Back to episode — Episode 1202 Scott Adams - Dale and I Tell You the News From Both Realities
Context —
rder to enjoy it to its full, full, full extent, all you need is a copper mug or a dangerous vessel of any kind filled with your favorite liquid. I like coffee. And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure of the dopamine hit of the day, the thing that makes everything better, including recounts. It's called the simultaneous sip. That happens now. So there's a really interesting chess game go
← Previous segment →ing on in the Middle East, and I hate to be fascinated by war and death, but it's hard not to be. You know, if you're a human you've always got these two thoughts going on. Well that's horrible, I hope there's less of that. I don't want any death and destruction over there. But on the other hand, it's really interesting, which is not really fun.
Somebody said it's the Scott sophistry hour. Anybody who accuses you of sophistry, that's one of the dumbest criticisms. I don't even need to say more about that. It's just dumb. Usually when they accuse you of sophistry is because they don't agree with you. It doesn't mean I'm wrong.
Anyway, talk about the Middle East. So as you know there was an assassination of the top Iranian nuclear scientist guy. Everybody assumes it's Israel, but the timing is the interesting part because if Biden goes ahead and takes office, as many people assume will happen, this really throws a little wrinkle into it, doesn't it?
Because what is Iran going to do? Here's the clever part. Does Iran just ignore it? Because if they do, there'll be more of it, right? There'll be more targeted assassinations, I assume, more things will blow up and that sort of thing. But what if they retaliate? If they retaliate, they either retaliate weakly in a way that makes no difference, so what's the point? Or they retaliate strongly. What would happen if they did a strong retaliation when Biden is trying to figure out how to maybe get back into the Iran peace deal? It would really make it hard for Biden to make any kind of overture for peace or an agreement with Iran.
So I think if we assume, as everybody assumes, that Israel was behind it — let's call that a safe assumption. Baseless? Oh it's baseless. I hav
Context —
e not seen any, not one piece of evidence. Certainly nothing's been proven in court. So I think we could all agree that the allegations that Israel is behind that assassination are baseless by definition because there's no evidence, right? Don't you know that if something is baseless then I guess you have to treat it like it didn't happen because it's baseless? Now I have argued of course that t…
Next segment → →