Transcription
You know, you know, Doug, let me ask you right off the top there. We're allegedly, according to this memorandum of understanding, in a 60-day negotiating period where we're trying to figure all this out, 60 days. And now here we're at the still in the front end of this. And he's already acting like nothing's happening. He's threatening to go back to war. Is that going to get the Iranian side to do what he wants?
>> No. But I think we ought to consider the following. First of all, if we look at those 14 points, Dan, is there really any chance whatsoever that we would ever willingly sign up for all 14 and support them? I I don't think so. I think that was always uh mission impossible for Donald Trump because it is the tacit mission that we were defeated militarily and having been defeated militarily could not achieve Israel's goals, which is really why we fought the war to begin with. And remember those goals have changed. Initially the idea was we'll topple the government. As a result, large numbers of Iranians who utterly hate and despise their government will all come out of the woodwork, help overthrow the government, and we'll be able to install a puppet. And the principal Israeli puppet was supposed to be the crown prince of Iran or the I guess I should say uncrowned prince. That failed. So having failed to do that, the only thing that was left for the Israelis that's acceptable is the utter and complete destruction of Iran. And that's what's on the agenda. I don't see any evidence based upon what you just heard from President Trump that the disintegration of the state uh the the utter obliteration of Iran is not still the preferred outcome. Everything else is just nonsense. And when he starts talking about what he's going to bomb, those are really not militarily significant targets, are they? We're talking about killing civilians, destroying lots of infrastructure, and expecting that we will leave Iran in complete ruins, rendering it totally incapable of governing itself, holding itself together, and presenting ultimately, most important, obviously, any kind of threat to Israel. So to answer your question, this is not over. We are at a pause and I think we should talk about what the justification for the pause is as well.
>> I do want to get to that. Um and I I wonder if uh you mentioned something about the the initial uh objective was to get all these people to come out of the woodworks and there was no question there was a significant number of people inside Iran that didn't like their government. They definitely were hatred uh hated it. I've talked to a number of them myself, but as a result of this bombing, and I think you and I talked about this before the thing, the likely outcome was going to be a rally round the flag kind of thing. Well, based on the the uh funeral here in the last number of days because it's been a a long elaborate deal, there's a lot of people that came out of the woodwork for the government. I don't know that I've ever seen a country more unified and certainly in gross numbers of people that came out and flooded the country of this apparently in the multi-millions especially across different country uh different cities. What do you make of the what you're seeing on the screen now and uh that the increased hatred for Trump himself but the galvanizing of a large number of people for the regime.
>> Uh Dan, I think we have to regard what we're seeing on the screen as a kind of national catharsis. I mean, they're in a position where they know they're not by any stretch of the imagination a superpower. They're up against a superpower, plus it's uh partner Israel. Israel is ultimately in control. So, I guess we have to say the Israeli American uh superpower. They didn't expect to be as successful as they were, though they've obviously been preparing for this for a long time. They did everything they could to strengthen their defenses. They have a real strategy which has helped to concentrate their military power where it counts most. But the bottom line is this is a catharsis. This I I think this is beyond just religious fervor. This is a national event where people are mourning not just the death of this man who in many ways ends up being a metaphor for so many people killed in the war to this point. A an old man with his family sitting in a in a in a town in a bunker of some kind in a room who fully expected to be murdered by the Israelis or us. Turns out he was right. But he is in fact a metaphor for the suffering of the entire country. Everybody who I'm not saying everybody who is who is there is not religiously motivated. What I'm trying to get across is that we we have turned this into a national catharsis, a meaningful event that will shape people for many many years. It's the kind of thing, and I'm sure you've experienced this, if you go to Vulgarrad, used to be called Vongrad, and there's a memorial there, and you can't help but once you're in there and you listen to the music that's being played and you recognize the losses and what the the true pain that was involved, that becomes a memorial for the kind of thing that you're seeing right now in Tyrron. It's the same kind of thing. Anybody who goes there feels this. I think this is going to be the case in Iran for a very very long time. Now is does that mean that uh anything that Trump says is meaningful? No, I think it is meaningful. I think that he's reinforcing what the Iranians collectively, whether it's their government or the population think. The interesting part though for for us before this war started, one of the things that I said was if we just did nothing to Iran in six to 12 months, we would see a a major change in the government there because that's where things were headed. Society itself wants change. The people that want that change are not all dead. A lot of them we killed when we bombed certain sections of Thrron where we had clearly people that we would describe as middle and upper middle class, well educated, they were among the most articulate opponents of the regime, not of their country but of the government and the advocates for change. But they're still there. Whenever this ends, it may a little longer now, maybe a year, two years, but we are going to see a new government come to power then. There's no question in my mind about that. But for the moment, while this war lasts, and they believe rightly that it is still on, uh you're going to see unmatched unity in the history of Persia.
