Transcription
One would matter, would imagine, that if Donald Trump could restart the war, he would only do so if he believed he could win. And if he believes he could win, then why isn't he waging the war right now? What was the purpose of the past few weeks?
The bottom line is, the United States stopped striking Iran because we were losing, because we couldn't win, because we don't have a strategy to go forward. That if we would continue to go forward, the escalation ladder would lead to permanent harm to energy production facilities in the region, would continue to create devastation for American military forces and installations in the region, that Donald Trump was losing. He had no other option. He had no other choice. So he stopped the attacks. [clears throat] And Iran responded by stopping its missile attacks. Um, you know, that's that's where we're at. The United States has lost this war. It's just up to Donald Trump to recognize the defeat and figure out how to, you know, find an off-ramp from where he currently is. But uh, if he could [laughter] bomb Iran into submission, he would be bombing Iran into submission. And so the fact that uh, he is saying things but isn't acting on is just proof positive that he's, he's in a very difficult political situation. He has to maintain the facade of being in control when the situation is totally out of control.
>> What do you make of the report of, I mean, 9,000 uh projectiles? That's what US officials are saying Iran has fired thus far. The United States claims, of course, especially during the beginning of the war, to have hit, you know, tens of thousands of targets. But what did you, what have you, what did you make of the last 13 days and the difference between the the damage and the the the the strikes, the precision, and all of this when it comes to why the United States is no longer firing?
>> First of all, we need to understand that the last 13 days, you know, produced nothing except further defeat for the United States. Iran hasn't been hurt by any of the actions taken by the United States. We're blowing up, you know, empty buildings. We're blowing up infrastructure that can be rapidly reconstituted. The United States intelligence community has, you know, recognized how quickly Iran can get bridges rebuilt, infrastructure rebuilt. Every building we're striking, I was struck by the fact that the United States was bombing the Parchin missile factory. I'm like, why? Um, wasn't it destroyed the first time, the first 39 days? And if it wasn't destroyed, why not? But more importantly, do you honestly think that the Iranians kept anything of value in this facility? Don't we understand that every high-value piece of equipment has long since been evacuated and put into underground facilities? We're just blowing up, you know, reinforced concrete. And the Iranians will come in and they will sweep away the debris and recast it and and once the war is over, bring the high-value equipment back out, reinstall it and get back to business instantaneously. We're doing no harm to Iran. I mean, we're killing thousands of people, tens of thousands of people. Um, you know, and that is, of course, harmful. It's it's criminal, but you know, our strategic objective was to collapse the Iranian regime. It's stronger today than it has ever been. Our strategic objectives was to, you know, terminate Iran's ballistic missile capacity. It's all gone underground. They're not only firing missiles that, you know, we claim to have destroyed, but they're building new missiles. So, they're getting stronger even as they're firing missiles. Um, something that, you know, we should you know, reflect on is the reality of our ammunition depletion at home. We're running out of long-range strike weapons. We've run out of the interceptors needed to protect. You talked about an article where you know, they have to let projectiles through. You know, you know, you're in trouble when you have to preserve the Patriot missile interceptors to protect the Patriot missile launchers and everything else gets destroyed. So, you know,
>> [laughter]
>> why are we there? Um, someday the history of this conflict will be written, and it nothing about it is going to reflect well on the United States, whether the military or the political leadership. Iran is 100% in control. You mentioned Saudi Arabia. Um, I mean, this is the reality that uh, had Trump escalated the way he claimed he was going to escalate, it wouldn't just be Saudi Arabia that'd be shutting down. It would be Kuwait. It would be Bahrain. It would be UAE. Um, uh, you know, and if the conflict continued, it could be Azerbaijan shutting down. Iran has the capacity to shut down the totality of energy production um in the Middle East region. Um, and that would be the outcome if the United States sought to escalate, because there is no defense against Iran's ballistic missile and drone force. There just simply is no defense. You can shoot one or two down, but you know, when when you know, when we did our strategic bombing campaign over Germany, in the end, you know, we'd launch show waves of bombers and, you know, the Germans would shoot down a few, send fighters up, shoot down a few, but at the end of the day, we were bombing at will. Yes, we took casualties, but the goals and objectives of the strategic bombing campaign were being met. The Iranians are firing missiles. Some are shot down. Not many. And the ones that aren't shot down hit the targets that they're aimed at. The objectives of the Iranian strategic air campaign are being fulfilled. The objectives of the American strategic campaign are not being fulfilled. We're having zero impact on Iran's ability to sustain this conflict.
