Nate Swanson
speaker
685 appearances
5 recordings
1 series
first heard Apr 2026
last heard 10 Sep
Nate Swanson’s voice in public audio — every appearance, attributed to the second.
Trend
recordings per month · last 12 monthsRecordings per month over the last 12 months — 5 in all, peaking in Apr 2026 with 3.
Appearances
So I think Iran's preference would probably be to not deal with the nuclear program, but I think they're open to dealing with it if they can get more in return.
And so I think this is where you see the haggling over the frozen assets, potential sanctions relief, things of that sort.
So I do think there is a landing zone ultimately for this.
But for me, the president should be judged not on necessarily what he gets, but, you know, hopefully on not overpaying.
You know, if we end up with a situation where Iran has basically a toll booth running through the Strait of Hormuz, that's a huge strategic loss for the U.S.
and for the world.
So I think, you know, we really don't want that to happen.
And so that, you know, I think he should be careful about what he's trading away to make sure it looks different.
But time is running out for really for both sides.
Like neither side can do this indefinitely.
And so I think Iran's calculus is that he'll blink first, but you never know.
I think both are possibilities.
The problem with sending troops in is it really doesn't change the middle.
I mean, it's problematic on multiple levels.
But the biggest problem is it doesn't really change Iran's calculus.
Iran will just respond in kind by, you know, hitting Gulf energy, you know, hitting more tankers in the Strait or in the Persian Gulf.
So, like, that doesn't really change anything.
There's no military objective.
The only thing that really changes Iran's calculus is massive ground troops, you know, like Iraq 2003.
But that's incredibly unwise, and I don't think the president will do that.
Showing 381–400 of 685 · page 20 of 35
← Previous
Next →