly, but we know this is not workable. We just die

if we follow this. And a second thing is that in those days, the Allied forces had a sudden pride and a sudden you know, confidence in the ideology they represented. So we're not just defeating you in the name of defeating We're defeating you in the name of you know, maybe they don't call it. They nobody called the capitalism or or or freedom. But they talked about freedom. They talked about democracy, They talked about the idea of individual sovereignty.

They talked about the negatives of what the Nazi ideology held. They attacked the Nazi ideology as evil. There was no qualms about calling it evil. Nobody nobody said, well, there's some good things about Nazis. Yeah, we don't want to paint too big of a brush. No, Nazism was evil. It was done with, it was finished. That'stmen of history

nobody was interested in. So the West defeated the militarily, crushed them, and challenged them intellectually, that is, philosophically, intellectually, basically called them what they were, which is an evil ideology that the West would have nothing to do with. And that combination works in Japan. The same combination worked every city in Japan. Every major city in Japan was firebombed. That is, it went up and spoke, we'll get to questions,

and they were all firebombed. Hundreds of thousands of people died way before he was Shuminnigasaki. A million people were homeless in Tokyo by the end of the war, a million people. And then of course he was Shumenagasaki. Put an end to the war. But they put an end to the idea that the Japanese was special. It put an end to the idea that the Japanese could conquer the world. It definitively said, no, you failed. Whatever ideology you had, it was rotten. Then you failed. These guys stronger,

more powerful, most success full than you are. But that wasn't all. Then the United States came in and said, and here are some ideas by which you can build a better society. That is all wrong. Here's something better. And you know, I don't know if you know this, but Japan's constitution that they have today was written over a weekend. But General MacArthur and his aid he sat down the road to constitution. They copied a lot of it from the American Constitution. The actually phrases that they

just copied straight from the Declaration of Independence. The American Declaration of Dependence is in the Japanese constitution. The idea, for example, that we all have an aliable right to life, live within the pursuit of happiness is not in the American constitution as in declaration, but it is in a Japanese constitution. And then they basically went to the Emperor of Japan and said, this is your new constitution. Sign here and ask him, in a sense, this is how

you are going to live. You've not you don't have the right to choose your own path moving forward. What you did is so horrific that you don't get to choose. We're going to choose for you. And here's an alternative. It's an alternative that has led your pant to thrive, to do very well. It's very much change, it's ideas. So that's a combination defeat on the battlefield, bet a crushing defeats on the battlefield, and then an alternative, fighting

the people with an alternative. Now, the first part of this, a question defeated on the battlefield is not pretty, it's not nice. It's not something we want to watch on television being done. You know, maybe we should be thankful there was no television or not significant television during World War Two, because maybe we wouldn't have tolerated what actually happened during the war, even towards the Nazis. But the

fact is today anything you do is on television. But the reality is that in order to have lasting peas, the Palestinians have to change their ideology. Iran is going to have to change its ideology. And the only way that can happen is first if they're crushed on the battlefield. Israel's done a little bit of crushing, but it's far from what could have done and should have done. It's

taken way too long. It's appease that every turn. And can you imagine bombing Dressden into oblivion and supplying it at the same time with water, electricity, internet connection and food. But that's what Israel's doing. Is Oh, by the way, supplies them with water and supplies them with electricity, and they have internet connection, and they have cell phone connection because of Israel, and yet they're bombing them at the same time. It's sanity in my view. People you bomb,

you should not be feeding. If you want to feed them, don't bomb them. But if you're bombing them, don't feed them. Otherwise you're sending a complete mixed message and a message and weakness. Since the win, Israel needed to truly crush the Palestinian people in the war here and here again more controversial than most the war. He is not against Hamas. Hamas is the particular. It's a political leadership of the Palestinian people. This is who the Palestinian people want. Every

pole shows they support Hamas. They voted for them in the last Palestinian election happened in two thousand and five, a long time ago. Green they want a majority. This is the government of the Palaestinian people. It's not just some external group that came in and took over. This is who they are. Palestinian need to be brought to their knees in otherwise they need to understand that they can never Israel militarily, that through whatever ideology they have

today is not an ideology for victory. The Slam the slum ist ideology is one of defeat. And then they need to be offered an alternative. And here you come up against multiculturalism. The West has to be able to say your way is bad, it's evil, it's wrong. Islamism, this interpretation of Islam, we're not expecting his Slim I'm gonna tell you what Islam means. It doesn't mean this version of Islam. World dominations show real law. Treating women the way you treat women, treating gaze, the way you