>> And apparently the there's a lot of those uh who want it to continue on on the western side. You know, we we often talk and I'm sure when Gary plays us here in a minute with Jack Keane, you're going to hit the that little silly warning sign that we have and for good reason. But the reason why we keep showing him is because when Jack Keane very often says something both in the Iranian war and also in the Russian Ukraine war, things that he says, he talks about getting on the phone with Trump and then subsequently oftenimes those things actually turn into American policy. So we just saw President Trump a second ago saying what he did yesterday about we go back and finish the job. Here's what Jack Keane said on the same topic.
>> Keith Kellogg was very blunt about it. He says it's time for a second wave of bombing. Go ahead and hit Car Island to wreck their economic and oil structure. What do you think about that?
>> They're diabolical, tyrannical radicals who are going to go right back to all the objectives that they've always had. Develop a nuclear weapon, accelerate ballistic missile development so that they can overwhelm the US bases, the Gulf States, and Israel. That's the path they were on when we went to war and they're going to continue to support for proxies. The evidence is what is happening with Hezbollah and Lebanon. They're they've got their full support. I think that is the path that we're on. You know, the president, he's going to put up with this. He already has a healthy dose of skepticism whether we're going to make a deal or not. It's likely we're going to return to combat operation. And and you know, Doug, let me let me just ask your opinion because Jack Keane is nothing if not consistent uh with the mischaracterization that Iran is the evil empire. They're all wicked. There's no good in them. All they want is this lust to destroy America and destroy Israel, which is laughable at face value, but that's what he keeps saying and people listen to that there. But if Trump does what he suggests, I mean, he's still is a four-star general. I got it. He gets paid. ies for the Institute for the Study War and all the money that comes in, all the Israeli money, whatever. But if he gets his way and Trump does strike those kinds of targets that he was talking about, energy and uh oil infrastructure, etc., we know what that's going to result in in the rest of the region, which is going to be catastrophic for our own economic interests. How can you make his argument there make any sense when he knows he's got to know that it will harm us a lot worse than doing nothing?
>> Well, President Trump, if he were a truly independent agent and acting as president of the United States, would not have ever embarked on this course of action. You know, we've said this for a long time. President Trump is under duress. Now, what that is, I don't know. I mean, there are people out there that talk about, you know, his routine mention in the Epstein files or something. I don't know. The only comment I would make is that the Mossad has had access to all the information in the Epstein files for a long time. So they could have easily utilized that material against him in 2016. They did not. And they didn't really need to pull it out and exploit it when he ran for reelection uh in uh 2020. So, I'm not sure what it is, but he's clearly under duress because what he is saying is laughable. It's it's utterly ridiculous. But you have to understand that people like General Keane and others are part of this cabal in Washington that is very well rewarded financially for their support of Israel and whatever the Israeli leadership in the United States and in Israel wants. So, you've got an Israel first government. The only people that are paying attention to this and believe in any of this are people in my age group because they live permanently in the past and they spend all of their free time watching Fox News whenever they can. Then they go back to playing golf or shuffleboard or pickle ball or something else and then it's back to Fox before they go to bed at night. They these are not people actively on the internet searching for the truth. They're not looking for alternative outlets. Uh, and they're not interested in listening to people like you and me. They're very comfortable with the narrative. But the rest of the population, no, absolutely not. But it doesn't matter. And that's what most Americans need to understand. The fact that what 70% or more of the American electorate or people that were polling are utterly opposed to the war doesn't matter. That's what people need to understand. It doesn't matter what they think. They're not in control of their government. Their government is an Israel first government. The people in Washington are comfortable with that. It's made them rich and they want to stay there and they're not going to roll back the influence and power of the pharmaceutical companies or any of the major lobbies that are out there. They're all very comfortable. And Americans are finally going to have to figure out that none of this works anymore. the government doesn't work, elections are irrelevant, they're going to have to do something about it. But they won't until they are suffering. And whatever bad things have happened to them to this point, they shrink to insignificance next to what can happen in the future. And I agree with you. The notion of going back to war is completely andly insane. But they will. Uh, I'm confident. Now, when will you have someone like Larry Johnson and I respect Larry a great deal as you know and his sources and he says nothing will happen till after midterms. Maybe uh I don't know that they can hold out that long. But I do know one thing is if you look at the state of our munitions, our missiles, our weapon systems right now, the United States Navy has more tubes, more launchers if you will, than they have missiles to put in them. Wow.
