All Episodes
Previous Next
Sept. 5, 2024 - Health Ranger - Mike Adams
54:31
Ret. Col. Douglas Macgregor gives urgent update on Ukraine, Israel...
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's interview on Brighton.com.
I'm Mike Adams, the founder of Brighton, and today we're joined by a very important guest, someone who has, I believe, incredible insights into world events, and if more people would listen to his words, I think that we would be a safer world by far.
His name is, well, retired Colonel Douglas McGregor, and he's the CEO of OurCountryOurChoice.com.
We'll talk about that coming up, but welcome, Colonel McGregor.
It's an honor to have you on the show, sir.
Hey, happy to be here.
Well, you are a prolific analyst these days, and I've followed a lot of your videos.
You are really up to speed, so let me just start out with breaking news.
The nation of Turkey, a NATO member, I'm saying that for our viewers, I know that you're aware of that, of course, but a NATO member is now saying that they wish to Join BRICS, which is the Russia, China, Brazil, Iran currency settlement system.
In your view, Colonel, what do you believe are the ramifications of this announcement?
Well, it depends on your perspective in Washington.
I'm sure Washington will view this in almost exclusively negative terms.
Your audience needs to understand that Brazil, Russia, India, China, Saudi Arabia got together and formed this, not necessarily an alliance, but a partnership with a strong economic content and a desire to ultimately build over time an alternative to the U.S.-dominated global financial system.
Most Americans don't understand how we've operated since the end of the Second World War.
We built a system that obviously was favorable to ourselves, which is not surprising and didn't bother anyone at the time because we were viewed as inherently positive as a force and an influence in the world.
But it's taken the last 60 to 70 years to convince people that that's not really the case.
We certainly damaged ourselves in Vietnam.
I don't see how you couldn't killing 2 million Vietnamese and turning the country into ruins.
We then moved from that away from those policies of intervention and nation-building, and we recovered somewhat.
But of course, that was largely thrown away after the 1991 Desert Storm campaign.
We got back in the business of directly involving ourselves using military power as well as financial power.
And the way we use financial power is very straightforward.
If you want a loan from the World Bank, we want you to adopt these policies.
If you want to grow this crop, we'll have to approve it because we think you should grow a different crop.
In other words, we were very, very intimately involved in the way economies were developed, particularly in the developing world.
So over time, we became, in the eyes of people in the developing world, another version of their colonial masters.
And that's why you've seen us recently tossed out of Africa.
We've been tossed out of many places, although we don't give it much coverage in the media.
And I think that's only going to pick up and worsen now because we're seen today as a catalyst for conflict.
Wherever we go, we promote violence.
We cultivate hostility as opposed to having been seen 80 years ago as this inherently positive force that wanted people to live free and independently on their own.
I mean, even Harry Truman, who today would not recognize the Democratic Party, used to say, quite frankly, we don't care what the Soviet Union does or how they govern themselves.
That's their affair.
We would just prefer that they not be aggressive towards their neighbors.
And I think that was the general view of almost everyone in the United States in the 50s and early 60s.
And then we took a turn for the worst, in my judgment, and began thinking that We could reshape the world in our image.
And that's got us into a lot of trouble.
I think your description is very accurate there.
And I believe that most Americans still suffer under the illusion that the United States military can project absolute military dominance or kinetic dominance all over the world.
But I was just reading yesterday That Iran has introduced five new aircraft domestically produced, one of which is a stealth fighter, and of course Turkey is a global leader in unmanned aircraft and fighter jets and drones that it exports all over the world, many of which are far more sophisticated than what the US is producing.
What are your thoughts?
Is there this lagging effect among maybe Americans who aren't aware that Turkey and that Iran and other countries, Russia in particular, have really made these incredible leaps in military technology that have surpassed our own capabilities in certain cases?
Well, in some cases, I still think we hold a comfortable lead in the aerospace industries.
In almost every other area, we are somewhat competitive, but not as competitive as we used to be.
If we go back to this idea of BRICS and you look at Turkey, Turkey is, I would describe, the 500-pound gorilla in the room in the Middle East.
The Turks effectively dominated the region for at least 500 years, and they have a very martial culture.
Their people are very proud of their past, but they are not necessarily inclined to dislike us or fight with us.
And I would argue that you have something similar in Iran.
Iranians have a much less martial outlook.
I don't think the Iranian people as a whole are even remotely Marshal in their orientation towards military power.
Absolutely not.
Iranians have very small ground forces, couldn't move into any neighboring country and have much impact if it was a purely military enterprise.