>> Yeah, and here are the satellite imagery of what Yemen has done to uh the strategic Yanbu port area. Oil infrastructure uh has been hit, the bulk plants in the industrial city. And uh it's as you said, Scott, uh Iran could do far more damage uh than this, and the Gulf countries have been perhaps at the front.
>> And just make a point since you put those photographs up. It's I know maybe later we'll talk about Ukraine and Russia. But um I I just want people to look at these photographs. Um and also there's video of the big explosion when uh the the the Ansarullah missiles hit. Compare and contrast with the imagery you see out of Russia when an when a Russian oil refinery is hit.
>> [laughter]
>> Okay, understand when I say that the Ukrainians make things go pop, and the Russians make things go boom. Um, this is what boom looks like. Okay, look at those photographs. That's what boom looks like. Um, Russia has nothing like this happening to it. Nothing like this happening to it at all. Um, there's nothing going boom in Russia. Uh, it goes pop. It burns for a little while. The valves are turned, shutting off supply, the fire's put out, the items are repaired, a week and a half later it's back in duty. This will never be brought back into operation. This is destroyed permanently. It will take a, you know, years to uh, to to rebuild this. So, um, I just want to bring up the point, you know, when this is what happens when things go boom in um, in in oil refining uh, in in oil processing and energy processing plants. And uh, it's a far cry from uh, what the media's been hyping up about what's happening to Russia. I just thought it would be, since you brought out that photograph, it was a good point to do that point.
>> Uh, it's a really good point. Really, cuz we, if the satellite imagery existed for on rush on targets of these Ukrainian drone strikes, they would be out.
>> [laughter]
>> No doubt about it. I want Scott, now that you mentioned Ukraine, it's so interesting that it seems like Ukraine has gotten itself now entangled in the war in Iraq. Here's Ukrainian Telegram channels, the monitoring channels, uh incredibly panicked after Ukraine struck Iranian vessels in the Caspian Sea. I wanted your comments on this development. You know, some people are saying that, you know, Iran could technically strike Ukraine from Tabriz in its northwestern border and get into Kiev, but I'm curious on what you thought about this situation. Why would Ukraine get involved? Why would it strike Iran at this point in the Caspian? Your your thoughts on this.
>> Well, Zelensky ordered a 40-day war using long-range and intermediate-range Ukraine strike capacity against Russia. It's a 40-day drone. He ordered it to begin on June 25th. And uh, the purpose of this was to break the will of the Russian people, uh, to bring the war home to Russia, and to bring real harm to Russian capacity. But the most important part was to break the will of the Russian people, to make it clear that there was nowhere in Russia uh that was safe for Russia. And so, you know, Ukraine had long argued that it had shut down the Black Sea to Russia. We could talk more about that later, as Russia basically shut down the Black Sea to Ukraine now. Uh, and they were attempting to make the same point in the Caspian Sea, where Russia had built up a supply line to Iran through the Caspian Sea. And um, basically they the the goal was to send a message to Russia. Yeah, I don't know if the Ukrainians deliberately targeted an Iranian ship. Part of me says they didn't. Part of me says they thought it was a Russian ship and and were surprised when they heard, but then sought to spin it. You know, one of the things Ukraine is very good is spinning data in a way that's supportive of, you know, thematics and narratives. And right now, you had Zelensky going to Washington D.C. to meet with Donald Trump to try and get Donald Trump to agree to, you know, provide additional support, political, military, fiscal to Ukraine. And right now, Donald Trump is in a bind. We just spoke about it with Iran. Getting his butt kicked. And so I think when the Ukrainians found out that they hit an Iranian ship, rather than doing the right thing, which would be to apologize to Iran, say this was a mistake, an accident, we're sorry, won't happen again, we'll we'll we'll talk with you about how to avoid this the repeating this. They they just took the cheap way out. Hey, yeah, hell yeah, we hit them. Hey, Donnie baby, see, we're in it with you. We're we're hitting the Iranians cuz we're on the same side. We're we're the same thing, brother. And um, now they're going to pay the price. Perhaps. Again, I don't know what the strategic thinking is in Iran. You know, Iran G and the IRGC has made some very stringent statements, but you know, the fact is to strike strike Ukraine, the missiles are going to have to fly over NATO airspace. The, you know, Turkish fly fly over Turkey. Um, and um, yeah, I don't know if that's really the kind of escalation that that Ukraine wants at this time. But I mean, they have every right under self-defense to retaliate. But you know, whether or not they will, I don't know. Um, you know, this this hype you see on Ukrainian social media may just be a scare tactic to again try and create the impression that Ukraine, United States is the same, both sides being threatened by Iranian missiles. They're all, we're all on the same team, Donnie, give us all the help we can we we need. Give us the ability to shoot down those Iranian missiles. Things I, who knows what's going on with the with with Ukraine, it's not a rational state. It it it's not functioning a rational fashion. Everything they do is irrational. So who knows what their thinking is. And Iran is on the opposite. They are a rational state. And so you you have to say, you know, yes, it was an affront to have a a ship struck. Yes, it was an affront to lose a sailor. But you know, the consequences of firing a missile salvo into Ukraine could be dire. Um, so therefore, why do it?
