tbh, i didnt watch even 2 minutes. just went with the headline. lulHere's the hour and a half video.
The short of it is that Obama has picked prevention of Iranian nukes over containment, and there were several speakers discussing the consequences and possibilities of that stance. There was a discussion of negotiations and how deals could be struck and what should not be done as well as to what would be beneficial to the West. Towards the end was the scenario of complete failure, meaning that the Iranian leadership is bent on having nuclear weapons regardless of any offer. In that case a final offer would have to be made after which there would have to be military action in order to assure prevention. A reporter asked that if there were a need for war how would that be sold. That was what we saw in the clip, and he cited examples where some event gained approval by the public. A little later in the discussion (and there was a part in the OP video) where the speaker said that it's not a matter of going to war vs inaction, but that there are covert options which exist to hamper Iranian progress. In short this was an exploration of the possibilities, good or bad, and not some plot to start a war.
Nice try though OP.
That's reasonable based on what it said, but there wasn't any context so I had to find out if there was some crazy think tank with the objective of creating a war as a goal in itself. Certainly there's no love lost concerning Iran, but it's an interesting vid subject and completely relevant and explains how the objective laid out by Obama could translate into negotiations and offers and responses to them. It might wind up good for all, or go quite badly, and the talk explored those possibilities.tbh, i didnt watch even 2 minutes. just went with the headline. lul