They are influential politically and economically, and that's where they have invested heavily.
But most of their weaponry is purely defensive.
The Turks, on the other hand, Could put 2 million men into the field in the space of 30 to 45 days.
Wow. And they're very ferocious fighters.
And right now our problems in the region stem almost exclusively from our unconditional support of Israel.
And we have to remember that for many, many decades, presidents of the United States have supported Israel, but they have also set limits to what they would permit the various prime ministers of the Israeli state to do.
Because we have interests in the region.
We want or have wanted in the past good relations with the Saudis, close relations with Turkey.
We've ended up in this unfortunate no-win situation with Iran and Syria and now increasingly in Iraq because we've built enemies in places where none existed previously.
And again, much of this is attributable to our interventionism But it's also attributable to our more recent unconditional support of whatever the Israelis want.
The Israelis in 1956, during the Suez Crisis, actually joined the British and the French, who intervened to put an end to the NASA regime.
It didn't work out that way, and General Eisenhower, who was president at the time, pulled them out and told the Israelis to get out of the Sinai.
So they fell back behind their current borders.
Subsequently, we had presidents like Kennedy and Johnson, ultimately Nixon, who supported them, but also set limits, ordering them not to cross the Suez Canal, the Nile River, to get out of Egypt in a hope of building some sort of peaceful negotiating system with Israel's neighbors.
What we have today that we've never had before is a president who sets no limits.
A president and an administration that has said, not only do we unconditionally support Israel, we're going to do whatever Israel wants.
And we're going to commit the use of our armed forces in pursuit of whatever Israel's goals are.
This is a huge departure from past practice.
Fundamentally diverges from anything we've done in the past.
I don't think most Americans understand that.
So the Turks are watching this, and the Turks who've always...
Tried or thought they would like to be members of the European Union have given up on that.
They've come to the realization that they are Muslim Turks.
They will never be Europeans.
And so they said, fine, then we are going to become part of the Muslim world.
But we still want good relations with our neighbors.
And the Turks have generally managed that.
They have always had a partially tense relationship with Iran.
They actually were fighting with the Iranians back before World War I. I think it's important to understand that now the Turks have largely given up on us because Turkish public opinion is ferociously anti-Israeli.
They do not approve of the mass murder expulsion policies in Gaza.
They don't approve of what...
It's happening now with Hezbollah.
They certainly are sitting by watching with great concern what may happen with Iran in a regional war.
The Turks didn't want us to go into Iraq in 2003, and we ignored them.
That's true. I'm sorry to interrupt, but I wanted to add that isn't some of the Turks' grievance with Israel, a lot of that is also being transferred to the United States.
There was a video recently, you may have seen a couple of US sailors that appeared to be somewhat beaten or physically assaulted in Turkey when they were on shore.
But a more important question is, what about Turkey's NATO status?
Because It seems to me right now they're leveraging their NATO status in order to achieve a lot of exports of their drones and other technologies, so it's important for their economy.
But long term, you know, the West doesn't get along with Turkey.
As you just mentioned, Turkey was never allowed to join the EU, and now that they're joining BRICS or intending to, this seems to be exacerbating the separation.
What are your thoughts? No, I think you're right.
It's inevitable at this point because our relations with Turkey have been severely damaged.
We've asked them to go along with policies that are antithetical to their interests.
And they are not at all supportive of what the Israelis are doing.
If you go back 20 years, they took a very different position vis-a-vis Israel.
And Erdogan, the president of Turkey, despite his public rhetoric, has been very reluctant to stop trade with Israel.
It's only quite recently that they imposed sanctions on about 54 different items that the Turks produce that the Israelis buy.
But they still allow oil and natural gas to flow into Israel through Azerbaijan, down out of the Caucasus, through their borders.
I don't know if that's going to continue much longer.
The Turks have fought at least 60 to 70 major wars against the Russians.
Over the last three, four hundred years.
So there's no love lost there.
But the Turks want to get along with the Russians.
And the Russians want to get along with the Turks.
They've managed to patch up some of their differences and cooperate.
The Turks have been able to compromise with the Russians on issues.
We don't compromise.
It's our way or the highway.
And this attitude has simply convinced most of the world to bail out on us.
You're looking at about 84 countries who want to join BRICS. If you add up the numbers, I think there are 131, 132 nations on our planet.
And you add the five or six, you're up over 90, 95 countries who will join BRICS, an alternative trade system, economic system with, as you point out, new monetary system potentially.
This is horrendous.