treat gays. This is unacceptable in the civilized world. This ideology is evil. It's like the Nazis. It's psych Japanese imperialism. It needs to disappear from the planet. Need to say that. I can't say that anymore. Too politically correct. Is no good and evil talking those terms good ideology, bad ideology by what standard. But it's a combination of those two things that have to happen. That is what leads to long term peace. And there's no reason they cannot be

long term peace in the Middle East. There's no reason why the religion of Islam cannot be called it moderated, reformed, enlightened, just like Christianity was. This was a Christianity, pretty barbaric religion. Three four, five, six hundred years ago. In the Thirty Year War, thirty Year War which was not far from here and participated, you know, Netherlands was part of it. A third of the German population was killed by Germans.

Why because one side was Catholic, because one side was Protestant, and they hated each other. They killed their own people, their own families, a third of the entire population maybe per capita. The bloodiest war in human history all over religion. So it's not like there's a religion of peace someway. There is no such thing as a religion of peace. Just read the Old Testament if you're not convinced of that.

way you achieve peace. Peace comes as as the quote from mine rand Uh emphasize, Peace comes when we start treating each other as individuals, not as members of tribes. Peace comes when we start treating each other as traders. Well we can gain from one another through trade. Peace comes when all parties acknowledge the value of individual human life and acknowledge the fact that individuals have rights, that an individuals should be free. As long as we don't

have that, it's almost impossible. It is impossible to achieve peace. We can negotiate temporary cease fires. We got one right now in Lebanon, you know, by Israel maybe ten years. It's not insignificant because Israel's devastated Grisbella as much as it has. But it won't go away. The problem hasn't been solved. It's just kicking the can further down the road. As we're very good in the West the doing in

almost every realm of our lives. God forbid, we deal with reality and actually deal with the problems that we face. We just pretend it doesn't exist and kick them down the road. Same thing will happen in Gaza. I expect some deal will happen where the Pastinians are not defeated, and therefore it's just a matter of how do they reform, how do they reorm how do they initiate war again

in the future. So I'm not very optimistic about achieving lasting peace in the midd least because I think we in the West are way too weak we don't have the backbone that we had seventy years ago. We don't have the confidence that our system is actually of value and will actually lead to lasting peace. Because that's what

it's gonna take. It's gonna take the West is what representing the West in the Middle East, But it's going to take the West to recommit to its own ideas, recommit to the value its own ideas, and recommit to fighting evil ideologies to threaten and defeating them and then

advocating for the good in the same time. You know, I think immand is an important tool, if you will, maybe the most important think of the twentieth century that can reignite that sense of value that we see in our own culture and our own civilizations, in our own value and give us the kind of backbone, give us them all certainty to go out and fight the fight, and it needs to be fought because it's not over and it's only going to expand as if Israel doesn't win it all.

scale of what they did before October seventh. People forget before walked over seventh. Every few days missiles would be launched on Israel, and luckily Israel knew how to play defense. They could knock the missiles out of the air. So now a lot of people died, But the intention was to kill a lot of people almost on a daily basis.

That won't happen. The missiles are gone, the ability to protect those missiles are gone, so it's always likely to face the situation where the threat level has decreased significantly. I would also say Iran has been shown to be a paper tiger. For most of us, that was not surprising. Iran has always been weak. But for a lot of people who are surprising, and maybe for the Uranian itself. The Uranians themselves. They discovered how weak they are they

really are. They thought they had these amazing Russian weapons systems, and it turns out that those amazing Russian weapon systems can be destroyed very, very easily by a modern, technologically advanced army. Maybe we could learn something about other conflicts from that. So I think Iran is weakened significantly. So I think you're buying. You probably brought a decade of relatively quiet and then the real question is what happens to Iran. I think Iran is the key player in

the Middle East. You could I can imagine an optimistic scenario, right. The optimistic scenario is over the next few years, local hostility to the regime in Iran increases, and ultimately there's a revolution in Iran and they kick out the Mulas and they establish a pro Western, Western friendly regime in Tehran, and then the whole Midlease changes and Israel has a shot because then you know, the financial resources don't go

to Hamas and Krisbala and those organizations finished. And maybe then the Palestinians wake up and say, we're on our own. We better cut a deal, right, we ret to do something, We better change in some fundamental way, so defeat could come from the Iranian people. And in a sense, that's the most bloodless way in which the whole some of

the issues get resolved. Is the Iranian people rebel against the Islamist regime and establish a decent country, then I think you get you could get real change in the Middle East. So that's you know, that's what I think is going to happen. You know, Lebanon is a powder keg.