>> [clears throat]
>> And I was just pulling up a um Foreign Minister, I almost said, she did say this, these are his words, right after the incident happened this weekend. He said, uh, Zelenskyy attacked an Iranian commercial vessel killing a sailor, blatant violation of the UN Charter done at Israel's behest to drag Europe into its war. In a call with uh, High Representative Kallas, Kaja Kallas, and Foreign Minister of Russia Lavrov, made it clear that the free loader in what the free loader in Kiev did cannot go unanswered. So obviously no love lost, Scott, for Zelenskyy. I don't know, those are very strong words. But but yeah, I mean, part of it, uh, there was a target list released of, uh, or target bank released, and and part of it seems like what Iran's thinking is, is that maybe if war continues directly on Iran, I mean, Europe could very much be made part of this war, and Europe does have assets, does have trade, does have energy needs coming out of West Asia. Um, especially after the UK, not technically part of Europe, I guess, but uh, also with its activity that letting the United States use its facilities to launch operations against Iran. So, your thoughts on this? Could Europe be very well a target in the next round of war?
>> Why? I don't, I mean, I'm still trying to figure out why would Iran want to involve Europe? What is the purpose? Um, you know, the the goal should be kicking the United States out of the out of West Asia. Um, in order to do that, you're you're better off having the totality of your military capacity able to be dedicated to that task. Um, you know, why would Iran strike Europe? I mean, because Israel let the United States use some bases? Then why isn't Iran striking Israel? Because the last time I checked, the Israeli bases were just full of American military aircraft or civilian aircraft. They're being used. So, we know that that's not a red line for Iran. Um, you know, Europe has zero military capacity deployed to the region right now that that's impacting this this conflict. Um, why provoke them so that they do deploy potentially meaningful military capacity? Um, for what purpose? You know, to defeat Europe? Europe's already defeated. They're defeating themselves. It's the same argument with the Russians. Don't touch Europe. When the enemy's doing what you want them to do, let them do it. And right now, Europe is just dying, devolving, collapsing. It's It's become a a self-parody. You know, look at Macron. Marine Le Pen is going to oust him in the elections next April. She's going to be wearing a monitoring bracelet on her ankle. That's the state of the French politics. You know, Kier Starmer's out and this um, this new Andy Burnham's in. How long is he going to last? Not long, because changing the nameplate doesn't, you know, change the the reality. It's it's addressing the symptom. The symptom was that people hated Kier Starmer. So they got rid of Kier Starmer. Now they put Andy in. They didn't change, they didn't cure the disease. The disease is the United Kingdom, which is basically cancerous and dying. And putting Burnham's name on the top doesn't cure the disease. They'll continue to treat the symptom saying, well, he hasn't cured it. Let's get somebody else in. But they're not addressing the fundamental underlying issue, which is the dysfunction of the United Kingdom as a as a collective. Why would you want to do something that could potentially rally the United Kingdom? Have the people forget about their political differences and come together and say, we must now be focused on Iran who has attacked us. Germany, Merkel's a joke. AFD Alternative für Deutschland is the most popular political party in Germany right now. And as things continue to devolve for the other parties, they'll become even stronger. They're not looking for a war with Iran. So why would Iran bring a war to them? Maybe the best thing for Iran to do is to do absolutely nothing. Because Europe is killing itself. It's the same strategy for Russia. Don't do anything. Just let Europe be Europe, which is Europe's own worst enemy. So I don't see this war expanding into Europe. I don't see the Iranians doing anything that would um, you know, disrupt Europe's, you know, path to self-destruction.