Are we witnessing a sea change in Middle Eastern alliances, or is this just another twist in a long saga of regional complexities? Tune in as we peel back the layers of Iran's brazen attack on Israel, revealing the political chessboard that underpins this new chapter of hostility. You'll grasp the gravity of the situation through our breakdown of defense strategies, the Iron Dome, and the fascinating dance of military might against diplomatic finesse. We delve into the high-stakes conversation between President Biden and Prime Minister Netanyahu, scrutinizing their united front for de-escalation and the weight of American support in this geopolitical tightrope walk.
Hold on to your hats for a satirical whirlwind as we take a step back from the brink of global conflict, chuckling at the irony of Arab nations rushing to Israel's aid. The episode transforms into an almost comedic stage, mocking the often farcical moves of Western foreign policy and the theatrical musings of former President Trump. We navigate the treacherous waters of legal drama, including Trump's trials and the whispers of history in the making. The dynamic interplay of geopolitics, social media's courtroom, and Japan's military pivot becomes the backdrop for our inquisitive gaze into the world's unfolding narratives.
As we reflect on the transformed landscape of public discourse, remember when high-profile trials were singular national events? Now imagine them amplified by the digital megaphone of social media. We explore this phenomenon and its implications for the way we absorb and contribute to the public conversation, dissecting the dramatic shift in our collective experience of major events. So, brace yourself for a journey through the tempest of today's most pressing issues, all served up with a side of incisive humor and critical insight, right here on the Darrell McLean Show.
Are we witnessing a sea change in Middle Eastern alliances, or is this just another twist in a long saga of regional complexities? Tune in as we peel back the layers of Iran's brazen attack on Israel, revealing the political chessboard that underpins this new chapter of hostility. You'll grasp the gravity of the situation through our breakdown of defense strategies, the Iron Dome, and the fascinating dance of military might against diplomatic finesse. We delve into the high-stakes conversation between President Biden and Prime Minister Netanyahu, scrutinizing their united front for de-escalation and the weight of American support in this geopolitical tightrope walk.
Hold on to your hats for a satirical whirlwind as we take a step back from the brink of global conflict, chuckling at the irony of Arab nations rushing to Israel's aid. The episode transforms into an almost comedic stage, mocking the often farcical moves of Western foreign policy and the theatrical musings of former President Trump. We navigate the treacherous waters of legal drama, including Trump's trials and the whispers of history in the making. The dynamic interplay of geopolitics, social media's courtroom, and Japan's military pivot becomes the backdrop for our inquisitive gaze into the world's unfolding narratives.
As we reflect on the transformed landscape of public discourse, remember when high-profile trials were singular national events? Now imagine them amplified by the digital megaphone of social media. We explore this phenomenon and its implications for the way we absorb and contribute to the public conversation, dissecting the dramatic shift in our collective experience of major events. So, brace yourself for a journey through the tempest of today's most pressing issues, all served up with a side of incisive humor and critical insight, right here on the Darrell McLean Show.
Welcome to the Darrell McLean Show. I'm your host, darrell McLean. Today is April 16th of 2024. You are now listening to episode 402.
Speaker 1:Now, I did an episode on Sunday very short 12 minutes long about when addiction touches lives, and it was a narrative about the loss and the human condition, and that was just something touching to me. But now we're gonna have to get into some of the news that has happened since we last spoke. So israel and a lot of other countries actually had to strike down some drones that was sent from Iran, and you heard me right, this was the first time that this has happened. So let me get into this analysis, and it may take a bit longer, but it is necessary. Analysis, and it may take a bit longer, but it is necessary.
Speaker 1:Now, we have known for a very long time that the Middle East is one of the most volatile places on the earth, if not the most volatile, and, frankly, it has been for a matter of decades. Now, that very fact. We're not talking about a bilateral conflict, we're talking about mass conflicts and networks of conflicts, and some of them go back to more than over a millennium. And right now, of course, because Iran, and that is the Islamic Republic of Iran. Iran, and that is, the Islamic Republic of Iran, actually attacked Israel over the weekend with a massive barrage of cruise missiles, mostly explosive-laden drones, and also some ballistic missiles. Now the good news is, at the end of the day, the massive barrage and that's the only thing you could say a massive attack upon Israel was largely ineffectual. There was one little girl who was tragically, who was seriously injured, and there was at least some injuries to a couple of Israeli military bases. The big news was that the effectiveness of Israel's famed iron dome systems and the national defense against cruise missiles, drones and ballistic missiles. But there was another big story and that was that it took not only Israeli defensive mechanisms and technologies here, it took a massive coordination of other nations, including the United States. At this point, it appears that Jordan was rather directly involved in helping to defend Israel. It also appears that at one point that other Arab nations, especially in the Gulf region, were involved in providing at least logistical support.