It's it's hard to exactly say what's going to happen there with his ballah, partially because of the eternal politics within Lebanon, but the Lebanese were very happy to see Israel completely degrade his balla and destroy his ballah because that was their only hope of reasserting control over the country. The Schietes again not a majority, and there used to be a small minority, the bigger minority today, but nobody else had the will or the military resources to take

them on. Now that they've been degraded, you might see a renewed civil war in Lebanon where they attempt to try to cross as well. I finished the job so that they can go back to normal. I mean, remember Lebanon has not been a normal country since the early nineteen seventies, right, it's been in a civil war or in some kind of mayhem since the early nineteen seventies before that, But you know what, what what Lebanon was called Switzerland of the Middle East, and yeah big Woot

was called the Monaco. It was a it's a beautiful, beautiful city. Lebanon is a beautiful, beautiful country. And it used to be you know, almost fifty percent Christian, and the Christians have all left. Now today it's it's it's somewhere between twenty to thirty percent Christian, if that, because they've all they've all left, the Christian Arabs, and and because because of the civil war, because how horrible Lebanon became,

and they they had options. So who knows exactly how Lebanon plays out, But again I think physimal eyes, a military force threatening Israel for the most part is gone. It doesn't mean they can't rebuild, but but for a decade it's gone.

advanced weapons systems. The only good thing you could say about Egypt right now is it's all to military is basically American weapons systems. So they couldn't launch a war against Israel without American support because they would have no spare parts, they would have no ammunition, they couldn't fight the war. They're completely armed by the United States. The same as true, by the way, as the Saudis. The

Saudis have weapons systems, all American weapon systems. But really here the question is what is the goal of the Saudi regime? What does the Saudis actually want? And I, you know, the reality is I don't know, right MBS, who is a crown prince of Saudi Arabia, who will be the king of Saudi Arabia. When the current king dies is a young man who claims to be Western, claims to wants to being Western values to Saudi Arabia.

He's still gonna stay king. It's not exactly consistent with Western values, I would argue, and he's still pretty brutal in some respects. But there is definitely a loosening up and and a kind of westernization of certain aspects of Saudi life. Uh. Although you know, we met a I met a Saudi girl yes, yesterday, two days ago, two days ago in dis Soldo from Germany, and she was like, she just got out of Saudi Arabia and she's like,

I'm never going back. It's a horrible place now again, particularly for a woman, It's just a horrible place to live and to be. So how serious he is? And then the question also is, let's say he is serious, will he live? Right? So that was serious and so that was killed very quickly after signing a peace deal with Israel. So will MBS survive? What are the other forces were in the Middle East? Now Here again is

this point. If Israel defeats the Islamists locally, others will pay attention and they say we don't want that, and they'll have to change their minds. People don't like supporting a losing ideology. Remember when they were terrorist attacks regularly in Europe ten years ago, nine, ten years ago, it was just regular, you know, cause being driven through crowds, you know, subways attacked and it was regular. And where

was this happening? Was happening when ISIS was successful. ISAs had conquered ground, they had taken over parts of Syria, taken over parts of Iraq, and they were establishing the Collie Funds. And when you're successful like that, a lot of people are willing to die for your cause. But when ISIS basically was for the most part destroyed, hasn't been completely destroyed, but for the most part destroyed, had to give back the land disappeared as an is firing

force of victory. Terrorism declined dramatically. Now it's not gone away, and you can see the crowds all over Europe of Islamists who have not gone away, but they willing us to die for the cause has gone down dramatically because the cause doesn't look like exciting anymore, you know, Brits and I don't know if you guys had this phenomena here, but people all over Europe were volunteering to go and fight with Isis. They were converting to Islam and moving

over there because it was an exciting ideology. Well, if you defeat it, it's not exciting anymore. So a lot of it depends on how the Saudist and the common people interpret what Israel does. And again to the extent that Israel doesn't crush its enemy, and it hasn't completely to that extent, they always think, oh, this hope, next time we'll do it better. Next time, we'll beat them, next time, we'll get them. So if Uran goes away, there's the possibility that Saudi Arabia takes its place or

another country takes its place. But again, it buys time. Right right now, Iran is at the forefront of all the terrorism really globally in terms of Islamic terrorism, and if that's out of the picture, it'll take them a long time to reorganize around another state sponsor again. And as you defeat them off an alternative, you're just buying time. You're not doing more than that. Yeah, what do you mean.

has to be dictated through them. And again, all religions have gone through phases where they believed in that we will establish a theocracy where everybody has to do you know what the specific Holy tech says you should do.