>> And that's been true for some time and that's not going to change quickly. So, what are we doing? I think we're building furiously. I think we're, you know, Trump is trying to do everything he can to extract more from the military-industrial complex that he can use against Iran. And I think one of the things that he's worried about at this stage is that any plan that people may have had to attack China, I think, is probably in the trash. uh because they realized, good lord, we can't even defeat Iran on we can't roll them back from where they were. How could we possibly take on China? And I think that's a very legitimate observation. I think they're right. We can't. But on the other hand, he is saying, "Can we afford to lose this war?" Well, my argument is that for most Americans, the answer is yes. They don't care. And we haven't had massive American casualties. We've had casualties and they're regrettable, but not large numbers of them. So the real question at this point is if you're president and you're Israel first, do you put everything at risk to make the Israel first lobby, the people that put you into office, that own the hill to make them happy, or do you stand back and say, "Look, can't do this. Uh, I don't have enough weapon systems ready to go. I don't have a large enough arsenal. It's going to take time to rebuild that. And if I go back at this at some point in the future, the opponent will probably be stronger than it was in the past anyway. And we might not win. And if we can't win, then why should we fight? You know, the first lesson of military history over the last 5,000 years is if you don't have to fight, don't fight. But if you do have to fight, pick the time and the place of your own choosing. Make sure the conditions are favorable to you. That doesn't mean go six 7,000 miles around the world on a very shoestring logistical structure and depend exclusively on air and naval power to do the job. But that's what we've done.
>> It is and and that that has put us in a terrible terrible situation. And so, President Trump and and his desire to plate the the Jack Keane wing of the Republican party and and this this whole una party really it's not even the Republican party uh that are all for going back into conflict to make Israel happy or whatever their actual motive is. There's probably multiple. There's a couple of big problems with with that. Number one, the military is not going to succeed, but to even try to get something outside of that is going to be made near impossible by the objectives we have set. And and there's two big areas. One is that the first point of the uh memorandum of understanding is that the war has to end in Lebanon between Israel and Hezbollah. And then number two is the very close to number two is the straight of Hormuz because that's where our economic lifeline is. Here is Professor Morandi earlier today addressing both of those issues. We're going to start off with his comments on the straight of Hormuz and it ain't up for negotiation as far as they're concerned. Iranians have told the Omani government that they would like to work with them to have negotiations. But the Iranians have also said if Oman pulls back under duress from the United States, uh Iran will do it alone. So Iran is not going to wait for Oman, uh the decision has been made in Iran that they will for now on control the strait. they will take uh fees, not extraordinarily high fees because Iran wants uh shipping to go through this trade. Iran wants the Persian Gulf to be a source of uh wealth for the entire region and for Iran as well. Um but Iran will also prevent uh hostile ships, naval ships uh from the Israeli regime or the United States from being able to go to the Persian Gulf to militarize it once again. It sounds to me and just I mean aside from what he's saying, but just from what we see from the official Iranian leadership that they have calculated that we endured everything you had to throw at us for 40 days and 40 nights. We know where your inventories are down low. We know what you can't do because we're still under Granite Mountains with our drone and missile forces. So, um yeah, we're going to do what we say we're going to do. I don't care what you think. And what are you going to do? You going to go back to war to do it? It seems to me like that the Iranian side is willing to have Jack Keane succeed and they'll still hold on to that straight. What do you think?
