Obama's Colossal Mistake That Could Get Us Into a Proxy War With Russia

Barack Obama wants to go to war with Syria? Those words are evidently floating around the capitol.

"That is a very thinly veiled proxy war with Russia. A colossally bad idea," Glenn said Thursday, kicking off his radio program.

RELATED: Russia Tells Citizens ‘Nuclear War With the West Could Happen Soon’

Not only is it a bad idea, it's also unconstitutional; only Congress can declare war. But don't worry. Obama reveres the U.S. Constitution and always follows it to the letter.

Read below or listen to the full segment for answers to these colossally important questions:

• What other U.S. war was a proxy war with Russia?

• Does Vladimir Putin perceive the U.S. to be weak?

• Is Vladimir Putin on a mission to restore the Russian empire?

• Why did the U.S. suspend diplomatic relations with Russia in Syria?

• What excuse would Obama give to enter into war with Syria?

Listen to this segment from The Glenn Beck Program:

Below is a rush transcript of this segment, it might contain errors:

GLENN: Hello, America. And welcome to the program. We were just talking about a new -- I got a call from a couple of people in Washington yesterday because there are new voices floating around the capitol that Barack Obama wants to go to war with Syria. So you know, that is a very thinly veiled proxy war with Russia. A very -- a colossally bad idea.

Mike Lee is going to be on, either today or tomorrow to talk a little bit about that. He posted something on Facebook yesterday, actually made me call him. And I said, "What -- why is that?" He posted on Facebook about the separations of power for the president and Congress and said, "Only Congress has the ability to declare war, and Barack Obama needs to come to Congress to declare war if he wants to start another one."

I'm telling you, what we said yesterday, we are on the precipice. Nobody wants to hear it. But for those in this 10 million strong audience that are willing to open your mind and listen to something other than partisan politics, it's important that someone sees what's coming. And that someone is you. And we begin there, right now.

(music)

GLENN: We'll find ourselves -- I know.

We're talking about how nobody is going to declare war. Nobody is going to go through Congress. We haven't done that in a long time, but we need to have that conversation. Because I'm telling you, it's coming.

PAT: Yeah. World War II, I think, was the last time. Because Korea was a police action.

GLENN: Yep. Yep.

PAT: And they got approval from the UN. But they didn't get approval from Congress.

GLENN: Right. And we all know how that worked out. And that was a proxy war between us -- Vietnam was a proxy war between us and Russia. And that is what's going to happen in Syria.

PAT: And Korea was a proxy war between us and China.

GLENN: Yep. Enough proxy wars.

PAT: Yeah, we've had enough of those.

GLENN: And this is not going to stay a proxy war. It's not. Vladimir Putin perceives us as very, very weak. And we dismiss them as very weak.

What we don't take into account is the man believes he is on a mission from God to reestablish the -- the Russian empire, the holy Russian empire.

And he is making a pact with those in the Middle East. He has befriended Syria. He has befriended Iran. Saudi Arabia is moving towards the same kind of situation. Saudi Arabia is moving towards Russia and away from us. We're going to have the Middle East and Russia against us. I don't think that's a good scenario at all.

And Barack Obama is now talked about the -- the word in the capitol. And I've heard this from several sources. Is that we're moving towards a war footing with Syria in a proxy war. And Barack Obama is going to say, "We need to do it for humanitarian reasons."

JEFFY: I thought John Kerry just lost an argument that he couldn't use war or significant growth in his negotiations.

GLENN: No, no. I am hoping this is not true. I am hoping this is not true. But I heard those rumors. And I called Mike, and I said, "Why did you post this on Facebook? Why -- because he just sat in front of his computer and said, "Here's what we all need to understand: Congress -- Congress is the one that can declare war." And that was concerning to me. After hearing the rumors and seeing what's happened in Russia -- where as I told you at the beginning of the weak, today is the final day of the four-day 40 million people strong civil defense test in -- in Russia, where they dispatched people all over the country, affecting 40 million people. And they went in for chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons and shut cities and businesses and schools and universities down and set it up as if it was a treatment center. Plus, they had all their fire departments, you know, scrambling. And how do we put out a nuclear fire?