Speaker 1:Now you may try to unpack this, like with me, because it is very complicated, but what's uncomplicated is the fact that Israel's survival in this case has virtually everything to do with two things. Number one its own defensive capabilities, the famed Iron Dome missile defense, along with what's now very clear to be an effective anti-invasion undertaking on the part of the Israeli Defense Forces and, in particular, israel's Air Force. But the other big factor here is the involvement of the United States. The US moved major naval assets into the arena as soon as, by the way, the American government began to signal that it expected this attack on Israel from Iran and on something very likely, what eventuated as the scale. So this is complicated. The United States started speaking about intelligence indicating that Iran was likely to launch this attack in the aftermath what was believed to have been an Israeli attack in Damascus, syria, that killed multiple figures involving Iran's armed forces. It also, in that attack, killed some diplomats as well.
Speaker 1:Now, was that, in the military and foreign policy terms, legitimate if Israel did it and just about everyone believes Israel did it, and that was what Iran is saying they respond to Now the answer is yes, it was and it would be again, because you're looking at Hezbollah there in Lebanon, you're looking at Syria, basically being proxy states representing a clear present danger to Israel, because there are proxy states of Iran. What is taking place is over the last few days. What took place over the weekend is something without precedent in the terms of modern Middle Eastern history, and the fact is that it was a direct attack upon Israel by Iran. And what I mean by direct attack, which is to say it was not undertaken by Iran through proxy states, through shadow armies or through a shadow armed force or shadow terrorist organizations. This was undoubtedly Iran taking the action itself and, when it comes to the Islamic Republic, and it was its own military that undertook the attack, and it was a massive attack.
Speaker 1:By American estimates, there were about 170 drones that were sent with explosives. The drones, by the way, flew rather slowly and they were no match for the Israeli air forces and for other defense systems, including the Iron Dome system. When it came to the cruise missiles and the ballistic missile, there was something else, and it is now clear that the active involvement of the United States military was crucial, especially when it came to ballistic missiles. But Iran apparently doesn't have many ballistic missiles and it does a cheaper, it does a lot of cheaper and it uses that and a bunch of uh other inferior drones. The drones took a long time to fly to israel, and we're not talking about minutes, we're talking about hours, and so that raises the question of why did iran do this? And the answer is because iran was making a point. But we also need to understand that that point was not primarily directed at israel. That point was especially directed at the United States of America.
Speaker 1:Now, I remember going back to the Islamic Revolution in Iran in 1979. The Ayatollah Khomeini and others didn't describe Israel as a great Satan, but rather described the United States as the great Satan. Now, the conflict between Iran and speaking now of Iran after 1979 and thelamic revolution, it has been one of the major forces of american forest policies and necessarily so it has been our focus. So you have to think back to the hostage crisis, but remember also an incredible number of conflicts between iran and the united states and even more recently, between iran and numerous proxy states, and, by the way, it's not just the states, it's also the terror, terror groups such as the Houthi rebels in Yemen, and we're talking about a massive threat to the United States of America. Not by accident, iran sees the United States as the great Satan to be defeated, and in order to understand that, you have to put all the names of Iran's states together the Islamic Republic of Iran.
Speaker 1:Iran is a Shiite Islamic Republic. It sees the United States as a great secular devil. We don't have to wonder what the Iranians have as a great plan, when they have made it very clear it is a Shiite Islamic domination of the world. And that's not words we put in their mouths, that's basically what they say. Americans tend to think of the Islamic Republic of Iran as something that's safely far away from us in the terms of geography, and yet we are reminded again and again that it is simply not the case.
Speaker 1:Now, in the terms of the conflict between Iran and Israel, well, you can't create something of a tripod. Iran does consider the United States to be a horribly depraved and secular culture. Then we as a Judeo-Christian nation can talk about our own concerns there. But the root of the American identity, and a Christian identity as well, when it comes to Israel, of course we're talking about an Israeli or a Jewish state, and so to think about the apathy between Shiite and Islam and Judaism, between Israel and Iran, and you have to understand why. It's new and extremely dangerous thing that Iran would involve itself directly in a massive attack upon Israel.
