Tucker Carlson

In fact, as far as I know, only two people, me and Charlie Kirk, actually went and spoke directly to the president to make the case that, no, you shouldn't get involved in this war because its aim is not actually war.

to deny Iran a nuclear weapon.

That may be a virtuous goal.

But that's not really what this is about.

What this is about is luring the United States into yet another regime change war.

And if you do that, it's bad for everybody, including you.

That's the case that we made.

Charlie went to the White House to make that case, and God bless him for doing that.

And he was hated for doing that.

Hated for doing that.

But he did it.

Very few other people did.

In fact, as far as I know, none.

So, of course, in June, the debate ended and the United States did commit military force to Iran.

It bombed Iran and spent billions to protect Israel once again from the inevitable, the predictable conventional response from Iran, et cetera, et cetera.

And in the end, thank God, we did not get lured into a regime change war.

But the bitterness lingered and the total unwillingness of the people pushing for that war to state their aims, to be honest about what they wanted and to defend what they wanted, remained.

They understood from the very first day that they could not win that debate.

They didn't want that debate.

They wanted another debate where they felt they could win or at least cow their opponents into total silence.