00:00And according to a report in the Washington Post, the U.S. is using hundreds of tomahawk missiles on Iran,
00:07which is said to be alarming some people at the Pentagon.
00:12What is your assessment of this? Is the U.S. running low on ammunition?
00:17Because many people would say that they didn't expect it to last this long.
00:21Well, that's another assumption that was flawed, that we expected that this campaign would last much less than what we've
00:27seen so far.
00:28So obviously, when you're in a race of time, then you're going to start talking about resources, depletion of resources,
00:35a war of attrition, which seems to be now favoring the Iranians.
00:39It's not because they have more resources. That's not true. It's just because they have greater tolerance for pain, right?
00:45It's kind of a paradox. It's almost counterintuitive with the Iranians.
00:49The more pain you deliver to the Iranians and the more they're able to absorb, the more pain that they're
00:55actually able to supply to the international economy.
00:58And we can't win that race. The pain tolerance race, we can't win.
01:02And the firepower, no matter how enormous that we can apply against the Iranians, is also not going to solve
01:08essentially a political strategic problem.
01:11And so the whole conversation about tomahawks, the whole conversation about strategic bombers, the whole conversation about missile interceptors,
01:18that's almost irrelevant if you don't place it in its proper strategic context.
01:22And that proper strategic context has to be based on solid and sound and realistic assumptions, neither of which we
01:30have held so far.
Comments