But you know, you can imagine other forms of Islam where just like Christianity, the idea is there's a separation between state and religion, and Islam is something you practice in your home, practice in the mosque, but it doesn't affect public life, it doesn't affect the way the state is run, it doesn't affect governance. People are treated as individuals, and you treat people of other religions as equal in terms of the human the fact that the human beings.

Sharia law does not allow for that. There the Quran does not allow for that. But but really neither does neither does Catholic Catholic doctrine. If you go back long you know, fallow enough, right, I mean, when when when the Catholics dominated start to dominate the Roman Empire, when they became the official religion of the Roman Empire, there were significant voices within the Catholic Church saying, we need to kill all the Jews. The Jews are in the front.

They did you know, they sow Christ He was right there and they turned the back on them. Therefore they are evil and we was wiped them up. And Augustine, since Augustine comes forward and says, no, no, no, we shouldn't kill all the Jews. We need to keep them alive. We need to keep them alive so that we see their suffering, we see their pathetic lives, and it reminds us of what happens when we turn our backs to Christ. And you know, the origins of anti Semitism are all over,

you know, the early Catholic Church. Now Catholicism has evolved since then, right rejected a lot of those doctrines, particularly in the last fifty sixty years, less so before World War Two. But they've rejected all those doctrines. Islam needs to reject the doctrines that lead to the same conclusion. So you can have any Islam that is not involved in governance. You can have any Islam that is not involved in running the states. You can have any Islam

there way. People just believe now, to the extent that people hold their religion consistently, to the extent that people, you know, put faith above reason, to that extent, they're going to be problems. What in the West we have done is we've relegated that space the relatively minor part of life. So the damage is limited, somewhat limited, and

when it expands, the damage gets worse. So in America, when they talk about doing away with the separation of church's state, as some people in America are talking about today, that damage is expanded. So religion to the extent that the gates reason is always damaging. But if we can limit that damage to the individual itself rather than to millions and the whole political system. Then we've moved a

long way towards a more peaceful coexist. And Islamism is the idea that no Islam has to dominate all aspects of life and for everybody. And if you're not a Muslim, okay, you can still live. You have to be a special tax You definitely your second class citizen. There was definitely first and second class citizens in Islam, just like again they were under Christianity.

in Israel with that. So in the middle of the whole Islamitic we have a Western thinking or Western philosophy as a foothold, which I think is great. But now to your last points, this is very disturbing to me, and I realized it myself. Jan was talking about American or Mexican or whatever, the Islamitic influence on the street. I also experienced that. And what you said is in the past, we used to have a backbone, and we used to come out and help Israel and defend our

values and go for it. And now it is like things are turning upside down. It is and I'm afraid in all fairness, and this is my own conclusion, but

I'd like to hear your reflection on it. That people are not aware of what is going on, what kind of an indoctrination or not indoctrination with infiltration, what is going on, and if we don't realize, if we don't understand, if young people, if the current people in the West do not understand what's going on, basically underlaying to me, that's a real, real threat.

There's nothing unique about us. There's nothing good about Capitalism is evil, exploited, if nasty. I mean, find me young people out there at universities who are pro capitalists or even know what it is. They just don't exist. I was at Cambridge yesterday, Cambridge University in England, and I said a few things pro capitalism, and the place just blew up. They thought I was crazy. Really, you know, they don't know anything. But what they do know is we are bad. We are bad.

all related. It's all comes with really one idea, but the three related ideas. The first one is the ficacy of reason. We learn about the world through reason. It is our mind, our sensors in our mind. That's how we know what we know. Science, right, it's it's it's about reasoning and it's about understanding the world. And we have the capacity to do that well not not. If you read kant Hegel, Chopin, I am Mars and the post modernists, all Westerns didn't mention a single non Western philosopher,

reason is out. Reason doesn't tell you about real reality. And you know who cares about reason. It's the the emotion, the sense of being one or whatever he goes nonsense actually means right. And the postmonus tell you there is no truth, So hell with reason. You can't discover truth because there is no truth. There's no such, no concept

