All Episodes
Previous
Feb. 19, 2026 - Judging Freedom - Judge Andrew Napolitano
33:37
COL. Douglas Macgregor : Bombing Iran Won’t Fix This
|

Time Text
Questions About Russia And Ukraine 00:09:53
Undeclared wars are commonplace.
Tragically, our government engages in preemptive war, otherwise known as aggression, with no complaints from the American people.
Sadly, we have become accustomed to living with the illegitimate use of force by government.
To develop a truly free society, the issue of initiating force must be understood and rejected.
What if sometimes to love your country, you had to alter or abolish the government?
What if Jefferson was right?
What if that government is best which governs least?
What if it is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong?
What if it is better to perish fighting for freedom than to live as a slave?
What if freedom's greatest hour of danger is now?
Hi, everyone.
Judge Andrew Napolitano here for Ajudging Freedom.
Today is Thursday, February 19th, 2026.
Colonel Douglas McGregor will be with us in a moment on bombing Iran won't fix anything.
But first this.
Don't you just cringe when people say, I told you so.
Sorry.
I told you gold and silver would reap the benefits due to excessive money printing, inflation, and global uncertainty.
It's here.
It's happened.
Gold and silver have reached all-time highs.
Could you call Lear Capital and buy some?
It's not too late.
Experts are predicting higher prices ahead.
Why?
Nothing has changed.
Geopolitical chaos, cost of living crises, and a weaker dollar are driving central banks to boost their gold reserves.
Forecasts suggest gold could hit $6,000 an ounce and silver $200 an ounce.
Even Morgan Stanley ditched the 60-40 rule for 60-20-20, putting 20% into precious metals.
They're getting educated, and you should too.
Call the best in the business and the people I trust, Lear Capital.
Get their reports.
Get the facts.
Get some gold and silver.
Tell them the judge sent you and get up to $20,000 in bonus gold or silver.
Call 800-511-4620 or go to LearjudgeNapp.com.
Colonel McGregor, welcome here, my dear friend.
Thanks for accommodating my schedule.
I want to spend some time exploring your understanding of what may happen if the United States attacks or invades.
I don't know how you describe the difference, but I'll ask you that later.
Iran.
But before we do, some questions about Russia and about Ukraine.
Are you familiar with any reports indicating that U.S. fighter pilots in U.S. jets are patrolling the skies over Kyiv?
Yes, that finally found its way into the news today.
I know that two years ago there were requests for potential volunteers in the Air Force who might be willing to fly aircraft in support of the Ukrainian state.
So I don't think we should be totally surprised.
Now, as far as I know, we have not lost any pilots over there, and neither have the Dutch, who are reportedly also part of this.
But it wouldn't be difficult for that to happen.
I suppose that they may be flying west of the Dnieper River and hopefully beyond the range of air and missile.
But I think we have to understand that thousands of NATO soldiers in Ukrainian uniform, primarily Poles, but not exclusively, have already been killed in Ukraine in the war.
That's one of the reasons that President Novrodsky of Poland has made it clear that there will be no Polish soldiers on the ground in Ukraine in any future agreement of any kind.
So he's made that clear.
They're not interested in filling up any cemeteries.
But beyond that, I don't know too much.
But the more desperate Ukraine becomes, the more of this we are likely to see.
But to try and pin this down, and I know you don't have personal knowledge of it, so please disabuse me of any inaccurate notions that I have.
While the United States is purporting to be the neutral and negotiating between Russia and Ukraine, its fighter pilots, American Air Force pilots, and American Air Force jets are patrolling the skies over Kyiv to shoot down Russian drones.
Is that correct?
It seems to be the case.
And of course, the next question, the most important one, Judge, because of the obvious disparity in the comments between what President Trump said at Anchorage and has said subsequently and this news raises the issue of who is in charge.
You know, we went through this in the last term.
I remember this vividly in the fall of 2020.
People began discovering that the president had been lied to.
People had told the president that they had evacuated soldiers from Syria, soldiers from other places, and we discovered nothing had happened.