Speaker 1:Now, pragmatically, the big question is what will Israel do in response, and the arguments come down to this If Israel does not respond, it appears weak and invites more attacks.
Speaker 1:It weakens its positions not only everywhere in the world, but particularly when it comes to the threats from Iran.
Speaker 1:On the other hand, israel responds with an attack that is too large, a response that is too great to the magnitude that it risks the support of not only the United States.
Speaker 1:That's key to, but remember it also will put Israel in a position of threatening its allies and friendly nations in the region, and that includes non-Shiite Islamic states, including at least Saudi Arabia, as well as Jordan and some other monarchies there in the Gulf region as well. Now, when it comes to the United States and how we should think about this particular development, we need to understand this in a very, very, very ominous way. We need to understand that this is the kind of thing that really could lead to a massive conflict drawing a number of nations inside of it. It's the scale of a potential conflict that could reshape the entire world picture politically. We'll be talking about more of this, even as we look into another development that is taking place in the United States at the moment Iranian drones, cruise missiles and ballistic missiles flew toward Israel Saturday, raising the specter of a wider conflict between Israel and Iran that could drag the US into the fray.
Speaker 4:The unprecedented strikes were in retaliation for an attack earlier this month that killed top Iranian officers at Iran's embassy compound in Syria. An attack attributed to Israel. Despite the scale of the attack, there was very little damage. An attack attributed to Israel. Despite the scale of the attack, there was very little damage. Israel and the US, along with Great Britain, france and Jordan, shot down nearly all of the missiles and drones, and Iran told the United Nations it considered the matter quote-unquote concluded, as long as there was no counter-strike.
Speaker 3:To make sense of all this. We're joined now by NPR international correspondent Daniel Estrin in Tel Aviv and our national security correspondent, greg Meyer, here in Washington. Good morning to you both, hi, leila. Good morning. So, daniel, let's start with you. Walk us through Iran's strikes and how this all unfolded.
Speaker 4:Well, it began. Late Saturday night, israel announced that Iran was firing drones toward Israel and that it would take hours for them to arrive, and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addressed Israelis in a video statement. So he told Israelis our defense systems are deployed, we are prepared for any scenario, both in defense and attack. And then, several hours later, around 2 am, sirens started going off 2 am local time. They went off in Israel's north and the south, even in Jerusalem. There were these bright orbs of light flying through the air above the golden dome of the rock, the holy site. There were booms of interceptions. There was the rumble of fighter jets in the skies. Other pilots who have been speaking on Israeli army radio have said that they never imagined or even drilled for such a massive attack in terms of just the number of projectiles. At the same time, 99% of them, israeli officials say, either fell short or were intercepted. Midair, greg. Now several other countries also took part in this shootout. What can you tell us about that?
Speaker 5:Yeah, leila, the overall tally is really quite remarkable. Altogether, we're talking about nine countries involved in some form. Iran fired from its homeland, but it also fired from positions in Iraq and Syria. The Houthis in Yemen launched attacks, so Israel was facing incoming airstrikes from four separate countries. Israel, as Daniel just mentioned, shot down most of this fire, but the US took part from Navy ships in the Mediterranean and the Red Sea. Jordan shot down some of the drones, it said, not to protect Israel but to defend its own airspace. And Britain and France also shot down drones. So five countries were involved in shooting down the Iranian drones and missiles.
Speaker 3:Perhaps most remarkably, there's been no reports of anyone killed, just a couple injuries. Now, Daniel, even though the damage was limited, people across the region really weren't sleeping this weekend. What did Iran have to say about the attack? Well, Iran says that it was exercising legitimate defense.
Speaker 4:It was responding to the Israeli attack on the Iranian diplomatic compound in Damascus and the way that Israeli analysts explain that Israeli attack is that you know, during the Gaza war Iran has been fueling, you know, six months of attacks on Israel through its proxies in Lebanon and Yemen, and Israel here wanted to deliver a strong response. Only Israel apparently did not expect Iran to respond the way that it did Now. Iran was also sending many messages here. Iran says it gave other countries 72 hours notice of these strikes and also told the US through other countries that it did not intend to strike US targets or military bases. Iran's foreign minister, hossein Amir Abdullian, spoke yesterday through an interpreter.
Speaker 1:Here's what he said.
