Would you give Putin 30% of Ukraine to avoid World War Three?

What do you want from our Prime Minister and Foreign Secretary? I'm absolutely delighted that LBC's distinguished and sagacious US correspondent, Simon Marks, joins me live in the studio. Simon, let me ask you this. Is there a simple explanation for Donald Trump's volatile about-turn? And is it simply plunging popularity in the midterm elections happening at the same time? Well, Vanessa, it's lovely to see you. Distinguished and sagacious, I have definitely been called worse and will be again, I have no doubt. Look, Donald Trump, when he says that Volodymyr Zelensky is the problem, that it's much easier to deal with Vladimir Putin. Well, of course it is, because Vladimir Putin says we can stop this war tomorrow if Zelensky will give me 30 percent of his territory. And Zelensky is the problem because Zelensky says, I'm sorry, I'm not giving you 30 percent of your territory. I'm my territory. I'm not giving you eastern Ukraine. I'm not giving you Crimea. and so that's why Donald Trump takes the view that Volodymyr Zelensky is a problem because Donald Trump wants to be in a situation where this diesel deal that he agreed based on a single phone call with Vladimir Putin last Friday a phone call that was taking place without the knowledge of some of his senior cabinet members is for Donald Trump the thin end of what he hopes will become a very thick wedge and that thick wedge is doing as much American business with Russia as possible. He wants to normalise, wants to go back to a situation where American business is back in Russia, investing again, despite the fact, of course, that many leading captains of industry and finance in the United States won't touch Russia with a barge pole because they've already been through that particular mill under Vladimir Putin and in the case, for example, of some of the oil companies, have had their assets expropriated by the Russians in the past. But Trump wants to do business on a grand scale with Vladimir Putin. And I don't know if you saw the interview that Tucker Carlson recorded with Jacob Rees-Mogg a couple of weeks ago, where Jacob Rees-Mogg sort of realizes, I think they may, these two men, have gone into the interview thinking that they were sort of political soulmates. And Jacob Rees-Mogg realized very rapidly that that was not the case. And at one point, Tucker Carlson is arguing that the UK shouldn't be worried about. why is the UK worried about Russia potentially engaging in some kind of an attack on the UK? Does the UK not realise that Russia is a much larger economy than Britain's? And Rees-Mogg intervenes and says, wait a second, Russia is not a larger economy than Britain's. It's a much smaller economy than Britain's. And Carlson finds it quite difficult to understand that because Carlson, I think, thinks the same way that Donald Trump does. It's a vast country. It's got all of these resources, all of this wealth, even though vast amounts of it are untapped. I want in there. And and so I thought that that Carlson interview with Jacob Rees-Mogg was sort of an insight into the mind of Donald Trump when it comes to Russia. He wants the minerals. He wants the rare earths. He wants the oil. He wants the gas. And Zelensky is a problem. He's an irritant. This Ukrainian, what's Ukraine got for us, you know, compared to what we could be getting out of Russia? So that's one aspect of it. And the other aspect of it, of course, is that Donald Trump wants to be seen as a big man on the world stage. And the other big men on the world stage are Vladimir Putin and their president, Xi Jinping of China. And even though he's obviously presiding over a small country, Kim Jong-un of North Korea, He likes these big authoritarian leaders and he wants to be one of them. And so he wants a seat at the table. He's invited Vladimir Putin to come to the G20 summit, which Donald Trump is going to be hosting at his own golf club in Doral, Florida. You will read an awful lot in the next couple of months about the G20 summit in Miami because that's what the Americans are calling it. It's not taking place in Miami. It's taking place on the outskirts of Miami in Doral. at Donald Trump's personal golf club. Why are they calling it Miami? So they don't have to keep mentioning the golf club? Yeah, absolutely. It's all designed to intimate that this thing's happening in this major American city. And of course, there will be some events taking place in Miami city limits. But the meat and potatoes of this and the accommodation for many of the international delegates arriving, leaders and their staff, will be at the president's personal golf club, which raises huge conflict of interest questions to begin with. How do we know that British taxpayer money is not somehow going to flow into Donald Trump's business coffers as a result of Andy Burnham attending this G20 summit? But he's invited Vladimir Putin to it. The Russians at the moment are not indicating that Vladimir Putin is going to attend, but they haven't, I think, formally rejected the invitation because Donald Trump wants to be the man who brings him back around the table. He wants him back in the G7. So this is a breaking point with Europe. You know, the idea that Andy Burnham is going to be able to repair bridges between Washington and Kiev this time around, I think is going to be incredibly difficult because we've moved into a new phase of Donald Trump's presidency even before the midterm election results are in. and it is a phase in which he is going to go hell