is out. So if the West less rests on reason, I think it does, and the West comes to maturity and the Enlightenment, which is the age of reason, which is the rediscovery of reason after centuries of religion and going by a book. And I mean they even treated Aristotle and the Greeks as religious texts, right, They read them as if they were religious text because that's the only mentality they had. You read a book, it's all true,

you follow. And yet in the Enlightenment it was suddenly, whoa, you know, let's look around, let's discover, let's figure out what the truth is that's been undercut. Second pillar is individualism. Only an individual can reason. There's no group consciousness, there's no group consciousness voting around here. We don't think in groups. We think in individuals. And it's the individuals life that

has sanct It's the individual that must be protected. Go back to John Locke and the concept of individual rights, which is celebrated in Enlightenment and brought about the creation of the United States of America. But really all the modern Europe is a testament to John Locke and these kind of ideas. Right, and yet does anybody believe individual rights anymore? Anybody ever talk about individual rights, the right to life, liberty, and pursuit. Nobody talks about it, even

in America. Nobody talks about Send the decoration to adventents. But you learn that in history, and then you forget it and then you go on in life. But if you follow the presidential campaign debates, nobody ever mentions the word rights, partially because to have power, you have to violate people's rights, and everybody wants power. That's what's important. So the second pillar individualism. Now, in America at least, and I think this is true in Europe as well,

we become tribal. You know, you either belong to the left or you belong to the right, and you hate each other because the left and the truth is irrelevant. It's which tribe you belong to. It's all tribalism and collectivism and individualism is out the window. And then on top of that you have the whole multicultural movement right, which is a collectivistic movement basically categorizes people as groups. Every culture is equal, right, So we tell ourselves and

we invented this. Nobody imported this. Like immigrants who come to Europe come here because they want mostly because they want a better life. And then they come here and we tell them, yeah, but your culture is just as good as ours. About very culture that you escape from Africa, from the Middle East just as good as ours. You can't say one culture is better than the other, and they go, oh, okay, we didn't realize that, so maybe

we should bring our culture here. I mean, imagine a West that said you want to come here, great, we love immigrants. You have to assimilarly, you have to become us. You have to become European. Here's what it means to be europe You have to expect reason, you have to expect individuals. And finally, the third pillar of the Enlightenment or of Western civilization is political liberty.

democracy is not exactly what political liberty. Political freedom really is about, because it needs to be democrat. He needs to be limited by some things that it prevents the majority from overwhelming the minority. We don't have that anymore. We become much more democratic than we we should be or have been. And now democracy is like God. Right. If you go on a debate or you go in a state somewhere and you say democracy not so good God, they'll stone you to So it's so. The problem in

the world today is us, it's not them. If we understood our value, understood what we're about, understood how good our ideas were all can be, then it's easy to deal with them. It's easy. Putin is nothing. He's a nothing. The only thing that gives Putin power is the fact that he has confidence or jex confidence, and that we don't know what the hell we do. I mean, in America, a lot of the people on their rights in America think Putin is their friend because he's religious, he's strong.

You ever seen it without a shirt. He's masculine, you know, and they love him because he's one of them, and they can't say no, no, no. Putin represents evil because there's all such things evil all the same and or you know, Putin doesn't represent the West because they can't define the West. They have no concept for what the West is. So none of these bad actors in the world. North Korea, the fact that anybody cares about anything happening

in North Korea as a joke. They should have been I mean, that regime should have been destroyed a long time ago. As soon as they started making threats and building nuclear bombs, they should have been destroyed. Why are they've been around? And Iran could go like this, and so what Israel did to it that barely barely challenged itself, you know. So China is the only one that you could even imagine being a threat. And if you took care of Russia, North Korea and Iran, China would behave itself.

You know, China would would tow the line and they would change completely because they would be afraid.

wanted to become part of Europe. They they that was their dream, that's what they wanted, what they still want. So no, I mean you support you don't see, they have this perspective of supporting the underdog. Right, it's not about it's not about freedom, it's not about values. It's about who's on top and who's on bottom. So if you support Israel, they're the strong ones. You used to support Russia because they're the strong ones. If you support Ukraine,

they're the weak ones. That you support the weak ones over there, which is Gaza. So no, I support those fighting for freedom, fighting for a semblance of Western values, and Ukraine does, and Israel does, and Russia is the opposite of that. Russia is the enemy of everything Western.