Speaker 6:We told them that our target in this defense is simply to attack the Israeli targets. So Iran, signaling it does not want this to escalate further. You know, even before the missiles reached Israel, iran's mission to the UN tweeted. As Michelle mentioned earlier, this matter can be deemed concluded. It warned Israel not to respond and it said the US must stay away. Now the US said it would not participate in any retaliatory attacks but, greg, it was very much involved in Israel's defense over the weekend.
Speaker 5:right, oh, absolutely. The US and Israel and other partners were closely coordinating air defense plans. They had about 10 days to get ready for this because it was pretty well telegraphed and they knew it was coming. Still a US official who briefed reporters. He described the Iranian barrage as being very much at the high end of what they had anticipated and he also described this very tense moment when all these Iranian weapons were bearing down on Israel, including more than 100 ballistic missiles all in the air at the same time, within a few minutes of Israel and, as we noted, the US participated from Navy ships in the Mediterranean and Red Sea. Here's John Kirby, a National Security Council spokesman, talking about the shooting on weekend edition Sunday.
Speaker 3:It proved the superiority of the Israeli defense forces. It proved the military superiority of the United States and our other partners that participated in this. That was an incredible success. Now, Greg, President Biden spoke to Prime Minister Netanyahu right after the Iranian airstrikes. What was the president's message? Yeah, according to US officials, President Biden urged Netanyahu to proceed now with caution.
Speaker 5:He told the Israeli leader that the US will provide ironclad support to help Israel defend itself, but the US is not going to take part in offensive operations against Iran. Us officials said Biden is not telling Israel what it should or shouldn't do, but clearly the US would prefer Israel to see this as a very successful operation. Prove that Israel, with help from the US and others, can defend itself and should consider the path of de-escalation, and it's in keeping with Biden's stance since the Israel-Hamas war erupted in October.
Speaker 3:Again here's Admiral John Kirby. Everything we're doing is trying to prevent a wider regional conflict, and there's certainly no reason in our view that it needs to become so. Okay, but I want to understand what Israeli leadership is thinking, daniel. What are the options they're weighing? After this attack, israel's security cabinet is debating this very issue.
Speaker 4:An Israeli official told me this morning that everyone in the government in Israel believes that Israel has to respond somehow, because this is not the shadow war anymore, leila. This is not Iran hiding behind proxy groups in Yemen or Lebanon. This was a first ever declared attack launched from Iran directly toward Israel. It's an escalation in Israel's eyes, and so the Israeli official I spoke to says the question is how Israel is going to respond. Some want a military response, a strong one. Others see this as an opportunity for diplomacy, to build a strategic alliance in the region, maybe even to end the war in Gaza, establish ties with Saudi Arabia, and that would be a deterrent against Iran in the long term.
Speaker 3:And Greg Biden and Netanyahu had a tense phone call less than two weeks ago now over the deaths of civilians and aid workers in Gaza. Where does that stand now?
Speaker 5:Yeah well, this weekend was a moment of close Israeli-US cooperation. They can both view it as a success, so one would assume it's improved the atmosphere. But now there's the question of what will Israel do next? Toward Iran and in Gaza, the US says Israel doesn't have to hit back at Iran or, as one US official put it, the Americans don't want to see this run up the escalation ladder. And in Gaza, the US still wants to see an easing of the humanitarian crisis there. Israel did respond to Biden's previous phone call about 11 days ago or so. It is allowing more aid in, and we'll be watching very closely to see if this improves conditions for Palestinians there and, daniel, you described this pretty frightening Saturday night, sunday morning.
Speaker 3:What's Tel Aviv like now?
Speaker 4:It's really almost back to normal. Israel has lifted all the restrictions it had imposed on school outings and big gatherings and many people are, I think, just feeling a sense of relief. It's remarkable that the missiles were intercepted so successfully, that Israel hasn't immediately responded and we are not engulfed in a wider regional war today and PR's Daniel Estrin in Tel Aviv and Greg Myrie in Washington.
Speaker 3:Thanks to you both.
Speaker 1:So, guys, I always talk about here how I believe in supporting independent media, so on and so forth. The the only big media, um apparatus as far as legacy media that I do support is, uh, npr, and occasionally I do listen to pps although I've never actually given them money and um I I think there is something to be said for both of the stations, and I believe in giving money to organizations that I find valuable. I believe that when we have serious conversations about serious topics, in order to not always be in a to be in despair, that if there's somebody that can talk about politics in such a way that it brings us joy and humor, then that is something that we should do, something that can be engaged with. And one of the people that made politics kind of fun to talk about and humorous as a satirist is Jon Stewart. Now, he used to be the host of the daily show and he left and he came back and now he does like a once a week spot on the channel okay, and john stewart is, uh, jewish and he is somebody who is on the.