for leather in achieving every remaining objective that he's got in his remaining two years and, what is it, 27 months, 26 months left in office. And one of those objectives is to see Ukraine dismembered and peace with Russia resolved so that he can get on and strike business deals in Russia. And it's a period with no comparison in terms of his unpopularity and the plunging level of his popularity. Is that correct? Yes. I mean, 36% approval rating in some polls, a little bit lower in others. It is absolutely evident that the midterm elections are going to be disastrous for the Republicans. They will, 99.9% certain to lose control of the House of Representatives. And there is growing evidence to suggest that they may lose control of the Senate. it. Fox News had a poll out this week that showed how bad things were. And one of the more interesting aspects of it was buried in the detail, because this is the first poll to have shown that the number one concern among voters in America is now not the economy, it's not the war on Iran, it's not the price of petrol at the pumps, it's corruption in government. 88% of Americans responding to that Fox News poll, said corruption in government was their number one concern. And this is coming, of course, at a time when Donald Trump's own financial disclosure forms have revealed that in the 27 months since he returned to office, sorry, the 20, what are we, 22 months, 21 months since he returned to office, his personal wealth has swelled by $2.2 billion. dollars. And that's the money that he's reporting on the financial disclosure forms. We know that his family is coining it by engaging in business deals all over the world at a time when one of his special envoys, Jared Kushner, his son-in-law, is also running his own business and trying to strike business deals in many of the places where he, Mr. Kushner, finds himself negotiating and mediating. Now, you can also argue that some Republicans say that they're worried about corruption in state government where democrats are running individual states but the idea that corruption in government is now the number one issue of concern to american voters suggests that this is going to be a massively problematic midterm election cycle for donald trump and his behavior on a whole array of different issues over the last couple of weeks suggests that he knows it and he's moving into a different gear already. So many questions about his right or ability or freedom to make these kinds of decisions and make these sorts of calls and form these kinds of alliances and hold sanctions that have been enshrined in law. In my intro, I said American lawmakers are up in arms. But what are the sanctions against President Trump? Is it law-breaking? I mean, what kind of autonomy is he meant to have? That is exactly the question, right? So he has exempted Russia from a Russian sanctions bill. I mean, if you exempt Russia from this Russian sanctions and Russian diesel, there's not a heck of a lot left in the legislation. And I think it's really important to underscore. We've talked a lot on LBC in the last few days about the extent to which Donald Trump has betrayed Volodymyr Zelensky. Zelensky has accused Trump of betrayal. He's also betrayed many of his fellow Republicans because that sanctions bill was the initiative of the late Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, a very influential foreign policy voice in Donald Trump's ear. And boy, are we now seeing how influential he was because he's since passed away. He came back from Kiev, his last mission to Kiev in the middle of July. He came back, died shortly thereafter. But in his last public pronouncement, He said that he had secured White House and presidential support for this Russian sanctions bill. It was designed to choke the Russian economy further, make sure that anybody that was propping up, in his words, Vladimir Putin, was going to be themselves sanctioned and punished. And he specifically cited countries that were purchasing Russian energy. What's Donald Trump done in the last week? He struck a deal to buy Russian diesel, a breach of sanctions law. So he's now adjusted that. You know, he's now said, OK, well, we're carving Russia out of this if you want me to sign it. Republicans in Congress are outraged. They are all saying that this money from the United States to Russia is going to finance the Russian war machine. Trump won't answer the question as to whether any arrangements are going to be made to prevent that from happening. And so it's his fellow Republicans that are trying to head him off at the pass and are saying they want to pass legislation further to try and tie his hands. I wish you could see Simon Marks. His eyes are virtually rolling around in his head. He couldn't emphasise it more, could he really? He's bringing much energy and incredulity and utter horror. What a time to be alive. I think the word is aghast. He's aghast. It's at least one of the words. The headline in the Telegraph front page today, Musk approached Trump to slow Starlink across Ukraine. What the heck is going on there? Well, it certainly makes sense that that is possibly the case. Elon Musk, of course, denied it. We should explain that what we're actually talking about here is something called Starshield, which is the military-grade version of Starlink. And the Ukrainians use it in large measure to control drones and weapons systems. And if you start choking it back, you obviously have less control. And at times they have said they have had no control over some of the