I think at the time it was Ambassador Jeffrey or something like that who was in charge.
And he made it very clear subsequently that he had not been truthful.
And he felt that that was his obligation as a patriot and not to do things that he thought were antithetical to the interests of the country.
I wonder, given the CIA's enormous power and influence, if they're not really running the show on the ground as well as in the air in Ukraine anyway.
That has struck me as being the case for a long time.
And so what happens if one of these fighter pilots is shot down?
Well, then the president is in the same position Eisenhower was in when a U-2 spy plane was shot down after Eisenhower had promised publicly and privately told the Soviets it was over, we weren't going to conduct any more of those flights.
And his military assistant, General Goodpastor, had passed that information along, but he never went back and followed up to ensure that General Eisenhower, as president, that his orders were carried out.
Now, I don't know what's going on with President Trump in the White House, and I don't know how much he controls, but based on previous observations, there wasn't much follow-up.
So, you know, you've got to look at what happens as opposed to what is said.
And I think the Russians have figured it out.
Can we conclude, and I think we can, that what you just told us, the Russians know about.
And if the Russians know about this, how serious are the negotiations in Geneva, which only lasted for two hours on Tuesday?
Judge, you know, we've talked about this previously.
I don't think Monsieurs Witkoff and Kushner are being taken seriously by anybody anymore.
The reports in the Russian media were extremely negative about the two men, about their appearance, their behavior, and their focus.
They were accused in Russia of being more focused on side deals that they could make that were designed to enrich themselves and family members and others than they were in the subject matter.
I don't think the negotiations with the Russians are being taken seriously in Moscow at all.
I think Russians are now preparing to move forward and end this war on their terms.
Right.
Chris tells me that this story apparently originated.
This may be where you got it from, a French outlet called Intelligence Online, alleging secret international squadrons in the air over Kyiv.
The U.S. Air Force maintains that all combat missions over Ukraine are manned by Ukrainian pilots and not Americans.
That obviously is quite different from what this French outlet is reporting.
One last question.
The Russians beefed up their negotiating team.
I'm aware of their disenchantment with the real estate agents.
But as if to highlight that disenchantment, they had Vladimir Medinsky, President Putin's senior advisor, and Mikhail Galuzhin, a deputy foreign minister, join the negotiations that only lasted for two hours on Tuesday.
I think they were there to confirm what Foreign Minister Lavrov has concluded and what President Putin thinks, and that is that these are not serious negotiations.
The individuals they're talking to are not viewed as serious men.
They have no diplomatic credentials.
They are simply friends of the president.
And I think the Russians have thrown in the towel.
Now, those two men that you mentioned, particularly Medinsky, he's a very, very competent and highly educated individual.
I'm sure he went there to simply summarize what everybody thought.
He's also very knowledgeable about all the historical information and data connected with what's been going on in Ukraine, not just now, but for the last 300 years.
And he's fluent in English.
Israeli Concerns About Turkey 00:15:36
Yes, yeah, absolutely.
Everybody that Putin puts into the arena, let's put it that way, is a serious professional.
These are people like Chas Freeman.
You know, Chas was fluent in Chinese and spoke excellent Arabic, passable Spanish for what I can tell.
So, you know, this is the caliber of people that we're dealing with.
But unfortunately, that's not the caliber we're sending overseas.
To Iran, Colonel, can you paint a picture for us of the military assets that the United States has assembled?
Well, you know, without giving too much away, you know, Matt Ho produced an X today where he talked about E3 aircraft.
But let's look at it from the standpoint of categories.
There are now hundreds of aircraft in the region.
Hundreds.
This is the largest concentration of American military power in the Middle East since 2003.
You've got large numbers of command and control aircraft, as Matt Ho had pointed out.
You've got enormous numbers of refueling assets, not just in the air, you also have refueling assets at sea.
And then you have enormous numbers of platforms that can launch missiles.
Now, one of the things that we don't know too much about, but I suspect we've done everything we possibly can, are precisely how many Patriot batteries and Patriot missiles and THAD missiles and radars are also in the region beyond what are normally there.