Speaker 1:What I would say is the more moderate left is probably because he's a comedian. He's friends with Dave Chappelle. I actually went to see Jon Stewart, uh with one of the biggest uh supporters of this show in Red Rocks, uh, jon Stewart, dave Chappelle, and a bunch of other very hilarious comedians, and um, so he did give an analysis on this, or his take on this, from a very humorous way. That I do think would bring us some value and some clarity before I get into some other stories. So let's go to the Daily Show with Jon Stewart and we're going to listen to what Jon Stewart has to say about this particular conflict.
Speaker 6:Hey, welcome to the Daily Show. My name is John Stewart. Unbelievable show. They're already exhausted from the opening, by the way. How was your weekend? My weekend was breaking. At this moment, israel under fire from Iran.
Speaker 5:It's just raining rockets.
Speaker 2:with those sirens blaring out, we do effectively have World War III in progress.
Speaker 6:Oh no, not World War III. I'm still writing Iraq War on all my checks. But yes, the skies above Israel were lit up like a I want to say Christmas tree, but that's probably not For that area, menorah. It's the moment society has dreaded since the armistice of 1945. Finally upon us. As Einstein said, he doesn't know what weapons World War III will be fought with, but he knows the next ones will be fought with sticks and stones. This is Jon Stewart signing off. May God bless us and everyone and let future civilizations know that we could not overcome our fatal nature, that we could not overcome our fatal nature. In the end, there was almost no damage, as Israel, the US and other allies shot down 99% of Iran's missiles and drones Huh.
Speaker 6:It wasn't World War III. It wasn't, uh, world War III. Uh, I certainly regret doing this. I, um, I, uh, oh boy, moment of panic and, uh, I guess sort of a primitive instinct. But Is Is that me, did I, I guess, sort of a primitive instinct? But Is that me, did I, art Garfunkel?
Speaker 6:But kudos to the United States and to Israel. It shows just how effective a military defense system can be when you funnel American dollars away from health care and education. It really helps to build, and the best part is we did it with no help the two amigos, surrounded by hostile Arab nations, united in their zeal to destroy Israel. Jordan's Air Force also intercepted and shot down dozens of drones that violated its airspace and were on their way to Israel, and we've now learned that Saudi Arabia and the UAE provided real-time intelligence that helped track the incoming missiles. What are the teams of these wars? I don't even know the teams anymore. The Arab countries are helping Israel. I don't know what the teams are. We need to sort this out with jerseys or something, because Iran could attack at any moment.
Speaker 4:In a statement, Iran said it now considers the matter concluded.
Speaker 6:Hey, did you hear that? We're good? We're good. By the way, he was delicious Really. That's what you're doing. Anyway, we're going to be okay.
Speaker 5:Israel has vowed it will respond to Iran. No.
Speaker 2:All right, can I have a word?
Speaker 6:with you, middle East Over here. Word with you, Middle East Over here. Ah shalom, aleichem, trying to cover all bases. Listen, I hope this doesn't sound patronizing, but when we in the West drew your region's borders and set you up with perfectly functioning dictatorships, we expected a little better. See, the agreement was we would make up a whole new bunch of countries, some of which made sense, and in return, you would give us your delicious oil. That was the deal you give us your delicious oil and we take it. We certainly didn't expect to get drawn into all the drama that our actions created.
Speaker 6:And now these wars have got us all turned around. At one point we're helping Iraq fight Iran, and then we're invading Iraq. And now we're helping Iran fight ISIS, and then we're using ISIS to help fight Houthis that are backed by Iran. I mean, f*** you know, in Gaza we're actually bombing them and feeding them. How do you think that makes it feel? Oh, oh, oh, did you have a nice sandwich Run? Oh, and apparently now there's two kinds of Islam. I mean, you could have told us that before we got into this. As I said earlier, arbitrarily gerrymandered your homelands. Do better keep that oil coming and, by the way, we got enough trouble keeping track of our own wars, like this weekend. Our former president and illustrious historian, donald J Trump, spoke near one of America's most hallowed battlefields and if you thought, lincoln consecrated Gettysburg with his soaring rhetoric, well buckle up Gettysburg.