weaponry. separately from that there's also the issue of intelligence sharing by the United States with the Ukrainians which definitely according to Zelensky has been reduced Elon Musk has said Starshield is owned and controlled those units are all owned and controlled by the U.S. government I have no capacity says Elon Musk to choke them now there is reporting in the Telegraph that suggests that Elon Musk may at least have suggested to Donald Trump at the White House that he ought to think about doing this. And that's certainly consistent with Musk's worldview. Like Donald Trump, he has parroted the Kremlin's talking points on Ukraine. He says that Zelensky must hold a fresh election. They both keep suggesting that Zelensky is illegitimate in government. Of course, the Ukrainians say it's completely impossible to hold an election in their country at a time when every single day it is being bombarded by the Russians. He has embraced Elon Musk, Donald Trump's revisionist argument that it is Ukraine attacking Russian oil refineries that has caused the increase in the price of petrol and diesel in the United States, not the much more consequential matter of Donald Trump's war on Iran and the blockade of the Strait of Hormuz. So, I mean, look, I think this underscores the fact that Elon Musk is an enormously powerful man whose technology is the difference this week in life or death for some Ukrainian civilians. And what we've witnessed over the last few days with the throttling of the intelligence sharing and the throttling, whoever was behind it, of their access to Starshield means that there is now Ukrainian blood on American hands. Those civilian deaths that occurred this week, the Ukrainians will argue, absolutely can be tied to decisions that were made in Washington. And that's a staggering place. Staggering. And that's why Boris Johnson is saying we need a Western plan. So, lovely listener, this is over to you. What should the Western plan be? What should be happening? Because obviously it can't be right to sit tight and watch this unfolding. It's absolutely appalling. All right, let's go to Dave in Liverpool. Dave, you're on to me, but you're also on to Simon Marks, which is lucky for you. Hello. Yeah, fantastic. Simon is a brilliant reporter. I'm honoured to have him here. So what would you what's your response to this? Are you horrified? I am horrified and disgusted that I can't see how the USA can possibly remain in NATO after what's happened here. Because, you know, this action by Trump has emboldened Putin and Russia into upping the attacks on Ukraine and also possibly upping attacks on the rest of Europe. You know, he's been virtually given the green light. You know, it's absolutely outrageous. um you know what makes me really angry is you see the the cost of living that we're now uh suffering in the uk i filled up a car five minutes ago just talking about that in the break you may well have heard us doing it how much is it what kind of car and how much did it cost you it's an old Renault Clio but it's one pound 77 for a liter yeah so how much was the tank full uh i can bet i can't fill the tank up um i'm putting 10 quid at a time in the car you know okay i mean it's madness and to blame Zelensky to save his own skin trump's own skin this man is a schemer he'd sell his own mother if she was still alive um you know i think we've got to say to america we're sick of this we need to tell them the truth uh if we have to lose usa in nato well so be it and Europe needs to strengthen itself. Simon, is that a possibility? Probably not a probability, but could that happen? Look, I think Dave has put his finger on a number of different issues. I mean, first of all, with regard to NATO, I think that things have now moved to a point where it is not going to be possible for European leaders or even the NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte, the ultimate Trump whisperer, to drag Donald Trump back from the position in which he has now placed himself. And I think that this is almost certainly part of a broader strategy essentially to collapse NATO. The Americans have already been demanding that their NATO allies, including the UK, fill out questionnaires that explain the extent to which each member state of NATO is aligned or not aligned with Donald Trump's policy viewpoints. And this is all part and parcel of a six month review of the American troop presence in Europe that is being conducted at the Pentagon by Secretary of Defense, or as he calls himself, Secretary of War. And Donald Trump calls him Pete, Pete Hegseth. The point at which you are openly siding with Vladimir Putin against Volodymyr Zelensky is the point at which the NATO alliance, in all meaningful terms, ceases to retain its current sort of structures. And if we all wake up tomorrow, as we could, and find that Russia has committed some kind of a hybrid attack that takes the lives of civilians in a NATO country, and this is what is so animating the polls, for example, at the moment, and also the Baltic states, is Donald Trump going to be there for NATO if NATO's other members decide that it's time to go Article 5, you know, the mutual defence covenants that lie at the heart of the NATO charter? I think that is now very, very much in doubt. I mean, more broadly, on the issue that Dave identifies about the impact of the war on Iran, because it is the war on Iran mostly that is impacting the economy here in the UK, I think it is amazing that there is still, as far as we know, a hesitation to speak truth to power to