Annie Jacobsen

I have a sort of pessimistic thought here, which is an alternative to what is happening in Iran right now, which is what would happen, what could happen, and what might happen in the United States.

And to your point where you said this administration doesn't know how to govern, separate from that, whether that's true or not, I would say this administration thinks very futuristically about –

surveillance systems and systems of control.

And you can see that with ICE and with Homeland Security.

And my concern would be that red teaming or round tabling all the different possible blowback.

Well, what if we have Hezbollah sleeper cells, you know, set off a dirty bomb in the

a perfect opportunity to create more of a surveillance state in the United States, to use biometric surveillance platforms, ISR, against United States citizens because it's the only way to control people and to really know where the bad guys are.

And that is a concern of mine.

So you're saying that... Well, in other words...

I always just look at things because I consider weapon systems a lot and understand where we have come from.

Nuclear weapons are the weapons of the past.

Surveillance systems are the weapons of the present and drones.

What's the weapon systems of the future?

I mean, there's a serious motivation.

You can just look at what happened with Anthropic and OpenAI and the Defense Department the day before all of this went down.

And I'm not saying that per se.

I'm saying one hypothetical scenario that I can see is red teaming a bad outcome is not necessarily a bad outcome.

Like if there were a problem in the United States as a result of this, we could counter that with –

legitimate reasons for more surveillance systems.

I know they do.