Speaker 2:What an unbelievable battle that was the Battle of Gettysburg. What an unbelievable, I mean. It was so much and so interesting and so vicious and horrible and so beautiful in so many different ways. It represented such a big portion of the success of this country. Gettysburg, wow.
Speaker 6:That is plagiarized almost directly from my seventh grade book report Gettysburg. Wow, I did not know. It was vicious and horrible and beautiful. Is he talking about a Civil War battle or a horse giving birth? It was bloody but it's life Now. Obviously I'm not a Civil War buff, but unlike me he even knows all the famous quotes.
Speaker 2:I go to Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, to look and to watch and the statement of Robert E Lee, who's no longer in favor. Did you ever notice that? No longer in favor? Never fight uphill me boys. Never fight uphill. They were fighting uphill. He said wow, that was a big mistake, he lost his great general. And they were fighting never fight uphill me boys.
Speaker 6:It is true the North did have the higher ground, but I'm pretty sure that Robert E Lee was not a leprechaun. Ah, never fight uphill me, boys. That's not how to take back the North's party world. You can't be fighting uphill me, boys. Also minor point, but I'm pretty sure Robert E Lee would not have told them never fight uphill, since he's the one who told them to fight uphill. He wasn't like they go up the hill. I'm gonna be so mad if they do that they go up the hill. Longstreet actually told them to go up the hill and Robert E Lee said anybody's gonna do what they want, although, to be fair to uh former president Donald Trump, he does have a lot on his mind right now.
Speaker 3:Now to breaking news. The first ever criminal trial involving a former president will soon get underway.
Speaker 6:Oh my God, donald, don't run up that hill. Me boy Stay down. Stay down to hear me boy Stay down. Yes, after years of anticipation, the first criminal trial of a former president has begun and, by all accounts, it is absolutely riveting.
Speaker 5:Forty minutes ago, you wrote an observation that I was very surprised. Trump appears to be sleeping. His head keeps dropping down and his mouth goes slack. Tell us about that, well, jake. He appeared to be asleep.
Speaker 6:Hey Jake, what part of head down, eyes closed, drool coming out of his mouth. Do you not f***ing get over here? He's snoring, he's doing the hong shu, he's doing the me, me, me, me, me, me me. There's a piece of paper going up and down and up and down in his mouth. He's asleep. Imagine committing so many crimes. You get bored at your own trial. Move on to the good stuff now in case, uh, in case, you go off track. This is the trial where trump allegedly paid hush money to an adult film star that he slept with and then allegedly falsified business records to cover it up. Uh, or as Trump would put it this is a medical persecution.
Speaker 2:This is a persecution like never before. Nobody's ever seen anything like it and again, it's a case that should have never been brought. It's an assault on America, and that's why I'm very proud to be here.
Speaker 6:Well, it's true, trump is always very proud to be part of any assault on America. Look, even if yes, mr Stewart, we agree. Look, even if the prosecution's a bit of a stretch, it's not persecution. The guy's not Nelson Mandela or Jesus.
Speaker 2:I don't mind being Nelson Mandela, because I'm doing it for a reason.
Speaker 3:Trump also shared two articles that compared him to Jesus Christ.
Speaker 6:One was titled quote the crucifixion of Donald Trump. I don't let him crucify me, boy.
Speaker 1:The Jerome McLean show of course does have a phone number where you can call and leave a voicemail or you can leave a message. The phone number is 757 310-7303. That is 757-310-7303. On the show line I have that is 757-310-7303. On the show line I have a message that says Can you lay out a hypothetical scenario where Trump's followers would abandon him.
Speaker 1:That is the question. Can I lay out a hypothetical scenario where Trump's followers would abandon him, scenario where Trump's followers would abandon him? And the only scenario that I would really be able to come up with would be if he took a hard left turn, if he said he didn't believe in the principles, if he was caught on tape saying that his base was a bunch of rubes and he just says whatever they want to hear, but he doesn't believe it. He's losing a bit of support from the evangelicals because of his stance on abortion. That does not seem to be a totality with the evangelical position on abortion and there have been a lot of people in the Trump movement who have said, if he is actually convicted and found guilty of a crime that gives him a felony, that they would not be able to support him. Thank you for the question to the show line.