It is a very big deal. Then, as we told you on yesterday's program, Friday, we told you that we had broken off diplomatic relations about Syria with Russia. Then we find out that they are in a civil defense maneuver for four days, affecting 40 million. I've already told you that Putin said that we are going to -- we're already in World War III and he can't get anybody to listen to them. And then on top of it, as we said yesterday, the Soviet or the Russian state television said -- and was quoted yesterday saying that a nuclear war with the United States -- didn't they say seems inevitable?

Look it up. It was -- if it wasn't -- I think inevitable is too strong.

JEFFY: Yes.

GLENN: Seems very likely. Something like that. That we are on the road to a nuclear war.

I don't know if we're on the warpath with nuclear war. I have no idea. But we are entering a game-changing time. Game-changing time.

As game-changing as it was in 1914 and '15 and 1941 -- or, '38.

JEFFY: Imminent.

GLENN: Imminent. Imminent nuclear war with the United States

PAT: It's hard to believe that Obama would send troops to Syria.

JEFFY: It sure is.

PAT: You know, based on everything he ran on. Based on everything he said over eight years. Of course, it doesn't matter what anybody says anymore. Nobody listens. So he could get away with it, I suppose. But it's --

JEFFY: -- more than his belief in sending troops in?

PAT: Yeah. Come on.

GLENN: Okay. So, but let's think this through on history. And history always gets me into trouble. Because history doesn't repeat itself, but it does rhyme. Okay. So just because someone is repeating the patterns that Adolf Hitler did -- I just had this argument with somebody yesterday: You can't say that so-and-so is Adolf Hitler. I've never said -- let's be frank about it. It was Donald Trump. I never said that he was Hitler. Never said that he was Hitler. Stop it. Only Adolf Hitler is Hitler.

Was he a guy with the initials, A.H. that nobody -- if he was Steve Johnson and he did the same things up until 1933, no one would have a problem with me saying, "Look at, he did exactly what Steve Johnson did in 1920 to 1933." That doesn't mean that he's going to gas 10 million people.

PAT: No. But Steve --

GLENN: That was Adolf Hitler.

PAT: -- was dangerous. Let's be honest.

GLENN: So you can't -- what you have to -- and this is hard for people to do: You have to look at what time period you're talked about.

PAT: Uh-huh.

GLENN: There is a huge difference. And past performance is not necessarily indicative of future results.

STU: Right. If you have ten paths to walk down, they all look very similar early on. Only one of them might end in the worst human tragedy of all the time.

GLENN: Right.

STU: But you don't take the chance to walk down the path even a step.

GLENN: Or you walk down the path with your eyes wide open and say, "Wait. No. You're leaning that way. We have to go this way."

STU: That's correct. We have to make sure we learn the lessons.

GLENN: You learn the lessons from the past so you don't repeat them. And when you see the patterns, you say, "Pattern. Let's make sure we stay off this road."

PAT: That's what learning from history is supposed to be. Right?

GLENN: That's what never forget means, you remember the patterns that got you there. Because no one is born evil.

Featured Image: Russian President Vladimir Putin (L) meets with his US counterpart Barack Obama on the sidelines of the G20 Leaders Summit in Hangzhou on September 5, 2016. (Photo Credit: ALEXEI DRUZHININ/AFP/Getty Images)

5 SURPRISING ways space tech is used in your daily life

NASA / Handout | Getty Images

Is your vacuum cleaner from SPACE?

This week, Glenn is discussing his recent purchase of a Sputnik satellite, which has got many of us thinking about space and space technology. More specifically, we've been wondering how technology initially designed for use outside Earth's atmosphere impacted our lives down here on terra firma. The U.S. spent approximately $30 billion ($110 billion in today's money) between the Soviet launch of Sputnik in 1957 and the Moon Landing in 1969. What do we have to show for it besides some moon rocks?

As it turns out, a LOT of tech originally developed for space missions has made its way into products that most people use every day. From memory foam to cordless vacuums here are 5 pieces of space tech that you use every day:

Cellphone camera

LOIC VENANCE / Contributor | Getty Images

Have you ever seen a photograph of an early camera, the big ones with the tripod and curtain, and wondered how we went from that to the tiny little cameras that fit inside your cellphone? Thank NASA for that brilliant innovation. When you are launching a spaceship or satellite out of the atmosphere, the space onboard comes at a premium. In order to make more room for other equipment, NASA wanted smaller, lighter cameras without compromising image quality, and the innovations made to accomplish this goal paved the way for the cameras in your phone.