>> I think for the Israelis and increasingly for President Trump unfortunately because he obviously is their instrument. Uh this is war to the last missile. That's what people need to understand. Uh this is the sort of situation that that they find themselves in. Israel is now in a point of weakness unlike anything they've faced in their entire history. The entire Greater Israel project, this war against everyone in the region for the permanent security, protection, and hegemony of Jewish power has failed. It's backfired. They know that. And it's it's almost as though you are let let's put it in a context Americans can understand. Imagine you are a small force in the west in Arizona in the 1870s and you are surrounded by hostile tribes, Apache, Comanche, whatever. And you look at your ammunition, you have maybe 100 rounds per man left. You started out with a thousand rounds per man and you're not sure you're going to get any resupply. What do you do? Well, if you surrender or you try to escape, you're likely going to be you'll be destroyed. And so, it's better to sort of clean off your ammunition, check your weapons, and get ready for the next round than it is to do anything else. That's why I say this is this is war to the last missile. By the way, it's not just Israel that's in this position. It's also true for Kief and for Zilinski. For them, it's also war to the last missile. This is a losing proposition. But I think in both cases, there's a growing awareness that the two states and their leaders have done such terrible things to their opponents. There isn't really much hope for any alternative to quote unquote victory or death. And so, I think we'll see them both vanish in the months ahead as states on the map. And so do do you the the big question is uh that apparently is an open question in Washington. Is it for you can ma can Iran make good on this? Meaning if it goes back to war, can they hang on to the straight like they say?
>> Yes. There's nothing to keep them from doing so. I mean they're in a very wonderful position. The straight for reasons of geology and topography is very difficult to control. But they have the means. We do not. This is not uh a place that you can easily assault on the ground or from the air and exert any real control or influence. They can, as you point out, effectively destroy everything on the western side of the Gulf. They can do that. I would argue the Iranians can destroy Israel as well, completely. And increasingly, there doesn't seem to be much incentive for the Iranians to do much else. I mean, if you're sitting in their position right now and you know that we're trying to build replacements, why wait around? You know, what's the incentive to wait? It's so Russian position in 2022 was well, we we have an inkling of what's going on over in eastern Ukraine. They captured plans that they had found in eastern Ukraine that talked about the reconquest of Crimea and striking deep into Russia. They knew what was buil being built up. They didn't appreciate how bad it was. They underestimated the enormous investment of time, money, and resources that we had made in the Ukrainians. But it became clear that there's no incentive to wait around to be destroyed. It's better to take it on, fight it, and win it regardless of how long it takes. I think that's the Iranian position, too. And I I think it's the winning the winning uh card, so to say. They can outlast everybody else. That's why I say it's war till the last missile. Who runs out first?
>> And and and you know, it's it's ironic and and distressing if that was the only issue we had of the straight of hormuz. It's a pretty bleak picture for us. But there's one other issue that makes it even more amazingly bad for our side. Is that is point number one in this whole memorandum is that the war has to end in Lebanon between Israel and Hamas who wasn't even neither one of them were even party to theou. Uh, Professor Morandi also spoke on that and and laid out an even more clear Iranian position than they have to date on that topic. have been very clear to the Americans. There will be no nuclear deal if Lebanon is evacuated. If if it is not evacuated, if the war does not end, there will be no nuclear negotiations if this does not take place. So that's really up to the Americans. And in addition to that, the Iranians can make life for the Americans much more difficult in the straight of Hormos. If the Americans refrain from carrying out their obligations elsewhere, then the Iranians will feel that they are not obliged to allow all that many ships to pass.
>> And that's actually what they're doing right now. But that that is that's President Trump's primary uh political requirement, no nuclear weapons, etc. But he's saying it and and it's it's so weird because the Iranian side has always said we aren't going after nuclear weapons. So that's that's easy. We'll we'll declare that and whatever. We'll negotiate that after these other things are done. But now they're saying we won't even start that process unless this happens. And so Doug, I mean, tell me if you'd see it differently, but if that is truly the position of the Iranian government, there won't be any negotiations at all because Israel will never do what was required.