Speaker 1:I'm going to end on these two topics. So first one is going to be how communist China's aggression is pushing Japan actually into the arms of the United States. We're looking at a new epoch of world history. We have to give attention to major developments in foreign policy and a global scene. We've just gone to the hottest of the hot spots, which is Israel, after Iran's attack. But we need to also look at something that happened just over the last several days that ought to have our attention. Now we're talking about not what took place in the Middle East, but what took place in Washington DC, and that is towards the world changing picture. Not what took place in the Middle East, but what took place in Washington DC, and that is towards a world-changing picture. And when I tell you that there was a major way that the world picture is changing and that has to do with the relationship between the United States and Japan.
Speaker 1:Now Japan's Prime Minister, fubo Kishida, came to the United States with his wife on a state visit. This is the first official state visit, with all the white house protocol, undertaken by a japanese head of government in almost a decade, and the united states and japan have a very close relationship. But the relationship is getting a lot closer really fast. As a matter of fact, japan is now looking at changing its defense posture because ever since world war ii it's uh defeat by the allies in the horrifying um uh, you know things that happened in world war ii, given japan's militarism as a part of was creating the japanese future after the second world war and his absolute defeat. A part of that picture was a non-military posture or identity to be undertaken by modern Japan. Now there could be absolutely no military force because you're looking at Japan, you understand as a nation it has a very certain amount of kinds of defensive abilities, even if it's just to protect its coastline and its waters, and so Japan has a minimal defense force. But japan has been building up over the years and most recently there was a signed agreement between the united states and japan, also including the philippines, potentially being expanded to say australia and new zealand, among other nations. That vastly increased the military coordination between the united states and japan, and then add the add the Philippines and any others who eventually sign this agreement. But the big signal is this Japan, very quietly, is really transforming itself from a self-defense military posture into something that would be more formidable if there is a war in the Asian theater.
Speaker 1:And you ask the question why would Japan do that, by the way, has been able to get by as a nation and as an economy without the vast defense spending that has been true of every other nation, most important the United States of America. Japan has been under America's nuclear umbrella ever since World War Two. Japan has been under the general defense sphere committees of the United States since World War II, but we are living in a different world. And if you have to ask the question, what made the difference? And the difference is an aggressive communist China. That has been made all of the difference and it has led to a reconsideration of Japan's self-identity when it comes to being a non-militaristic nation.
Speaker 1:And that doesn't mean that they're returning to militarism as an ideology, but it does mean that japan realizes that it's not going to be able to survive without two things, and it's very much like the situation in israel japan's not going to be able to exist without, number one, having a much stronger defense system, a much stronger military, which much more advanced weapons and a lot more of them.
Speaker 1:The second thing is is Japan is going to have to be an ally known as the United States of America in the closest relationship and in the closest of coordination. Now just consider the economic competition that had existed a matter of just a couple of decades ago between the United States and Japan, but nonetheless, the Japanese Prime Minister, in a landmark address to Congress, called the United States an indispensable nation. Now, that's an amazing statement coming from the Japanese Prime Minister. It's also an amazing thing to recognize that just a matter of a few generations ago, after World War II, the Prime Minister of Japan spoke to what amounts to a joint session of American Congress. We all expect a much deeper level of coordination and cooperation between japan and the united states, and this is the state.
Speaker 1:That's visit is likely to be just one in a very serious sequence of developments that bring closer coordination between japan and the united states and other allies in the region, and, of course, the united states is not an ally in the region in the same sense that the philippines are, let's say, australia. But the point is that America, in the terms of global responsibility, well can't escape this and, frankly, the Japanese and Americans need to recognize and know it. And the final thought, and we're thinking about this in a worldview where we recognize that the changing world, with changing threats, we're looking here at the pattern of, let's just say, sinfulness when it comes to the global picture, we understand that relativism and realism as a worldview is just extremely important. We don't live in an imaginary world. We don't live in a world in which we can just wish this kind of threat, whether it be Iran or increasingly aggressive China, away. We do not live in a world in which we can wish bad behavior away. We do live in a world in which sin can take the form of cruise missiles, drones aimed at Israel, or which it can take the form of cruise missiles, drones aimed at Israel, or which it can take the form of a kind of threats, you see, in a newly aggressive country. That's not to say there's any sinless nations, but we know that there is not. But we also know that the moral relativism is not an option.