Washington. I mean, we saw West Street meeting Pete Hegseth this week at the Pentagon for the first time as Defence Secretary, lots of talk about the importance of the bilateral relationship and the abiding nature of the transatlantic alliance but you know at some point you've surely got to walk into the Oval Office if you are Andy Burnham or Emmanuel Macron or Friedrich Merz or Giorgia Meloni and say Mr President you are destroying our economies and we now have a list of demands for you And the prime one among them is you've got to wrap the conflict with Iran up. I've got so much to ask you, but I think we should let Mohammed Eleni have a bash at this, don't you? Mohamed, why don't you speak? It's good to have you on the show. Simon Marks is here and a gog. Hi, Vanessa. It's always a pleasure coming on your wonderful show. Thank you, my love. I think, you know, we are in really, really dangerous times in the world. And what I don't agree with most things President Trump is doing. But what he's, I believe, is avoiding an inevitable war between Russia and Europe. As the head of the British Army yesterday said, Sir Rory Walker, that the politicians will soon have to have frank conversations with the general public and prepare us for war and sacrifices. We, the general public, don't want that. We don't want war in this day and age, in the 21st century. And what President Trump is doing is trying to bring Putin in so we can avoid that. But, Mohamed, he's trying to do it at the cost of dismembering Ukraine of 30% of its territory. I understand that, you know. If it comes down to whether to save the world and millions of people, 30% of Ukraine's territory, I'm sorry, you know, if it has to go, it has to go. But let me play devil's advocate, Mohamed. Why do you believe that Vladimir Putin, who would be enormously emboldened by securing Russian sovereignty over Crimea and eastern Ukraine, why would he stop there? Well, I think, you know, Vladimir Putin is another issue, you know, that we have to face. May I ask something? How would you feel, Mohamed, if it were Manchester, Liverpool and Carlisle, for example, or Newcastle? I would feel absolutely furious and I would do anything to defend those cities, you know, as a British national. But what I've got to say is, you know, we are heading for war with Russia. Russia every single day is testing the resolve of NATO. And President Trump sees that. Hence why the CIA director made a visit to Moscow recently. And we don't want that. The public don't want that in the UK or wider Europe or the world. And President Trump, you know, I don't agree with him in most things, is doing a great job in avoiding that. If he's doing bad in Iran, he's avoiding us from World War III, whether we like it or not. Mohammed, thank you. I just wonder, do you see any accuracy at all in what Mohammed is saying there? I'll tell you what I think is really important about what Mohammed said there, which is that if you look at what the head of the army said yesterday about the need for a national conversation in this country about defence, that is something that several of the people that were involved in the strategic defence review under Keir Starmer's government were directly telling John Healey when he was Minister of Defence and Keir Starmer at number 10 that you've got to begin a national conversation because you can't suddenly find yourself in a situation where the British public is expected to accept that we have to get involved in some kind of a conflict, that we're spending loads of additional money on new gear for the army. You can't do that without the national conversation. And that's been delayed already by two years as a result of Keir Starmer not beginning that national conversation. As the army chief was saying yesterday, you know, Andy Burnham really needs to start that conversation. It's hugely important. John's on the line in France. John, hello. Janessa, how nice to speak to you. Very nice to speak to you. What do you think? What are you thinking? What are you worrying about at this point? Well, I want to put a completely opposing view forward. Go on. OK, I think the West is kind of in romantic love with Ukraine. And what I mean by that is, as you know, romantic love. You look at your partner, you don't see any negatives, you don't see any blemishes, you don't see any warts, you don't see any deformities. OK, what are the blemishes? You better get that out. What are Ukraine's faults, blemishes, warts and the noise that Ukraine makes eating soup? Tell me. Thank you, but I want to finish my point first. I think we get the point because you've got to move on because we've got loads of calls. No, you don't get the point. That we're in romantic love with Ukraine and we see no faults. Yeah, I get that bit. Listen, I think that there was a solution on the table right at the beginning of this. And that was that Ukraine would remain neutral and that they would, in that way, everybody would win. Ukraine would win because they wouldn't have to spend half their national product on military spending. there would be 100,000, maybe 200,000 people still alive and there would have been a perfect solution, a neutral Ukraine as a buffer between Russia and the EU. And I think that we are only going into this military solution because it's the only way that the UK, sorry, the EU will get economic growth. We're being told all the time. All right, OK, let me stop you there and let's get a reaction from Simon. Well, I don't think it's on the romantic love with Ukraine. I think that we in the