But if you look at the map that you just put up on the board, it's not difficult to figure out that the naval presence is now enormous.
And you're very shortly going to see the Ford carrier battle group show up.
It should be on station by Sunday.
And I suspect they'll be present, if not solely, certainly for the most part, to help defend Israel from incoming missiles and rockets.
They steamed through the Straits of Gibraltar more than 24 hours ago.
So they'll be there Sunday.
So I guess you could say that everything is probably going to be in place within the next 96 hours at the outside.
But as you and I were talking before it came on, one of the considerations that I don't think anybody has addressed is the State of the Union message on Tuesday night.
And the real question is, if you're President of the United States, yes, you've assembled the great big beautiful, whatever you want to call it, with hundreds of aircraft of all types and kinds firing all sorts of weapons.
Do you really want to unleash this war before the State of the Union?
You don't know what kind of a reception you might get.
And would you not want to wait until that was over?
So if I were to guess at this point, because I think President Trump is a more politically savvy individual, certainly domestically, than people give him credit for being, I rather suspect he'll wait until that State of the Union message is behind him.
Are you able to conclude from whatever observations you make of public information like what we just saw on the map or private communications that you have without revealing the sources that the president of the United States has already decided to attack Iran?
Yes, and I've said that for several days now, that I think the decision to attack has been made.
This is back to your question about negotiations.
There is no expectation that we can get any agreement out of the Iranians that will remotely approximate what President or excuse me, Prime Minister Netanyahu is demanding.
And this is very important for Americans to understand.
You know, Iran is, contrary to popular belief, not our arch enemy.
It is not the biggest terrorist state in the world.
That's a lot of nonsense.
We are not going to war because Iran presents some sort of existential threat to us.
We are going to war because this is what the Israeli state and its agents and advocates in the United States want us to do.
So if you want to understand the deadlock, you have to look carefully at what Mr. Netanyahu is demanding.
And those demands are not negotiable, Judge.
So you're going to have a war.
Now, the problem is this is an air and missile only war.
We're back to the victory through air and missile power, or at least this is the hope that people have sought for decades.
We can go way back.
We don't go very far back anymore because we didn't have precision munitions if you go back before the mid-80s.
But if you go back and look at the Kosovo air campaign, you didn't have quite this many aircraft, but you had a pretty substantial concentration of military power.
You had a carrier battle group offshore.
You had a strike group, the surface strike group offshore.
You had numbers of aircraft from all the NATO nations.
And that particular air campaign was supposed to last, the words were two or three days, maybe a week or two weeks.
That's what President Clinton was told.
And that's what Sandy Berger, Madeline Albright, Al Gore ultimately sold to President Clinton.
Now, that campaign lasted 78 days.
But keep something in mind, Judge.
The campaign did not end because the air campaign had driven the Kosovo army, or excuse me, the Serbian army forces out of Kosovo.
Absolutely not.
Their damage to the Serbian military was actually modest.
Most of the damage was done to infrastructure, bridges, factories, power grids, and of course the Chinese embassy, as we know.
But the point is, it took the Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbot to go to Moscow to negotiate privately with the leadership of Russia at that time, cut some sort of deal that persuaded the Russians to pull the plug on the Serbs.
And the Serbs had been promised fuel, food, and medicine to get them through the winter because the Serbs were not going to capitulate to our demands.
When it became clear that they would not have that backup from Russia, they made the decision to capitulate and they withdrew their forces from Kosovo and their forces withdrew in very good order.
It's very modest, marginal damage done to them from the air.
So my point is this.
We're going to have this air and missile campaign.
I think we can destroy most of Iran's critical infrastructure.
We can probably destroy whatever we can find of the scientific industrial base.
I don't think we're going to be that successful against all the armed forces, particularly the missile sites, mobile and fixed.
And at the end of the day, the real question is, when does this end?
Under what conditions?
You know, no one has talked about that.
We're going to launch this air and missile campaign on the basis of the refusal of the Iranians to submit to those three conditions.