Speaker 1:Murder is always a morality tale, and this is going to be the final topic I talk about, which is the death of OJ Simpson and how moral judgment happens across society. Which frankly, brings me to this final subject, which is something I really did not intend to discuss on the show. As a matter of fact, to be honest, I told people I didn't think I would discuss it at all because it just wasn't important to me. But here we are, and I'm talking about the death of OJ Simpson, and I'm pointing back to just about decades, to the infamous murder trial of OJ Simpson. We're looking at the brutal murders of his former wife, nicole Brown Simpson, and her friend, ronald Goldman. So let's just take stock of what we're talking about.
Speaker 1:30 years ago, we were talking about one of the most famous celebrity figures in American sports and, frankly, in American popular culture, oj Simpson, being accused of murder when it came to his ex-wife and her friend, and the murder was extremely violent, involving multiple stab wounds, and it was undertaken with incredible violence and vehemence. Now the question was could this be the same oj simpson? Then the story got more, just complicated. You'll remember the fact that he fled from police and was one of the early undertakings by cable television to follow alive in criminal pursuit in the white bronco. You'll remember going through la area with all the law enforcement behind it and you had OJ Simpson eventually surrendered to authorities. He went on to a trial and you say, well, they had no business making any judgments because they weren't in the courtroom and they didn't hear the evidence. Oh, but that's what was new. They in one sense were in the courtroom and they did hear the evidence because this was a live trial broadcasted across America for months and months.
Speaker 1:Americans were mesmerized. They were fascinated. This is a morality tale fascinated. This is a morality tale.
Speaker 1:Murder is always a morality tale and the fact is that it not only did most americans believe quite clearly that oj's had murdered nicole brown simpson and ronald goldman. The reality is that another jury in a civil trial found oj simpson was responsible and sent down a multi-million dollar verdict against him. But the fact is that the criminal trial he was found not guilty. But at the time it was argued that this was a form of what has become known as jury nullification. The jury refused to find him guilty, not because they didn't believe he was guilty, but because of either one of two things are both together they believe that the prosecution had made crucial mistakes when it came to evidence, in particular the infamous pair of gloves, and they also believe that the American justice system was unfair, particularly to African Americans, and thus OJ Simpson became a symbolic representation of the African Americans against the justice system, representation of the African Americans against the justice system.
Speaker 1:Now, I don't think that there's any way, morally, to interrogate the members of the jury and figure out what was going on there, but I just want to point out how moral judgment works out its way throughout a society. So that trial was three decades ago. It was almost 30 years ago when it came to the conclusion, so we're really talking about a long time. When it comes to the American memory, we're talking about an incredible number of millions of Americans born after the event. But nonetheless, when OJ Simpson died of cancer last week, there was virtually no one who was seeking publicly to speak up on his cause or to plead that he was not guilty in his famous case. You see, it turns out that, god having made human beings in his own image, we do happen to make certain moral judgments, and the vast majority of Americans came to a pretty certain moral judgment, not independent of the evidence, but honestly, for the first time in American history, having been presented with this kind of evidence.
Speaker 1:And the other very interesting development is that millions upon millions of Americans watched the trial. There was a national fascination with it. With the invention of cable television and cable television networks became possible for americans to watch this kind of trial, and at least a lot of them watched it together. And then nothing like that is probable now. The diffusion of media sources, streaming video and all the rest, the breakdown of the old media, the oligarchy, means that there are few things you can honestly say most Americans actually watch together.
Speaker 1:But it's also interesting to note that just in retrospect, just in the aftermath of the fact, the first issue is the reality of moral judgment. The second thing are the changes in our society, and the death of the media oligarchy is a part of it, which is to say that there used to be a few options. Now Americans have almost well exceedingly unlimited amount of options on their own smartphones.
Speaker 1:But there's still another major development, and this is one that had taken place 30 years ago in the OJ Simpson trial, when the controversy was such a focus of national attention, there was no social media on social media platforms. There was no Twitter, there was no Facebook, there was no TikTok or any of the rest of it, and so Americans were not talking about this in any sense in public. Talking about it in their offices and homes and classrooms, yes, but they were talking about it in one massive national conversation. But when something like this happens now, americans can actually speak into the situation and everybody can see it by means of social media. Now I'm not saying that that's a good thing or a bad thing, but it's a real thing. The trial of the century, as it was called then, was a media spectacle. So just brace yourself to the image and imagine what would it be like now, in the age of social media. Spectacle isn't a word that would even come close. Thank you so much for listening to the Darrell McLean Show.