This leaves the United States and North America with most of Europe and probably Australia and New Zealand on our own.
This is not a good thing for us.
This reflects the bad policies and the bad decisions we've made for many years.
It's just that within the last few years, it's gotten completely out of control.
Our country, our choice, most of the people there are dissatisfied with the outcomes of many elections, where people voted for one or the other party, never saw evidence for real fundamental change that they wanted, either in domestic or foreign policy.
And so we're trying to unify people across party lines.
We're trying to organize around issues that we can agree on.
We talk a lot about what we don't agree on.
We don't often point out that most Americans, most of the time, for instance, in fact overwhelmingly, would like the borders to be secure.
They would like to see the criminality in the country systematically reduced.
They'd like to see more effective policing.
They would like to see judges and courts stop putting policemen in jail and begin to jail criminals.
They would like to see an end to this massive invasion of millions of people into our country about whom we know absolutely nothing that we cannot possibly assimilate, especially at a point in time where our economy is losing steam and we can't employ them.
And finally, we want people to become concerned about electoral integrity, straighten out the electoral process once and for all, stop the sexualization of our children.
These are the things that we can unite around.
And then, of course, end these endless open-ended military commitments overseas that have cost us trillions and trillions of dollars, tens of thousands of lives.
American lives are being destroyed.
We talk about those who were killed.
I think we're good to go.
I think everything that you mentioned, Colonel, is right on track.
And this has been really brought home in Aurora, Colorado, where we have illegals now that have taken over, I believe, it's reported two residential apartment buildings.
And there was also, reportedly, in Chicago, a building was taken over by illegals.
I mean, people like myself and some of my guests that I've interviewed have long called this an invasion.
But we were accused of hyperbole.
Seems like now it's looking a lot like an invasion when you have illegals crossing the border, taking over your residential buildings.
How do you not call that an invasion?
No, it definitely is an invasion.
And if you look at the policies this government has embraced, they're fundamentally anti-American in content.
You don't tear down national monuments.
You don't degrade national holidays.
You don't attack the historical record and try to revise it and make it into something it isn't, unless you want to fundamentally destroy the country.
And I get the impression that there are people in Georgia and Washington who see the destruction of everything as somehow or another a precondition to the emergence of a better America.
And of course, this divides us.
I mean, you look at CRT, This thing called diversity, equity, and inclusion.
All of this is fundamentally anti-white.
A lot of it's anti-Christian.
And this divides people.
This makes matters much worse.
That's one of the reasons that they're having so much trouble recruiting for the armed forces.
Why would the average American male want to join this organization under any circumstances?
We're in a lot of trouble, Mike.
Yeah, clearly we are. And I would add that the university system is also anti-Asian.
And they routinely discriminate against Asians now.
Well, they discriminate against anybody who's talented and capable.
You know, we've lost sight of the criticality of rewarding people on the basis of their performance.
You know, in the military, we used to talk about character, competence, intelligence.
Now we talk about the racial makeup, the sexual preferences.
And the more perverse or strange the preferences are, the more they seem to like people.
None of this makes any sense.
This goes back to this issue of sexualization of children in school.
You know, it comes very close to the kind of thing that happened in 1918, 1919, and 1920 in Russia when Russia fell into the hands of the Bolsheviks.
Bolshevization was a process that was designed to change everything.
They set out to destroy the family.
You know, living with someone, being married to someone, all of that became irrelevant.
The women at the time, who were among the most radical in the Communist Party, talked about sexual relations as no different from any other physical action to include urination or defecation.
I mean, this is the sort of underlying badness that we're dealing with, and it needs to stop because we know it has never worked.
We have a long record of tragedy and misfortune that began with that revolution in 1918, and it continued until the early 90s.
And the strange thing is that we obviously in the West did play a role in ending it, but the people that we're now so anxious to destroy in Russia were the ones that walked away from it and want nothing to do with it.
And yet for some reason, suddenly, they're being made into an enemy.
It doesn't make any sense.
I'm glad you brought up Russia because I wanted to ask for your assessment also of what's happening with the conflict with Ukraine.
Of course, one F-16 reported lost already.
We knew it wasn't going to be a wonder weapon that would change everything overnight.
Nothing is.
But with your significant experience as a U.S. Army colonel, you know all about the battlefield.
What's the situation right now?
Well, I did study Soviet-German relations, and that's where most of my graduate time was spent.
I would simply say the following.
The war in Ukraine was lost at least 18 months ago.
The Russians gained control of the territory that contained most of the Russians in Ukraine, because their original purpose in going in was twofold.