I mean Took. He's such a complicated place because on the one hand, it Took. He's a member of NATO. Pretty pretty amazing, Took. He's a member of NATO. It has American nuclear weapons in Turkey. They have basically the best American weapon systems in the world. If you know, if thirty fives and uh, you know, they have a lot of American weapon systems. On the other hand, the one is as a community Slamist. Now he's an Islamist

of a different type. He's less militant than others. He does not he does not believe yet that he has the power militarily and otherwise to actually use physical force to get his way. He's trying to use soft power. It's called diplomacy software. He also would love to join the EU right, so he doesn't want to alienate the Eupeans too much, but he's realized now that he's never going to join the EU, so he's willing to be

a little bit more aggressive on the other side. But he also needs America because he's discovered what the Russian weapons systems are worth nothing, and so he still wants to buy weapon systems on the Americans. So he's on this balancing act. I mean, this is the funny thing is it's funny, it's tragic. The reality is that the enemies of the West are unbelievably weak. Russia is incredibly weak,

Tooki's incredibly weak. It depends on America. Right, you know, both Korea and you are a barely significant Right, they're all weak comas this week, he's well, last week, they're all right. And the West is incredibly strong in comparison, And the only thing that prevents us from winning is us. And in that sense, the number one enemy of the

West is the West. The number one enemies of the West are the universities, or what is being taught in the universities, which undermines who we are, underminds the values that we represent, underminds capitalism and liberty and all of these things, and reason, most importantly science even and indeed, the most significant enemies of the West over the last two hundred years of being the West came out of the West. Right, communism, and fascism, those came out of

Western thinkers. So nothing has come from anywhere else that's a threat to the West, nothing except what we produce. So what's happening today in the universities is we're producing, you know, on the left, if you will, the woke culture, and on the right the you know, this kind of nationalist national conservatism call it, or Christian conservatism as some call it. Again, these are forces that scare me a lot more than Muslims, Russians or you know, North Koreans.

I'm afraid of the university professor from across the street. He scares me much more than those because he's weakening, weakening ability to do anything. It could overtake us, right, he could. These people could take over the country. They have right in many respects. Right yeh.

providing water and antisity to them. They should have cut them off completely, isolated them completely and then just devastated them. And I don't believe in just picking off the leaders. I don't think that helps. Every leader was picked off, there's immediately replacement. And this has been going on for forty years, you know, thirty years they killed the kid they had, the guy who founded Hamas was killed in the in the nineteen nineties. Immediately somebody replaced them. You can't.

It's this is an ideology that is well established within the culture and and you can just pick up leaders because they have replacement. How many you know? This is the question. It's a it's a horrible question to asked, but it's a question. How many people do you have to kill for them to actually get the idea that they they've they're defeated, they finished, And I don't know what the answer to that is, but a lot more

than we're being killed. I mean, this will this still go down as the war in which fewer civilian casualties have died than any other war. In urban war is certainly in urban warfare, but in any warfare, certainly per kilogram of explosives detonated, I mean, those killed almost nobody, and the consequences are the Hamas. You know, the past

Sunian populations still think they can win. If you ask people in the West Bank, do they support Hamas, Yes, they still support com They still think they can win, They still think they can survive because you know the population. You know, Israel's accused of genocide. You know, the population of Gaza has actually increased over the last year. That is, more children were born that Israel has killed adults, right, old children or whatever whoever they've killed, right, so the

population has growing. This is the kind of the worst genocide that anybody's ever tried to do. When the population actually grows, doesn't shrink. I mean, it's horrible that we even have to talk about these things. But that's the reality that and everything's so pervert. So no, it needed to be flatted much. I mean Israel, like, Israel's done an amazing job and taking very few casualties, and the

military is amazing. But the reality is they go into a place they supposed to clean it out, they leave hamas reappears, they have to go back in clean it up. Leave. You can't win that way. And some places they've gone in five times and they're still popping up out of nowhere because they recruit new people. They trained sixteen year olds, they train them again. You have to crush the spirit of these people.

Tamas will never get to you, will protect your life, will give you five million dollars a lot of money, right, and nobody's come forward. So that tells you something about they don't want to they want the dog, they want to keep them. And it's two million people. So have they figured it out now? They haven't figured out yet. They'll start again, they'll start again. They're not defeated yet.