Cordless vacuums and power tools

Education Images / Contributor | Getty Images

When exploring the moon, NASA wanted astronauts to use a drill to collect samples from the lunar surface. The problem: the moon has a severe lack of electrical outlets to power the drills. NASA tasked Black & Decker with developing a battery-powered motor powerful enough to take chunks out of the moon. The resulting motor was later adapted to power cordless power tools and vacuums in households across America.

Infrared ear thermometer

BSIP / Contributor | Getty Images

What do distant stars and planets have in common with your eardrum? Both have their temperature read by the same infrared technology. The thermometers that can be found in medicine cabinets and doctors' offices across the world can trace their origins back to the astronomers at NASA who came up with the idea to measure the temperature of distant objects by the infrared light they emit.

Grooved pavement

Bob Riha Jr / Contributor | Getty Images

This one may seem obvious, but sometimes you need a massively complicated problem to come up with simple solutions. During the Space Shuttle program, NASA had a big problem: hydroplaning. Hydroplaning is dangerous enough when you are going 70 miles an hour in your car, but when you're talking about a Space Shuttle landing at about 215 miles per hour, it's an entirely different animal. So what was NASA's space-age solution? Cutting grooves in the pavement to quickly divert water off the runway, a practice now common on many highways across the world.

Memory foam

BERTRAND LANGLOIS / Stringer | Getty Images

If you've ever slept on a memory foam mattress, it probably won't come as a shock to find out that the foam was created to cushion falls from orbit. Charles Yotes was an astronautical engineer who is credited with the invention of memory foam. Yotes developed the technology for the foam while working on the recovery system for the Apollo command module. The foam was originally designed to help cushion the astronauts and their equipment during their descent from space. Now, the space foam is used to create some of the most comfortable mattresses on Earth. Far out.

5 most HORRIFIC practices condoned by WPATH

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Whatever you know about the "trans movement" is only the tip of the iceberg.

In a recent Glenn TV special, Glenn delved into Michael Schellenberger's "WPATH files," a collection of leaked internal communications from within the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH). Glenn's research team got their hands on the WPATH files and compiled the highlights in Glenn's exclusive PDF guide which can be downloaded here. These documents reveal the appalling "standards" created and upheld by WPATH, which appear to be designed to allow radical progressive surgeons to perform bizarre, experimental, and mutilating surgeries on the dime of insurance companies rather than to protect the health and well-being of their patients. These disturbing procedures are justified in the name of "gender-affirming care" and are defended zealously as "life-saving" by the dogmatic surgeons who perform them.

The communications leaked by Schellenberger reveal one horrific procedure after another committed in the name of and defended by radical gender ideology and WPATH fanatics. Here are five of the most horrifying practices condoned by WPATH members:

1.Trans surgeries on minors as young as 14

One particular conversation was initiated by a doctor asking for advice on performing irreversible male-to-female surgery on a 14-year-old boy's genitals. WPATH doctors chimed in encouraging the surgery. One doctor, Dr. McGinn, confessed that he had performed 20 such surgeries on minors over the last 17 years!

2.Amputation of healthy, normal limbs

BIID, or Body Integrity Identity Disorder, is an “extremely rare phenomenon of persons who desire the amputation of one or more healthy limbs or who desire a paralysis.” As you might suspect, some WPATH members are in favor of enabling this destructive behavior. One WPATH commenter suggested that people suffering from BIID received "hostile" treatment from the medical community, many of whom would recommend psychiatric care over amputation. Apparently, telling people not to chop off perfectly healthy limbs is now considered "violence."

3.Trans surgeries on patients with severe mental illnesses

WPATH claims to operate off of a principle known as "informed consent," which requires doctors to inform patients of the risks associated with a procedure. It also requires patients be in a clear state of mind to comprehend those risks. However, this rule is taken very lightly among many WPATH members. When one of the so-called "gender experts" asked about the ethicality of giving hormones to a patient already diagnosed with several major mental illnesses, they were met with a tidal wave of backlash from their "enlightened" colleges.

4.Non-standard procedures, such as “nullification” and other experimental, abominable surgeries

If you have never heard of "nullification" until now, consider yourself lucky. Nullification is the removal of all genitals, intending to create a sort of genderless person, or a eunuch. But that's just the beginning. Some WPATH doctors admitted in these chatlogs that they weren't afraid to get... creative. They seemed willing to create "custom" genitals for these people that combine elements of the two natural options.