West are not only aware of, but have intervened on numerous occasions in the past regarding corruption in Ukraine. So I don't think that there is denial about what has been a very, very persistent issue among successive governments in Ukraine with regards to corruption and the disappearance of aid money. And now, of course, questions about many of the millions of dollars that have headed into Ukraine and precisely how that money has been spent. So I don't think there's denial about that. I think that what the West is in love with is the notion that Ukraine, like any other country, is a sovereign nation. And Ukraine has the right to make its own decisions about what sort of foreign policy it wants to have and to do so in an environment where it's not on the receiving end of Vladimir Putin's war of aggression, which has obviously devastated hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of thousands of families in Russia who have lost loved ones serving in this battle against Ukraine. And so, you know, the notion that outside forces are in a position to say to Ukraine, right, you now must be a neutral nation. Well, I mean, just as it would be up to us to decide what we wanted to do, whether we wanted to be a member of the European Union, for example, or not, equally Ukraine as a sovereign nation surely has that right to make its determination as well. John, thank you and au revoir. Let's go to Michael in Sunderland. Hello, Michael. Hi, Vanessa. I think a lot of you people want to get yourself on YouTube and do a bit of history, what happened to Russia and Hitler, right? Because it happens to be exactly the same happening if you're on a boat. I'm going back 80 years ago, obviously, but it's apparent with what's happening now. Finland, Poland were all carved up before anything happened and i think that's what trump is doing with putin right but i put trump is a little bit like stalin where he's thinking oh no but we've got a deal he doesn't think putin is clever in the name and he's going to turn his back on them because i tell you what all the rest of europe should get together now stand up there and we're not all going to put the money in we didn't have the money for the second world war was neville chamberlain's peace in my time and all that rubbish we have got to stand up for ourselves because i tell you what give five ten years time, what do you think Putin's going to do? He's going to run that country until he's dead. I'm going to vote my grandson. I'm 60-year-old. That's the one that gets about 25 years of my life. His grandson's only six. Now, all these people want to have a history lesson about what will happen if we don't stand up to Putin now, and the previous expert who was on, I would have all the EU countries, NATO, in Ukraine, I've always soldiered in there for this exercise. That sounds like what Boris Johnson's calling for today in his column, where he says We need a Western solution. That sounds like what you're offering, at least a plan for a Western solution. Simon Marks, what do you make of what Michael's just said? Well, look, I mean, I think that Donald Trump definitely wants to be a president of the United States who expands America's territory. He's not joking when he says he wants Canada to be the 51st state. He's not wasn't joking when he said he wanted Greenland to come under U.S. auspices. And indeed, he claims that the agreement that has now been struck over Greenland basically guarantees American involvement in Greenland's affairs in perpetuity. He admires past presidents who have expanded America's frontiers and added to its territory, particularly in what he refers to as its primacy in the Western Hemisphere. So in that sense, he's all about splitting the world up. You know, I mean, you could see a certain set of circumstances in which he says, I'll take Canada and the Chinese can take Taiwan or I'll have Greenland and, you know, and so on and so forth. So, I mean, I think that is that's where Donald Trump's mind is in all of this. And, you know, yes, Europe is going to have to decide how it is going, what what degree of commitment it is prepared to make to Ukraine in an environment in which the United States is bailing on Zelensky and adhering itself to Putin. But we also have to bear in mind that by the middle of next year, Marine Le Pen may well be the president of France. She says she's going to cut all aid for Ukraine within six months of coming into office. The AFD are making huge inroads in Germany. Georgia Meloni in Italy has got a problem on her far right. you know where we sit today uh october 2026 may not be where we find ourselves in terms of our relationship with european governments in just a matter of you know six eight nine months time so you know the opportunity to make any decision today exists but you've also got to be mindful of the fact that there could be huge political change in Paris in Berlin in Rome and in other capitals that leads to a very very different series of conversations let's go to Matt in Brighton who's on the line Matt hello good afternoon to you oh hi Fenna it's very good to talk to you hope you're well thank you i'm fine tell me tell me your thoughts on on Putin and Trump or the other way around well Trump oh god i'm sick of hearing about him seriously i just had to google it i just said to your researcher who the heck voted for him his polls ratings are down and uh you know he's getting to a certain age where he needs to move to one side i think and retire but he's causing a lot of problems for us for everybody