Trump Gives Green Light To Israel To STRIKE IRAN

The Young Turks

178,017 views • yesterday

Video Summary

The video discusses a strategy allegedly involving senior Trump advisors aimed at instigating a war between the U.S. and Iran on behalf of Israel. The alleged plan suggests that Israel should initiate an attack on Iran, prompting Iranian retaliation against Israel. This, in turn, would be used to draw the United States into a war, purportedly with the support of the American public who might feel compelled to defend Israel after an attack. The discussion highlights concerns that this strategy might deliberately put American soldiers in harm's way to justify military action, drawing parallels to the rationale used for the Iraq War. It further critiques the media's framing of polls and the influence of the "Israeli lobby" on U.S. government policy, emphasizing the financial and military support the U.S. provides to Israel without reciprocal contributions. A striking assertion is that Israel has stolen U.S. nuclear secrets and developed its own nuclear weapons.

One highly interesting fact revealed is that senior Trump advisors are reportedly hoping Israel launches an attack on Iran first, which would then trigger retaliation and draw the United States into a war, supposedly making it more palatable to the American people.

Short Highlights

U.S. soldiers are stationed in Israel, purportedly to defend Israelis, at a cost of a trillion dollars annually for U.S. military.
Alleged strategy by senior Trump advisors aims to provoke an Israeli attack on Iran, leading to Iranian retaliation and U.S. involvement in war.
U.S. government is accused of manipulating public opinion to support a war with Iran on behalf of Israel, even if it means American soldiers are harmed.
Politico reports that "there's thinking in and around the administration that the politics are a lot better if the Israelis go first and alone and the Iranians retaliate against us."
The video claims Israel has stolen U.S. nuclear secrets and developed nuclear weapons, and that the "Israeli lobby" influences U.S. government and media.
There is a concern that depleting U.S. munition stockpiles could create an opening for China to invade Taiwan.
The deployment of F-22 Raptors and Army troops to operate THAAD anti-missile systems in Israel is highlighted as U.S. military resources being used for a foreign country's defense.

Key Details

U.S. Military Presence and Funding in Israel [00:00]

U.S. soldiers are currently stationed in Israel to defend the country.
The U.S. funds its own military, not Israel, despite the significant cost of approximately $1 trillion annually.
The presence of F-22 Raptors in Israel is questioned as a protective measure for Israel.

"We pay FOR OUR MILITARY. WHY ARE OUR soldiers based in Israel? Why do we have F-22 Raptors in Israel in order to protect Israel?"

Alleged Strategy to Provoke War with Iran [00:29]

Senior Trump advisors are reportedly hoping Israel will launch an attack on Iran first.
This would trigger retaliation from Iran against Israel, drawing the United States into a war.
The motivation is to make a war with Iran more acceptable to the American people by creating a sense of obligation to protect Israel.

"So they're hoping that our planes and our soldiers get hit. Our guys, our government is hoping that our guys get hit so then they can go, 'Oh, okay. Now we don't have a choice. Wink wink. Now we have to attack Iran.'"

Political Calculus and Media Manipulation [01:43]

The Trump administration is aware that most Americans do not want to go to war with Iran on Israel's behalf.
The strategy is described as a political manipulation to make war more palatable if the U.S. or an ally is attacked first.
The plan involves Israel attacking Iran first, which would then lead to retaliation against the U.S., necessitating a response.

"So instead of listening to the American people, the Trump administration would like to manipulate the American people."

The Role of American Media and "Anti-Semitism" Accusations [02:42]

A key assumption is that American media will frame Israel as the victim, and any dissenters will be labeled as anti-semites.
This framing is intended to pressure the public into supporting a war to protect Israel.
The media's role is seen as complicit in pushing this narrative, ignoring the fact that Israel might have initiated the conflict.

"The reason why they assume that is because they know that at that point American media will go out and say Israel is the victim and that you're all anti-semites if you don't now engage in the war to protect the poor poor poor Israelis."

Anonymous Officials and the "Israel First" Agenda [03:07]

Politico quotes anonymous sources familiar with discussions, revealing a sentiment that "the politics are a lot better if the Israelis go first and alone and the Iranians retaliate against us."
This is interpreted as an open message to Israel to strike first, with assurances of U.S. backing.
The planning is seen as borderline treason, with White House figures allegedly anticipating American soldiers being killed to achieve their objective of attacking Iran.

"There's thinking in and around the administration that the politics are a lot better if the Israelis go first and alone and the Iranians retaliate against us and give us more reason to take action."

"Regime Change" as the Objective [04:37]

The strategy is framed as being driven by individuals like Steve Bannon and Jared Kushner, described as "Zionists who have no interest in peace in the Middle East and want to help Israel."
Negotiations with Iran failed because Iran wouldn't give up its missiles, which are seen as its only defense against Israel.
The ultimate goal appears to be regime change in Iran, sacrificing U.S. military personnel and resources for Israel's interests.