And if again, if you look at surveys, if you look at questionnaires, you know, do you support Ramas anonymous? Nobody will find who they are. They support Ramas, they continue to support the US. Israel has not defeated them, not psychologically. Maybe they defeated the militariity, not psychologically. It's amazing, Yeah, I see it. There rezillions of people, the willingness of people to commit suicide, to destroy their own lives in

the name of an ideology, but it's there. It's like those Japanese who believed that they still had to hold onto that island no matter what, and they were going to fight this war even if they you know, even if they died, and all the other troops who died, they were going to hold the island no matter even though it was obviously they were going to lose.

commitment to a religious view of the world. And yet once they realized that this was not going to achieve what they were promised it was going to achieve, that this was a dead end, that they could not go anywhere, that they could not achieve anything, they switched their ideology. People change their minds. People have free will. People could change their minds, but they need particularly if they're if they're deeply religious, they need strong motivation. Death and destruction

are strong motivation. It's again, it's it's it's you know, the only way to change somebody's mind when they when they're that committed, is to show them it doesn't work. And again I'll go back to my Isis example, when ISIS was winning. There was a lot of terrorism, a lot of people volunteering to go die when I ISIS is losing. Nobody volunteers or very few people volunteers. And ISIS was never really crushed. It just wasn't gaining it, you know, it just lost the ground that it made.

So the same thing happens here.

three hundred million people. That's a lot of people. But again, this a lot of that dramatically increased after the Iranian Revolution because what did the Iranian Revolution show them? The Iranian Revolution was the first example in modern times of Sharia law being established over people, of its being successful defeating the West, because the shah Viuwan was associated with

the West. So when I turn Romani came to power in nineteen seventy nine, it was considered whoa Islamism can work And suddenly there was a massive boon in the creation of Islamic organizations, in terrorist organizations and other forms of organizations, and they got emboldened and they sped all over the Middle East. Right, if Iran goes, that'll take a lot of that momentum awayfund Yep.

this woman is innocent. I don't think she is. That Jews just saved the baby's lives, but what she wants is the baby to kill when he grows up, to kill Jews. This is the ideology. This is ideology A significant percentage of Palestinians believe in now is it? Everybody? Of course, not just like not everybody who was an Natzi, but The reality is that when you live in a place that is ruled by evil people, you're going to

suffer the consequence of their ideology. If the only way for me to defeat Ramas is for some innocence to die, then you have to kill some innocence because there's no other way to defeat Ramas, and there is no other way. There was no way in Germany to only kill the Natist and indeed, if you had done that, then more Nazis would have been created. And that's what's happening in Kamas right now. Every time you kill a leader and new leader pops up. Every time you killer somebody with

a gun and you one caps up. Now, it's horrible. The children have to die. Children are truly innocent. Women might not be. The children are truly innocent. It's horrible that you have to kill children. But the fault of that is on Hamas. Haramas started a war and the only way to defeat defeat them, The only way to destroy them is fuel where some children are going to die. I'm start yes, I mean, if you want to ask me if Ramas, if you want to ask me the history,

I'm happy to go through the history. But absolutely Hamas started in two thousand and five. Is A left Gaza. Haramas could have done anything they wanted with Gauza. Is Old didn't tell them what kind of state to build. They could have turned Gaza into the Hong Kong of the Mediterranean. They chose to build tunnels to buy weapons to launch missiles into Israel. Israel didn't attack Hamas, didn't attack the Palestinians and Gaza. Gaza as a geographic political entity,

was completely israe completely separated itself from Gaza. So who started but Israel.

strategic advantage over them. Butchzabella has been attacking Israel regularly. I mean Isabella Isbela attacked who started to attack Israel in nineteen eighty three. We're talking about forty years of a war initiated by Chrisbela. We're not talking about yesterday it started. This is forty years of Chris chrisbel Is in Lebanon. What do they have against Israel? Anyway?

Some Nazis, mostly French people died there. Hundreds of thousands of French died in the invasion of the invasion of France by not by the Nazis, by the Americans and the British and the French themselves.

We've been going at it for seventy years, eighty years, one hundred years, right, and it's not ended. Just what everybody calls a cycle of violence. But the way to end that cycle of violence is for one party to defeat the other part more violence to end the violence. You cannot end a cycle of violence without more violence.

aggression ended German aggression. Violence ended aggression violence. You know, at the end of the day, you don't get peace until one side beats the other.

how big the billk was. Food would go into Gaza, water would go into Gaza, Electricity would go into Gaza from Israel. It's not a brocade exactly. They got billions and billions and billions of dollars from Kuwait and from Katar and from all these countries. They could have built anything. They could have built beaches and hotels. Israel would have said, cool, we don't want to blockade you for the sake of lockading. The only reason they were blockaded is because weapons were

being smuggled in in order to attack Israel. If your neighbor is smuggling weapons to try to kill you, yeah, blockading is the least thing you should do against.