Is it our assumption that after being pounded for two months, three months, four months, whatever it turns out to be, that they will suddenly come back and say, we surrender?
Because I don't think that's going to happen.
So the real question for President Trump, you're in a hell of a position, Mr. President.
Military has done everything you asked it to do and can do.
What do you do if it doesn't work?
And I don't think this will.
The president has, I feel sorry for the vice president.
The president has dispatched him to be the PR person and generate support amongst the American public.
He's almost nonstop on the airwaves.
Here's his best clip.
I don't accept what he says, but here he is.
And from his perspective, at his most articulate, Chris, cut number one.
And I think it's very important for the American people to appreciate it's one of the most hostile and also one of the most irrational regimes in the world.
You can't have people like that have the most dangerous weapon known to man.
It would be awful for our security.
It would be awful for the future of our children.
That is the goal of the president of the United States, and he's got a lot of options and a lot of tools to make sure that doesn't happen.
Everything is on the table.
We certainly want Iran to stop being a state sponsor of terrorism.
They're one of the world's largest state sponsors of terrorism.
There are a lot of ways in which they endanger America's national security, but the most important way they could is if they acquired a nuclear weapon.
And that is the red line the president of the United States has consistently said.
Yes, of course, the Iranians say that they're not interested in a nuclear weapon.
We know, in fact, that's not true.
They have shown a number of things that make it clear that they're interested in acquiring a nuclear weapon.
Our goal is to make sure that doesn't happen.
And again, the president has a lot of tools in the toolkit to make sure that doesn't happen.
Some of this is sophistry.
They're interested in acquiring a nuclear weapon.
Well, who isn't interested in acquiring a nuclear weapon when you have an enemy like Israel determined to destroy you?
They're one of the world's largest state sponsors of terrorism.
The Israelis have inflicted more terrorism on civilians than the Iranians have.
They're the most hostile, one of the most hostile and irrational regimes on the world.
Are they?
These are talking points from the Israel lobby.
We've been listening to this.
I certainly have been listening to this for almost 30 years.
I think what's useful to point out is that within the recent few weeks, several Israeli legislators, government members have stood up and said, we're very focused on Iran, but an even more serious threat to us may be Turkey.
Now, when I was in Israel, I always pointed to the Turks as the real potential opponent for Israel.
depending upon what the conditions and circumstances were.
At that point, I had no idea that this would be an offensive for Greater Israel.
I mean, I thought the Israelis were concerned about defending themselves, which I absolutely support and still do.
But this has nothing to do with defense.
The Greater Israel Project is an aggressive offensive maneuver that puts them at war with virtually all of their neighbors and certainly raises the stakes for Turkey, because if you're a Turk watching what's about to happen to Iran, it's very hard to conclude that you are not next on the menu.
So I think all this rhetoric is fine, and I know I'm familiar with it.
I've heard it 100,000 times.
I've never bought it.
I think the far more serious problems that the Israelis have are homegrown, whether it was through occupation of southern Lebanon that produced Hezbollah or the decision by Mr. Netanyahu many years ago to fund the stand-up of this thing called Hamas, which was supposed to be a counterbalance to the Palestinian Liberation Organization or authority.
Most of the problems that Israel confronts that has resulted in some of the tragedy in the country from terrorism and terroristic acts begin inside Israel.
So I've never bought that argument, but this is the standard fair.
And if you want to get your check in the mail from the Israel lobby and the Zionist billionaires that support it, then you repeat this ad nauseum.
We'll see how well this works in a few weeks because I don't think it will hold up very long.
Naftali Bennett is the former Netanyahu chief of staff and former prime minister who ousted his former boss and then was ousted by him.
Here's what he said about Turkey two days ago.
Chris cut number nine.
I want to be very clear.
Turkey and Qatar have gained influence in Syria, are seeking influence elsewhere and everywhere throughout the region.
And from here, I warn, Turkey is the new Iran.
Erdogan is sophisticated, dangerous, and he seeks to encircle Israel.