Number one, We're going to go in and liberate the Russians who are there because Russians had been reduced to second and third class citizens in Ukraine.
The Ukrainians were busy trying to turn them into Ukrainians, abolishing their language, their culture, their traditions, their church.
So that was part of it.
The other part was that we had built this enormous Ukrainian force, equipped it, poured a lot of money into it in terms of training and preparation to attack Russia.
And indeed, when the Russians intervened, That was the plan.
They had been shelling and attacking periodically the two provinces in the east since 2014 and killed at least 14,000 people in the interim, probably more.
So when the Russians went in, it was to stop that violence and also to preempt what they saw as clearly a dangerous instrument that emerged in Ukraine that was directed at them.
Their fear, of course, was that inevitably eastern Ukraine would be turned into a platform for missiles from the United States that would then threaten the Russian nuclear deterrent and Russia in general.
That was exactly the NATO plan.
There's no question. Absolutely.
It still is, unfortunately.
Yes, it still is. I mean, what about the recent permissions, I believe, from the State Department and the Pentagon saying that Ukraine can strike now deep into Russian territory using U.S. missiles?
Mm-hmm. Well, imagine what would happen if the Russians or the Chinese or someone else were in Mexico and you saw them build a large Mexican force that was designed to attack us.
What would we do?
How would we respond? I rather think that we would begin turning large areas of Mexico into parking lots.
The problem is Americans don't get a true picture of how this developed, what's really happening.
If they did, it would all end tomorrow.
And the mainstream media has adopted this narrative, fabricated by the CIA and MI6 in London, that says the opposite, that this is an unprovoked invasion, which of course is utter complete nonsense.
We did everything we possibly could, certainly since 2014, some would argue earlier, to push the Russians into doing exactly what they did.
And I think that people that did this completely misjudged the situation.
They didn't understand the Russians.
They didn't understand what they were doing.
I mean, this is an area that probably has swallowed more lives and blood than almost anywhere else in the world over the last several centuries.
And this is an area that's thousands of miles away from us, a place about which we know almost nothing.
And the people there We're not the ones that necessarily chose this.
In other words, Ukrainian people didn't go to the polls and say, we want war.
In fact, when they voted for Zelensky, they voted for him because he promised them peace.
He promised them a new arrangement with Russia and an end to all of this.
So this whole thing is a disaster.
How is it, however, because I'm tuned in to alternative media, watching you and Judge Napolitano and so many other analysts, you know, the Duran and those guys that do a great job.
How is Ukraine still functioning as a military and a government when we're told the losses are estimated 1,000 to 2,000 a day on many days?
Germany has said no more equipment for Ukraine.
The U.S. has sent most of the ammunition, the artillery ammunition that it had.
It seems like the supporters of Ukraine are saying, well, we don't have any more equipment and maybe not any more money for you.
And yet Ukraine has not fallen completely.
It's lost a lot of territory, but it has not fallen.
How is that still happening, and how long will that last in your view?
You know, I don't like historical analogies when the distance between events is so great, but I think it's fair to say that Ukraine is in a position today similar to the Confederacy in the spring of 1865.
And you'll recall that in desperation, Lee launched some offensive operations that had no chance of success.
And suddenly the Union armies that had finally broken through the densely forested areas and crossed the appropriate rivers were now positioned to fall directly on Richmond and what was left of his army.
I think that's what you have today.
When we ask, how can they keep it up?
I think they're keeping it up for two reasons.
First of all, they're sitting on a pile of U.S. cash.
Most of the leadership has put hundreds of millions of dollars into foreign banks, which I'm sure they will live on once the war ends and they try to flee.
But also, the Russians have chosen not to advance as the Union armies did in the spring of 1865.
They've chosen to wait because I think they were hopeful that there would be a negotiated settlement.
I think it's pretty obvious now that that's not going to happen.
So I would expect that something like that will occur now.
We've been waiting for it.
And President Putin, I know, is under enormous pressure to do it.
And I think they will.
I think over the next month or so, we're going to watch this regime fundamentally rooted out and destroyed in Kiev.
The thing I hope they don't do, which is unfortunately what many people in Russia want them to do, is march all the way to the Polish border.
I know Putin doesn't want to do that because he knows the people that live on the other side of the river are really Ukrainians.
They don't want to be ruled by Russians and he doesn't want to rule them.
So these are some of the reasons that the place persists, but it's an empty facade.
And you're right. This is at the end of the war.