and uh you know you go out on the street this evening when you finish your hard shift you're working three hours on LBC and i just think you know people look sad and you know that you like someone just called up and putting 10 pounds of fuel in their car the actual fuel is coming from Norway not coming from Ukraine but uh i can't say what i want to say but you can get the gist Donald Trump is a big stirrer and he's causing a lot of problems for us but someone we need to cut ties from him i mean interestingly during the break, someone was saying to me that he thinks that um that he won't that Trump won't mind a defeat in these midterms in terms of and Congress etc no i think that's right i mean i think he's pricing it in and i think what we're already witnessing is the Donald Trump that we are going to be witnessing and i've got bad news uh for you because he's not going anywhere he's got another 26 months to go i mean we have to remember we're not yet even halfway through his second term in office i think that uh you know with Republicans on Capitol Hill developing a bit of spine particularly for example over this Russia sanctions legislation and saying that they're going to try and pass more legislation to constrain him, and with it being evident that the Republicans are about to suffer a substantial defeat in the midterm elections, in a way, he almost would prefer to find himself facing a Congress that is controlled by Democrats because he'd be able to make them his new target, he'd be able constantly to tell the country that they're radical left, they're trying to bring Marxism and communism to the United States, even though, of course, they are not. And I think he relishes that kind of a fight. It's more of a it's more of the kind of bloodthirsty competition that he enjoys than having to deal with disquiet among his own Republicans. And as everybody can see, I mean, if you watch what's going on in these midterm elections, if he had tried to be less useful to Republicans seeking election in two and a half weeks time, I'm not sure what more he could have done because he has been utterly useless in terms of providing them with any fodder to assist in their campaigns. And I think one has to look at it and say that for whatever psychological reasons, he is indeed indifferent to the outcome of these elections and also wants the Klieg lights of publicity always on him. So everything is about him rather than about these individual lawmakers in battleground, critical races all over the country where the composition of Congress is going to be determined. Thanks, Matt. Let's go to Seamus in Wellington. Hi, Seamus. Good afternoon. Thank you very much. Pleasure. You're on to Simon. What would you like to say? I just wanted to thank you for the quality of the context for the debate. The whole relationship with NATO has got to be survived over the next two years. I'm really sorry to say this out loud, but this war has now been lost. And all we can do from a European perspective is survive Trump, try and hold NATO together and try and make some sort of semblance of Ukraine post-Trump, where we can then have a proper and mature relationship and a proper global aspect to peace, not this lunatic psychopath who's carving up the world along with Putin and the Chinese. I want to ask Simon if other people are seeing it in the same way as Seamus about surviving Trump. I think, Seamus, you make a hugely important point and I'm sure that in the corridors of power in various European capitals the calculation that's being made is we've just got to get through the next 26 months and survive Trump. I mean, the question I would have is what happens if we all wake up and discover that J.D. Vance or Marco Rubio are running things in the United States? I mean, do we honestly think that this brand of Republican politics in America is going to evaporate when Donald Trump leaves the stage? I'm not convinced that that's necessarily the case and I'm also not convinced that it is entirely certain that on January the 20th 2029 the next American president will necessarily be a Democrat so those calculations have to be made they're very important but they can't be guaranteed I just want to read you this it's from Harley who says no disrespect to Simon for his left of center anti-Trump positioning but your discussion is missing the elephant in the room Europe and others betrayed America over dealing decisively with Iran, which will have to be reckoned with at some point. With oil flowing through the Straits of Hormuz, Russian diesel falls away and sanctions stand. Europe and the UK especially have made themselves geopolitically irrelevant, nowhere more so than in the Middle East, where we're backing the wrong side of history, the Iran regime. Look, I preferred it when I was being called sagacious. Look, I mean, there's an awful lot in there. The overriding reality is that Donald Trump's decision to go to war against Iran emboldened as he was by Benjamin Netanyahu to begin that conflict was carried out without any plan, any calculation that assumed this was going to be anything other than a cakewalk. And I don't think it's Europe that is holding Donald Trump up, back from completing the war in Iran and bringing about regime change in Iran. It is the reality of the circumstances that demonstrate that you cannot win this war from the air only. You've got to deploy ground troops and there is no public support in the United States for the deployment of ground troops in this conflict. This is Donald Trump's mess. It's not Europe's mess.