5.Experimental, untested, un-researched, use of carcinogenic drugs 

Finasteride is a drug used to treat BPH, a prostate condition, and is known to increase the risk of high-grade prostate cancer as well as breast cancer. Why is this relevant? When a WPATH doctor asked if anyone had used Finasteride "to prevent bottom growth," which refers to the healthy development of genitals during puberty. The answer from the community was, "That's a neat idea, someone should give it a go."

If your state isn’t on this list, it begs the question... why?

The 2020 election exposed a wide range of questionable practices, much of which Glenn covered in a recent TV special. A particularly sinister practice is the use of private money to fund the election. This money came from a slew of partisan private sources, including Mark Zuckerberg, entailed a host of caveats and conditions and were targeted at big city election offices— predominantly democratic areas. The intention is clear: this private money was being used to target Democrat voters and to facilitate their election process over their Republican counterparts.

The use of private funds poses a major flaw in the integrity of our election, one which many states recognized and corrected after the 2020 election. This begs the question: why haven't all states banned private funding in elections? Why do they need private funding? Why don't they care about the strings attached?

Below is the list of all 28 states that have banned private funding in elections. If you don't see your state on this list, it's time to call your state's election board and demand reform.

Alabama

Photo 12 / Contributor | Getty Images

Arizona

Encyclopaedia Britannica / Contributor | Getty Images

Arkansas

Photo 12 / Contributor | Getty Images

Florida

Encyclopaedia Britannica / Contributor | Getty Images

Georgia

Encyclopaedia Britannica / Contributor | Getty Images

Idaho

Photo 12 / Contributor | Getty Images

Indiana

Photo 12 / Contributor

Iowa

Photo 12 / Contributor | Getty Images

Kansas

Photo 12 / Contributor | Getty Images

Kentucky

Photo 12 / Contributor | Getty Images

Louisiana

Photo 12 / Contributor | Getty Images

Mississippi

Encyclopaedia Britannica / Contributor | Getty Images

Missouri

Photo 12 / Contributor | Getty Images

Montana

Encyclopaedia Britannica / Contributor | Getty Images

Nebraska

Encyclopaedia Britannica / Contributor | Getty Images

North Carolina

Photo 12 / Contributor | Getty Images

North Dakota

Encyclopaedia Britannica / Contributor | Getty Images

Ohio

Photo 12 / Contributor | Getty Images

Oklahoma

Photo 12 / Contributor | Getty Images

Pennsylvania

Photo 12 / Contributor | Getty Images

South Carolina

Photo 12 / Contributor | Getty Images

South Dakota

Encyclopaedia Britannica / Contributor | Getty Images

Tennessee

Photo 12 / Contributor | Getty Images

Texas

Encyclopaedia Britannica / Contributor | Getty Images

Utah

Encyclopaedia Britannica / Contributor | Getty Images

Virginia

Photo 12 / Contributor | Getty Images

West Virginia

Encyclopaedia Britannica / Contributor | Getty Images

Wisconsin

Encyclopaedia Britannica / Contributor | Getty Images

POLL: Was Malaysia Flight 370 taken by a WORMHOLE?

NurPhoto / Contributor | Getty Images

It's hard to know what's real and what's fake anymore.

With the insanity that seems to grow every day, it is becoming more and more difficult to tell what's true and what's not, what to believe, and what to reject. Anything seems possible.

That's why Glenn had Ashton Forbes on his show, to explore the fringe what most people would consider impossible. Forbes brought Glenn a fascinating but far-out theory that explains the decade-old disappearance of Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 along with riveting footage that supposedly corroborates his story. Like something out of a sci-fi novel, Forbes made the startling claim that Flight 370 was TELEPORTED via a U.S. military-made wormhole! As crazy as that sounds, the video footage along with Forbes' scientific research made an interesting, if not compelling case.

But what do you think? Do you believe that the U.S. Government can create wormholes? Did they use one to abduct Flight 370? Is the government hiding futuristic tech from the rest of the world? Let us know in the poll below:

Does the military have the capability to create wormholes?

Is the U.S. military somehow responsible for what happened to Malaysia Flight 370?

Is the military in possession of technology beyond what we believe to be possible?

Do you think American military tech is ahead of the other superpowers?

Do you think there would be negative consequences if secret government technology was leaked?