Key Moments
Iran War Expert: "The 8 Weeks After Midterms Could Be The Most Dangerous!" | Prof Robert Pape
The Diary Of A CEOKey Moments
The 8 weeks following the US midterms could spark global conflict, from domestic political violence to war escalation in Iran and Ukraine, with potentially devastating consequences.
Key Insights
The period of power transition following US midterms is identified as the most dangerous, echoing the events of January 6th.
Over 40 million Americans reportedly support political violence for Trump's goals, and over 60 million support force to prevent him from being president, numbers that have doubled in two years.
President Trump has a plan on his desk to strike targets in Iran over a 3-day period, described as a rapid, high-intensity aerial campaign similar to 'Instant Thunder' used in the 1991 Gulf War.
Putin may escalate in Ukraine by targeting civilian infrastructure, aiming to knock out 90% of power in major cities for weeks or months, a move driven by his failure to gain territory.
The UK government has advised households to stockpile essential supplies for up to 3 days, preparing for potential hostile state attacks or major infrastructure collapse, signaling governmental concern.
The potential use of the Insurrection Act by President Trump to deploy US military within the country against citizens is not being taken off the table, a rarely used power that bypasses Posse Comitatus.
The perilous eight weeks after the midterms
Professor Robert Pape, a political violence expert who has advised every White House since 9/11, warns that the eight weeks following US midterm elections represent the most dangerous period in living memory. This heightened risk stems from the confluence of three critical issues: the transition of power after the midterms, the ongoing Iran war, and potential escalation in Ukraine. The transfer of power is particularly volatile, as demonstrated by the events of January 6th, and is exacerbated by the current political climate where tens of millions of Americans support political violence for their respective causes. Pape highlights that over 40 million Americans support political violence for Trump's goals, and over 60 million support using force to prevent him from being president, figures that have doubled in just two years, indicating a significant rise in political polarization and a willingness to resort to extreme measures.
Escalation in Iran: A pre-planned strike
A significant threat identified is a detailed plan on President Trump's desk to strike targets in Iran over a 3-day period. This plan, reminiscent of the 'Instant Thunder' operation during the 1991 Gulf War, is designed to paralyze Iran's military and leadership through high-intensity aerial campaigns targeting missile sites, drone launch hubs, IRGC command centers, and crucial energy infrastructure. The strikes are intended to force capitulation without triggering a prolonged ground war. However, Pape argues that such an attack could lead to devastating retaliation, potentially from decentralized Iranian elements or inspired terrorist attacks, and could result in significant civilian casualties, mirroring the estimated 5-15,000 civilian deaths during the 'Instant Thunder' campaign against Iraq. This aggressive action could also spiral into a "forever war" with the potential deployment of US ground troops into Iran.
Putin's escalation trap in Ukraine
Simultaneously, Russia is poised to escalate its actions in Ukraine, particularly if Putin realizes Trump cannot deliver promised territorial gains. Russia's strategy may involve targeting civilian infrastructure, aiming to knock out 90% of power in major cities like Kyiv, Kharkiv, and Odessa for an extended period, creating a 'dark winter.' This escalation is driven by Putin's own 'escalation trap,' as he has failed to achieve his initial objectives and faces immense pressure from his military and domestic situation if he accepts a stalemate or defeat. The objective would be to force Ukraine into capitulation, but the consequences could be dire for Ukrainian civilians and potentially lead to direct confrontation if Europe retaliates against Moscow, a scenario Pape likens to World War III.
The rise of violent populism and domestic unrest
The concept of 'violent populism' is central to Pape's analysis of domestic instability. This occurs when political violence moves from the fringe to the mainstream, fueled by millions of Americans on both sides of the political spectrum who support such actions to achieve their goals. The combustible material for this violence is the sheer number of people willing to use force, while unpredictable 'sparks' can ignite widespread unrest. Pape draws parallels to the January 6th Capitol riot, where Trump's rhetoric acted as a spark. He warns that ongoing ballot counting and certification processes, combined with international crises, could create focal points for clashes between protesters and federal agents, mirroring the spread of unrest seen in France due to rising prices and social tensions.
Global implications and government preparedness
The interconnectedness of these crises is emphasized, with rising gas prices, economic instability, and the potential for widespread civil unrest. Governments are already showing signs of concern: the UK government has officially advised households to prepare for national emergencies by stockpiling essential supplies for three days, including water, non-perishable food, and batteries. This 'Be Ready' campaign underscores the acknowledgment of risks from hostile state attacks, cyber warfare, or infrastructure collapse, indicating that official bodies are anticipating severe disruptions. The potential for cyberattacks on critical infrastructure, possibly by Iran, leading to power and water outages, is a significant concern, with reports suggesting US intelligence may have suppressed coverage of such incidents for national security reasons.
The extreme measure: Insurrection Act
A particularly alarming prospect is President Trump's stated consideration of invoking the Insurrection Act. This rarely used presidential power allows the deployment of US military, National Guard, or reserves within the country against citizens, overriding the Posse Comitatus Act, which generally prohibits domestic use of the military. Pape notes that Trump has not taken this option off the table, and in the context of escalating domestic and international crises, its invocation could lead to American troops on American streets, a move historically reserved for dire circumstances and one that authoritarian states often employ to suppress populations. Such an action would represent a dramatic shift in American governance and a severe test of democratic norms.