We can't close our eyes again.
And while some senior Israelis were on Qatar's payroll, Qatar and Turkey are nourishing the Islamic Brotherhood monster that is growing and eventually might become as dangerous as the one created by Iran.
Turkey and Qatar are gaining influence not only in Syria, but also in Gaza through the front door and everyone and trying to create a new choke rink.
Turkey is trying to flip Saudi Arabia against us and establish a hostile Sunni access with nuclear Pakistan.
Reference to senior Israeli officials on Qatar's payroll is to senior members of Prime Minister Netanyahu's inner circle have been arrested for treason, actually.
Well, it's nice to know that they have a problem similar to our own with people taking money from various advocacy groups.
Unfortunately, we don't arrest them for treason, Judge.
Right.
Look, he's not wrong, but if he's serious, and I think he is, why would you begin a war against Iran?
The only thing that the Israelis are doing, and if you listen carefully to what he described, is that they are creating enemies who are now finding alliance together.
Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Turkey, very good examples.
Sunni states, they have buried the hatchet for all intents and purposes with the Shiites, at least for the foreseeable future, because they see themselves as ending up exactly like Iran.
That's the point.
And why then would you press ahead with this war on Iran?
Well, it goes back to this Greater Israel project.
Do you have to conquer the entire region or destroy it in order for your Greater Israel project to succeed?
Well, I guess so.
So the question, Judge, is are we expected once we finish up destroying Iran to move on to the destruction of Turkey?
Is this the next round in this insane series of wars?
Well, it probably is, given the control that Netanyahu and the donor class in this country have over the American government.
I mean, how many trying times has Trump said, oh, Chris, let's play this.
Number 15.
Watch this.
I've always heard peace in the Middle East is impossible, and it's turned out not to be.
And we do have some work to do with Iran.
They can't have a nuclear weapon.
It's very simple.
You can't have peace in the Middle East if they have a nuclear weapon.
Impossible Peace 00:07:17
And they can't have a nuclear weapon.
And they've been told that very strongly.
Told to say that very strongly.
If Iran had a nuclear weapon, that might be the best thing for peace.
Just recently, within the last 24 hours, the president of Iran has reiterated once again that Iran does not have a nuclear weapon, nor does it aspire to get one, because there is a fatwa.
In other words, a decree from the supreme leader who leads the Shiite Islamic state that under no circumstances will nuclear weapons exist on Iranian soil.
So, and all the intelligence people that I've ever spoken to have all said categorically, the Iranians do not have a nuclear weapon.
Now, one thing that I think that we may have discussed in the past, I don't know, is that after this next round of war with Iran, I would expect nuclear weapons to proliferate.
What is the lesson if you are Iran?
It's even more strident and stark and grim than the lesson administered to Libya and Muhammad Qaddafi.
The lesson is very simple.
If you don't have a nuclear weapon, you are at risk of destruction at the hands of the United States.
That's why this is stupid.
It's stupid.
It's stupid for us.
And whether or not the Israelis, for all their presumed superior intelligence, have figured it out, this is not good for them, because this will not make them more secure.
That's the point, Judge, is it not?
Right.
Right.
So what will be accomplished by an air invasion of Iran?
You will destroy the critical infrastructure, the significant industrial base.
You will kill large numbers of people, whether you intend to or not.
You will probably inflict enough damage that many people will try to leave the country, just as many people have left Israel.
You will see people trying to get out of Iran.
And by the way, that's something else that the Turks have repeatedly told us.
Please don't do this.
We can't handle any more refugees.
I don't see anyone in Europe welcoming more refugees.
Nobody wants them.
So why are we destroying this country?
I mean, the point is you can destroy Iran.
Let there be no mistake about it.
That's within reach.
But then once it's happened, what are you looking at?
Well, I think you will have alienated most of mankind because I don't think most people on this planet are going to look favorably upon us after we do this.
And secondly, I don't think Israel will be secure.
What can we do?
We can sail home, Judge.
We don't live there.
We can sail home when we can fly home.
