A very powerful country stretching around throwing bombs in some directions killing people in other directions threatening people with sanctions but it isnt coherent and you know. You wouldnt get that impression from Mainstream Media go ahead glenn go ahead and i was just going to say this theme of. Escalation dominance has been the very central strategic objects about do not a state so. The simplicity that america would be able to increase escalate when it wants and the bring it down so for example if the u. S. Drops bombs in pakistan to syria or in another dozen countries understanding would be that country would not be allowed to respond because of the unpredictable and there are devastating consequences from your so they can bring tensions up and down as they want for for pressure now whats interesting with iran is they more or less denied this is america cost what they did last. And launch their missiles directly at American Military bases and america essentially have to suck it u
Different reasons taran was being strategic and political while trump was relying upon sanctions and the 3rd and and the demand that the United States be remain inside of iraq against the will of the people in government and parliament there that is what makes this all asymmetrical and i think you can draw different conclusions about as the media likes to do who won and who lost go ahead alex and well what is what i mean i think the fundamental difference is that the range to the strategic range of their asses to get that Foreign Policy that diplomats they bring to get their political aint is they be able to bring in their intelligence operatives manage to me people also their economic assets such as they are and they set themselves very clear objectives which they dont let themselves be done from. And then objective is not clearly defined easy is to try to get the United States out of the middle east out of iraq specifically out of areas where they can threaten new iraq iran the Unite
Have people look wanting to escalate as you put it which means essentially having a war you see the u. S. Government forced into frantic diplomacy through the Swiss Embassy in tehran which it now turns out it was the United States which initiated it was lee u. S. And having started the escalation became panicked and saw the way out to deescalate in other words they dont have a clear objectives and theyre not working towards those objectives instead you get the impression of a very powerful country stretching around throwing bombs in some directions killing people in other directions threatening people with sanctions but it isnt coherent and. You wouldnt get that impression from Mainstream Media go ahead glenn go ahead last just going to say this theme of. Escalation dominance has been the very central strategic objective by the United States or. In the simplicity that america would be able to increase escalate when it wants and then bring it down so for example if the us drops bombs in
Was used all of the time and i think indeed it was asymmetrical but for very very Different Reasons taran was being strategic and political while trump was relying upon sanctions and the 3rd and and the demand that the United States be remain inside of iraq against the will of the people in government and parliament there that is what makes this all asymmetrical and i think you can draw different conclusions about as the media likes to do who won and who lost go ahead alex and well what is what i mean i think the fundamental difference is that the range to. Range of their assets together that that Foreign Policy that diplomats they bring to get their political aint is they be able to bring in their intelligence operatives manage to me people also their economic assets such as they are and they set themselves very clear objectives which they dont let themselves. It from and their objective is not clearly defined easy is to try to get the United States out of the middle east out of iraq
Acres. The significance of that he was involved, partially involved in the creation of the original president s park, a tourist site 12 myles from here that was open from 2004 until 2010. That was the home of all 42 of these sculptures. He was actually also instrumental and commissioned in 2010 to come take these sculptures when that park went bankrupt and put them in his stone crusher. So he did not have the heart to do that, thank god. And spent a considerable amount of his own money to transport every one of these one by one from that bankrupt, nonfunctional park 12 miles from here to his property here as a way to store them temporarily until he figured out what he wanted to do with them. The sculptor of all of these is a gentleman by the named of david adickes. Not in the home attic but adickes. And he, if hes still alive, is probably in his early 90s. He was a painter and artist out of houston who was visiting friends in canada and was coming home by way of Mount Rushmore and beca