If the Palestinians are committed to war, which they are and have been, and they haven't shown any indication otherwise, then Israel cannot allow for two state solution because that would put the Gaza Strip five miles from Tel Aviv. So it would make it it would make October seventh a cakewalkers compared to war was coming in the future. So once the Palestinians are committed an actual peaceful, productive country,

problem with the two state solutions. On the other hand, once they committed to that, there's also no problem with one state solution. Have them integrated into Israel, give them full equal rights together with Israelis. They can vote, they can do everything else, and there's a one state solution. Either one is fine. Nobody's you know, people are not objecting to these solutions. As long as the palestine Is are willing to be peaceful. As long as they committed to violence, there is no solution.

I think Israel is such a Western liberal country. I mean it's a it's it's it's exactly what Israel is. So all the Palestenians have to do is copyism.

system to go with the money. So the Gulf States can you know, they're not gonna prove this is the problem. They're not gonna be happy about the Western liberalism, right because they're our Western liberal countries. Dubai is not a Western liberal place. You might go there and be fooled by it, but it's not. It's it's a it's an authoritary state, which it prevents presents a Disneyland for Western visitors. But it lives in a in a a in an

alternative universe. But they could totally buy the funding to make it all possible. They did, right, They provided the funding for Hamas all these years. Kamas used it, not to establish a Western liberal society. They used it to buy weapons in the build tunnels and to and to and to build up uh their ability to aggress against his will. And that's what cannot be allowed.

Ukraine and civilian infrastructure in Ukraine constantly. But look, there is a difference between good guys and bad guys. And you know, bad guys will always try to kill as many people as they can, and they do it for the same reason they're trying to subjugate the population. If Putin flattens Ukraine, you think the West will intervene, there'll be no Third World War. They'll just give up Ukraine and hand it over to Pudtin. He'll win, which is

exactly my point. That's how you win, whether we like it or not, that leads to victory.

guy by definition. If you're fighting a warrier to establish freedom, you know, to deliberate a peace people, you're the good guy by definition. So it's not an issue. We don't count bodies in World War Two and say the Allies were the good guys and the Nazis were the bad guys because the Allies kid fewer people. That's not the

stand about what you evaluate. Nazis started the war, and the Nazis wanted to build to bring oppression and toutalitarianism to the world, and the Allies were fighting for freedom and they were fighting in their own self defense. That's what makes them good guys, not how many people they killed or didn't kill. It's also, i would say, it's the gratuitousness of it, right, The Allies killed a lot of Germans, a lot of Germans. They didn't set up

industrial camps by which to kill them. They didn't rape and pellage for the sake of Rapian pillage and filmed it all and put it up on TikTok. It's a big difference between just a mentality of an army that does that versus the mentality of an army that is trying to defend itself.

were getting huge amounts of money. They were organizing massive infrastructure projects to build tunnels to be able to get into inside Israel. They were they were building owns and missiles and these capabilities, not guerrillas style. They were doing it as a government of a territory.

and then ultimately religion and that is a challenge. The biggest challenge is how do you replace the reliefous institutions that encouraged this authoritarianism. How do you replace it with call it moderate Islam, call it some kind of reformed Islam that is more modored. And that's where you know, the Palaestinis could get some help maybe from other Arab countries that have more moderate Islamic forces, but it's the same institutions have to be replaced.

already a win. So that's great. I'd like to invite you all to Mendeville now, because I think we rented this place till six o'clock, so we nearly were nearly there, and then we can have a drink and we also so I have a little bit a program later on, so everybody is invited to Mandeville. But before that, I have two remarks. This whole idea that why I invited everybody is that I like to say something positive about Ironn.

But you begin loving iron by reading her novels. And for those of you who don't have read her books or don't have the possession, I have put two major ones on the table in the back, so you can take one of the Fountainet one of Edwards Rut and I think this is fantastic reading for those who haven't started. And the second point I promised to give Jonatan a few minutes to express how you can even learn more about iron Rent and objectivism.

have over there, So it's meant for students. It's one of our programs at the Ana Institute, So if you have somebody who wish to give a book for free, you can use the link there. And the second thing, they're handing out flyers for the Iron Rand conference we're having in Berlin in Mertz next year. It's going to be a weekend where we discuss these ideas in a very profound way.