"So, we're going to bomb them. We're going to go to war with Iran. We the people of the United States of America, our military... will be sacrificed on the altar of precious Israel so they can get regime change in Iran."

Post-War Plans and the Destruction of Iran [05:43]

There is no clear plan for what happens to Iran after the current government is allegedly destroyed, suggesting Israel's primary concern is regime change, not stability.
Israel is portrayed as favoring a failed state in Iran, similar to its alleged role in the destructions of Libya and Syria.
The idea of a country with 92 million people being destroyed for Israel's interests is questioned, highlighting Israel's alleged role in regional terrorism.

"Israel would be happy to see a failed state much like we have in Libya, something else that Israel wanted and got, and Syria."

Polling Data and Media Framing [06:28]

Politico's citation of a poll by JL Partners, suggesting Americans support regime change in Iran but not at the cost of U.S. casualties, is criticized.
The framing of the poll is seen as manipulative, emphasizing support for the war under specific conditions rather than outright opposition to it.
The reliability and potential bias of JL Partners, a UK polling firm with ties to Conservative campaign figures, are questioned.

"You see how the trick is in the framing and so they constantly are framing to manipulate you to serve Israel's interests."

The "Laughable" Idea of Easy Regime Change [08:52]

The notion of achieving regime change in Iran through air strikes alone, without boots on the ground, is deemed "laughable."
Iran is described as more sophisticated and larger than Iraq, implying a military intervention would be far more complex and costly.
This narrative is seen as a deliberate attempt to mislead the public into believing the war would be easy.

"So this idea that we're going to just like do some air strikes and the Ayatollah is going to get killed or is going to step down and suddenly we're going to have this wonderful regime change situation in Iran without boots on the ground is laughable."

U.S. Military Deployment and "War of Choice" [09:19]

The Wall Street Journal reported the deployment of F-22 Raptors to Israel for the first time, in preparation for Iranian retaliation.
U.S. soldiers are in Israel to operate THAAD anti-missile systems and support ballistic missile defense.
This is characterized as a "war of choice," not a necessary act of self-defense, as Iran's missiles cannot reach the U.S.

"So, I want to be clear, we will have troops on the ground in the very least in Israel to protect Israel for a war of choice. That's what this is. War with Iran is a war of choice."

Historical Parallels and Financial Drain [10:40]

The current situation is likened to a "100% redo of the Iraq war," with similar talking points.
Israel's demand for U.S. defense while initiating attacks on other countries is questioned.
Israel is accused of having received $330 billion from the U.S., which is considered an abnormal and unreciprocated amount.

"So, the brain deadad morons over at Politico thought that they could insult our intelligence by citing a poll by JL Partners..."

"Anti-Semite" Smear and Media Corruption [14:03]

Israeli politicians are accused of lying and manipulating the U.S. government and media for decades.
Accusations of anti-semitism are used to silence critics and protect Israel's interests, even when factual information is presented.
The U.S. media is described as "totally and utterly corrupted" for failing to report on Israel's financial dealings and influence.

"The Israeli politicians have been lying to us our whole lives. They've been manipulating our government and our media."

Israel's Nuclear Secrets and Threats [15:10]

The video claims Israel has nuclear weapons, which they "stole" from the U.S.
Jonathan Pollard, a former U.S. Navy analyst convicted of spying for Israel, is cited as having stated that Israel threatened the U.S. with nuclear weapons.
This is used to support the argument that Israel is not a trustworthy ally and engages in deception.

"The media says if you do not ignore the fact that Iran stole our nuclear secrets, I'm sorry, Israel did. See, that's funny. Put it into my head. Israel, not Iran. Israel stole our nuclear secrets."

The Rage of Lost Troops and "Finding Out" [16:48]

The potential rage in the U.S. if a significant number of troops are lost in a war with Iran is highlighted.
This is described as the definition of "effing around and finding out," suggesting severe consequences for initiating such a conflict.
The belief is that the public will eventually react strongly against the policies that led to such losses.

"The rage this country is going to feel when we lose any significant number of troops in this war is not going to be anything like you've ever seen before."

Strategic Risks: Munitions and Taiwan [17:22]

A risk acknowledged by anonymous officials is the depletion of U.S. munition stockpiles, which could embolden China to invade Taiwan.
This highlights the broader geopolitical consequences of engaging in a protracted conflict.
The reliance on Taiwan for semiconductor chips makes such an invasion particularly detrimental to the U.S.

"One risk they admit is, you know, depleting our munition stockpiles, which would give China an opening to invade Taiwan."

U.S. Assets in the Region and American Casualties [17:38]

Iran is likely to retaliate with all its capabilities if attacked, posing a significant threat to U.S. assets in the region.
These assets include American soldiers, who are at high risk of casualties due to the lack of protection like the Iron Dome.
This risk is presented as a deliberate gamble by the government to trick Americans into supporting a war on behalf of Israel.