>> Well, from the standpoint privately uh of people in Washington and Israel is very much the same. This nuclear business is almost a distraction. In fact, I would say it's a major strategic distraction. If you go back and look at the comments that were made before and immediately after this the first major round of war that began in February and then concluded uh you know I would argue I guess at least temporarily uh before uh July. What what was the focus? What did what did people talk about? They say, "Well, you know, nuclear weapons, yeah, that that's important, but it's really the ballistic missile arsenal. It's Iran's ability to threaten Israel." And that's the problem. What Morani says is not wrong, but he needs to understand something. There is only one acceptable outcome for Israel in this war, and that is the complete destruction of Iran. Just as the only outcome right now that satisfies people in Kief and for that matter in the globalist elites, not the populations of Europe, but the globalist elites is the destruction of Russia. Just as they wanted to carve up Russia into smaller pieces, rape it and exploit it for its resources. That's exactly what the people in Washington and in Israel want to do to Iran. That has not changed. Now the the other issue on on nuclear weaponry is as follows. If you were really all that concerned about preventing people from developing and fielding nuclear weapons, don't attack them. But that never really occurred to anybody because it really wasn't at the top of the agenda. Remember, the Israelis would probably welcome any excuse they could find to launch a nuclear weapon at Iran, and we would probably sit there and applaud. Fine, great. Go ahead and do it. Don't wait for anybody in the United States to wake up, smell the coffee, and understand the utter insanity and folly of all of this. Don't don't expect anybody to take note of the views of the rest of the world, let alone the Chinese and the Russians. It's not going to happen. Nobody cares. Nobody gives a damn. So what are we dealing with? We're dealing with the kees of the world. Obedient servants of the Jewish lobby in the United States, well paid for their trouble, well paid for their efforts, richly rewarded for everything they say and do. And they are going to fogg this horse until it's dead. That's Iran. So having said that, what is Professor Morandi's answer? Build more missiles. strengthen your defenses. Get ready for the worst because it's coming. I don't think I choice in that matter.
>> And and and and you know, I I'm listening to you talk here, Doug, and and I'm remembering things that we've said over the the months, uh things that we said prior to the war started, and it seems to me we have now, and tell me if you agree or disagree with this, we have we have walked ourselves into the worst imaginable outcome. You are lobbyed so many times. All you got to do is the walk away theory. just walk away, declare victory, say whatever you want, and then just leave and then don't even worry about or negotiations, anything else. You can just declare your victory and leave. That would have been the least bad option we had. But I think that now that we have with thisou, Trump has trapped himself into not even a no- win. That would have been a no-win situation. This is nearly this is what I think from listening to you. We're in a must- lose situation now because with the straight of hormuz we can't get it fully opened and we can't get the terms that we want and Lebanon's not going to go anywhere or Hezbollah is not going to go anywhere. Now then the only thing Trump can do is to go back to war because if he just walks away now without the straight Hormuz or without Lebanon then now that he is seen as a loser. So it seems to me like almost all the pressure is that he must go and do this which will guarantee a physical defeat.
>> Yes, I think that's true. And I think again uh I don't want to don't want to keep repeating it, but I think it's true. It's war to the last missile and we're not leaving until we think we have expended all of our munitions and capabilities. We're not going anywhere. And Donald Trump, the big disappointment with Donald Trump is as follows. If you go back and it's not just a question of look he was saying before he was elected, but let's look at what he's done since he arrived. What has he really succeeded in fundamentally changing? And I think the answer is nothing. Arguably one of the keystones in the edifice of success that he was trying to build was the simple passage of legislation on voter integrity. I mean it's hard to imagine any country in the world that would say we don't want every citizen that comes to vote on election day to show their identity lest we should discover they are American citizens. Instead, we don't want to demand anything of anybody, and effectively, we're leaving that into the lapse of the states. So, there's no voter integrity. If there's no voter integrity, how meaningful are elections? If elections aren't meaningful, what does that say about the republic? Now, you would think that what I just described would be at the top of Donald Trump's list of critical tasks to be performed. Have you heard him say a lot about that lately? Not really. Uh I think he's walked away from these things that were vitally important to the survival of our republic and instead is focused on all the things that are important to his donors, to the donor class, the global globalists that currently govern the west. Uh what else do you want to call them besides donors and globalists? Zionists, uh neocons, the Epstein class. You mean use whatever you want. All lump them together. They're the people that are driving the train. They could care less about elections. They could care less about the electorate. They don't care who shows up or doesn't show up. They're in control. That's the problem. And President Trump has done nothing to change that. Nor do I expect that he will in the near future.