But what happens to the people that have to live in that region?
And that's why I say Israel is being very foolish in demanding this from the president.
I don't care how much money has been paid to buy his support and influence.
This is equally dangerous for Israel.
For us, well, we'll succeed in isolating ourselves from much of the world, as I think Chad Sreeman will tell you, Jeffrey Sachs, any number of your guests.
I realize this is more my field than yours, but shouldn't an attack of this magnitude be the subject of a debate in the Congress and a vote in both houses for a declaration of war or not or against a declaration of war?
Well, obviously, you're correct.
And the good news is that you have Roe Conna and Massey from Kentucky, these two courageous members of Congress, both of whom are being targeted for destruction by the Israel lobby for their positions and their behavior.
They're trying to induce Congress to vote on the War Powers Act.
Now, I don't know when that's going to happen.
I have this terrible sinking feeling that by the time that they finally persuade anybody to go to the floor for the vote, the war will be well underway.
And the problem with this, as you know, is wars take on a life of their own.
They go in directions that nobody ever thought they would.
We still have the Chinese and the Russians watching from the sidelines.
Now, the Russians have no reason at this point to pay any attention to anything we say.
We have lied to them, either willingly or unconsciously.
I think President Trump says a lot of things that he means.
He doesn't understand.
Those statements don't necessarily convert into policymaking.
There are other people who are making the policies, and frankly, they're not terribly concerned about what he says.
So I think the Russians are going to press ahead in their own area.
I think they will do whatever they can to assist and support the Iranians.
But then there's the Chinese card.
The Chinese are the last people on the earth that want a war with anyone.
And they go to great lengths to make that clear, despite the fact that people have turned a deaf ear to them in Washington.
What are they going to do?
Because as you pointed out at the beginning, the Straits of Hormuz will probably be closed.
A barrel of oil will be far north of $100 a barrel.
We may well see the markets crash.
President Trump loves to talk about the stock market.
He may see that thing take a nosedive on a scale that we haven't seen since 29.
And then everyone, whether it's Luke Groman or Ray Dalio or anybody in the financial world will tell you, watch the bond market.
Look at the 10-year bond market.
Look at the yield.
If we get 5%, we're in a lot of trouble.
Correct.
Because we can't afford it.
Colonel, thank you very much.
This has been a great, I realize these are testing and unpleasant subjects, but you've shed such a light on so much of it.
It's been from my perspective.
And I can.
Can I say one last thing?
Sure.
Very briefly.
You know, this is part of a larger whole in this sense.
In Ukraine and in the Middle East, vis-a-vis Iran and the rest of the world, we seem to be fighting against the future.
The future is not a world in which we are the preeminent superpower.
The future is not going to look like the last 80 years.
We're living in a new world.
We should welcome it because we've actually cultivated and helped it to grow.
We've been doing this positively in some respects for at least 40 or 50 years since the war.
And now we're fighting against it.
We're really trying to make it impossible for BRICS to emerge.
It's going to emerge anyway.
We're trying to make impossible the emergence of any alternative to our financial system, certainly anything that's backed by gold or other precious metals.
It's a waste of time.
It's not going to work.
And instead of following a course of action that harmonizes the United States and its interests with the interests of others, and accepting the fact that the future will be very different from the past, we're fighting it.
That's happening in Ukraine, and it's happening in Iran now.
Fighting the Inevitable 00:00:45
Brilliant analysis, Colonel.
Thank you very much.
Thanks for your time.
Thanks for your willingness to explain all of this in such a dispassionate and informative way.
All the best to you, my friend.
We may be calling on you soon when all this starts.
Yes.
Thanks, Judge.
Thank you.
Wow.
Coming up very shortly at two o'clock this afternoon on the same topics, Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson at 2:45 this afternoon with some emphasis on China and Russia, Pepe Escobar.
And at 3.30 this afternoon, what did the Israeli government try to do to our friend Tucker Carlson at the Tel Aviv airport yesterday?
Who better?
Max Blumenthal.
Export Selection