What can be done: Establishing firebreaks
To counter these escalating risks, Pape proposes three critical 'firebreaks.' Firstly, all members of Congress should declare that there will be no escalation by the Trump administration in Iran until the new Congress is seated, unless Iran strikes first. Secondly, a two-month moratorium on federally armed agents in cities should be called for by governors and mayors during the counting and certification season, to reduce the potential for violent populism to ignite. Thirdly, core mediating countries like Pakistan, Qatar, and India should call for a 'hands-off civilians' policy, prohibiting the direct targeting of civilian infrastructure or residential areas by any state. These measures aim to de-escalate tensions and prevent the slide into wider conflict.
The public's role and the limits of stockpiling
While some governments are advising public stockpiling, Pape questions its effectiveness for individuals. He argues that three days of supplies are insufficient to mitigate the panic and disruption caused by prolonged infrastructure collapse. Instead, he emphasizes that ordinary citizens can exert influence by contacting their political leaders and urging them to adopt the proposed 'firebreaks.' Pape also highlights the power of social media and platforms like The Diary of A CEO in raising awareness of complex issues and potential worst-case scenarios, which can influence decision-makers and potentially avert disaster, as he believes has happened with previous discussions on his show. His ultimate message is one of cautious optimism, emphasizing that proactive measures can help navigate this period of extreme danger.
Mentioned in This Episode
●Supplements
●Software & Apps
●Companies
●Organizations
●Books
●Concepts
●People Referenced
Common Questions
The period after US midterms is considered dangerous due to the transition of power, a time historically marked by political violence. This is compounded by potential escalations in the Iran war and intensified conflict in Ukraine.
Topics
Mentioned in this video
Discussed as a central figure in potential US midterm election disputes, escalation in the Iran war, and the use of emergency powers. His administration's actions and promises regarding Iran are a key focus.
The expert guest, a political violence researcher who has advised the White House since 9/11. He is the primary source of the analysis on geopolitical risks.
Discussed in relation to potential escalation in Ukraine, particularly concerning civilian infrastructure and the possibility of a 'dark winter'. His desire for Ukrainian territory is highlighted.
Mentioned in relation to the 'Instant Thunder' operation during the 1991 Gulf War and the subsequent Scud missile attacks, as a historical parallel to potential Iranian responses.
Mentioned as a focal point for protests that spread globally, used as an example of how a single event can trigger wider unrest.
Mentioned in the context of January 6th, where rhetoric suggesting he had 'let them down' acted as a spark for the crowd to storm the Capitol.
Defined as political violence moving from the fringe to the mainstream, with millions of Americans supporting violence for their political goals. It is seen as a key factor in the current dangerous period.
Referenced as a historical 1991 air campaign against Iraq, used as a comparison for the potential 3-day bombing plan against Iran, highlighting its prolonged duration and limited success.
Discussed in the context of President Trump's political power and the potential impact of midterm election outcomes on its future, including mass deportations.
The capital of Ukraine, mentioned as a target for Russian attacks on electric power stations during a potential winter escalation.
A major city in Ukraine, mentioned as a target for Russian attacks on electric power stations during a potential winter escalation.
Identified as a core country that could act as a mediator in international conflicts, along with Pakistan and India.
Experienced power and water outages attributed by US intelligence to a likely Iranian cyber attack, a story that was reportedly not widely followed up.
Increasingly playing a quiet role as a mediator in conflicts, particularly between Russia and Ukraine, and identified as a core country for mediation.
Mentioned in the context of a co-pilot's attempted hijacking of a plane, potentially as a suicide attack targeting the city.
Mentioned as a critical waterway for global oil transport, which Iran gained heavy control over, impacting gas prices and contributing to the escalation trap.
Mentioned in relation to riots caused by rising prices due to the Iran war, illustrating how economic instability can lead to widespread civil unrest.
The UK government's 'Be Ready' campaign, advising citizens to stockpile essential supplies for national emergencies, is highlighted as evidence of governments preparing for potential state-sponsored attacks and infrastructure collapse.
Identified as a core country that could act as a mediator in international conflicts, along with Qatar and India.
One of the two houses of the US Congress, whose control by either party is discussed in relation to checks and balances on presidential power.
The other house of the US Congress, discussed alongside the House of Representatives regarding control and its impact on presidential power and impeachment.
Mentioned as part of the US system of checks and balances, alongside Congress and the President.
The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, identified as a target in the proposed 3-day air campaign against Iran.
An ally of Iran in Yemen, whose direct missile strikes on Riyadh International Airport are cited as an example of escalating conflict and direct targeting of civilians.
Cited for reporting on the Minnesota power and water outages, quoting US intelligence that suggested Iranian cyber attack involvement.
Mentioned in the context of media working with the Pentagon during the Gulf War and the 2003 Iraq War, including an instance where a reporter set ground rules before a broadcast.
President Trump's potential use of this act is discussed, which would grant emergency powers to deploy US military within the country against citizens, a rarely used measure that bypasses Posse Comitatus.
A policy that generally prohibits the use of the US military domestically, contrasted with the potential invocation of the Insurrection Act.
The book by Robert Pape, which models the effects of bombing campaigns, is referenced as a basis for understanding potential US strikes against Iran.
Robert Pape's book, described as a definitive, evidence-based work on America in the age of violent populism, containing statistics, graphs, and historical analysis.
More from The Diary Of A CEO
View all 529 summaries
97 minJames Talarico: Here Is How They Designed The System To Keep You Poor!
102 minWW3 Threat Expert: The Warning We Are Ignoring, The Only Way Out Is THIS! | Dr Sarah Paine
92 minMark Cuban: The Brutal Truth About The Next Market Crash!
110 minPresident Zelenskyy: It's Time To Tell You The Truth About This War! I Found 500 Bodies!
Ask anything from this episode.
Save it, chat with it, and connect it to Claude or ChatGPT. Get cited answers from the actual content — and build your own knowledge base of every podcast and video you care about.
Get Started Free