And most of the casualties, the most horrendous casualties armies take, come after defeats when they're retreating and withdrawing.
That's when the Germans lost more people in the last six months of the war than they did in the rest of the war.
That seems hard to imagine, but it's true.
Once you break, your front crumbles and your forces start to pull back and withdraw.
That's when the heavy casualties occur, and that's happening in Ukraine right now.
This thing in Dakersk, by the way, so everybody understands, the Ukrainians that are inside Russia that still remain are in little pockets of 3,000 to 4,000 each, spread along a road.
They're being annihilated.
And they're caught. They can't get back into Ukraine because they're cut off.
This is the worst of all circumstances.
Unless they surrender, I expect most of them will be killed in short order over the next few days.
It reminds me of a miniature version of the Soviets surrounding and forcing the surrender of Germany's 6th Army in World War II, right?
But a much smaller version of that, but it's like, hey, you...
They broke into Mother Russia, the mainland of Russia, mostly, as I understand it, a rural area, not heavily populated.
So, of course, they were able to proceed several kilometers into the country.
But what are they thinking?
To this day, aside from the nuclear power plant, what on earth are they trying to do?
Just have a better negotiating position to say, we have some of your land?
I've heard this operation referred to in several circles in Europe as the quote-unquote Kavoli plan.
So perhaps this General Kavoli, who is the Supreme Commander in Europe, is the author of this dumb idea.
It's possible. Unfortunately, the Ukrainians have been doing most of the things we've told them to do, all of which were wrong, all of which have failed.
And this was the worst of all possible decisions because they lost most of their best equipment and best troops.
So there's not much left.
And really, the ball is now in Putin's court.
And I think they're going to march west.
As I say, how far they go will depend heavily on somebody raising their hands in the west and saying, that's enough, let's end it.
And it could end very quickly, but we have to do certain things.
We have to suspend all military aid to Ukraine.
We can certainly provide humanitarian aid, but through a third country.
All U.S. personnel, military and civilian, have to get out.
The Russians will not tolerate any of us or the British or other NATO forces in Ukraine.
And then we have to accept the fact that the outcome of this war is that Ukraine will be neutral, which I think was always the right answer from the very beginning.
Ukraine could have been a very wealthy, prosperous bridge between Russia and Europe.
Instead, it's been turned into a large graveyard by people in Washington, London, and in Kiev.
But Colonel, those steps that you mentioned that are necessary for some sort of peace accord or settlement to be reached, I cannot imagine, and I say this with respect, I'm not attacking you, but I can't imagine anyone in the State Department, in the Pentagon, in the Biden administration, but I can't imagine anyone in the State Department, in the Pentagon, in the Especially before the election.
I can't imagine them admitting to any kind of defeat or even de-escalating in any significant way whatsoever.
It's like the culture of Washington today, it's not compatible with negotiating peace.
It's just not. Yeah, it's not rational.
No. And we've lived at the center of the universe, our own universe, for so long.
It's hard for people to imagine a world in which we are one of several great powers.
We like to think of ourselves as the only remaining superpower.
It's all misleading.
We certainly have tremendous advantages in some areas, but we suffer in many others.
And right now, we haven't talked about it, but our social cohesion as a country is at an all-time low.
You've got people in Washington who have been working for years to bring in as many people as they could Who are as fundamentally different from us in cultural terms, historical terms, linguistic, ethnic as possible, so that they could undermine our social cohesion.
That seems to be working.
I think we're at real risk as a major country today because we don't have the uniform confidence in our institutions and our way of life, in our values that we once had.
So that's another problem.
Let me shift gears just a little bit.
There was news that Volkswagen is going to be shutting down its principal factories in Germany.
We've seen massive deindustrialization following what I believe is the US destruction of the Nord Stream pipelines.
That's not the official explanation.
The official explanation involves, I think, a fishing boat or something, but it's absurd.
But Germany is suffering rapid deindustrialization as a result of loss of access to cheap energy via Gazprom of Russia.
Where do you see this going, and are you surprised of this Volkswagen announcement?
You know, I should say that I'm surprised at what the Germans have done to themselves.
By following us blindly into this valley of death that we created for them and the Ukrainians.
I think it will stop.
But the first thing that has to happen is this current government needs to go away.
And ultimately, at some point, I suspect someone will have to prosecute the people in charge for what they've done to the German nation.
The second part is that you've got to get the alternative for Germany into power.
And the alternative for Germany, like all of the center-right parties in Europe, anything that is anti-migrant, anything that is against the massive infiltration and invasion of Europe by millions of people from North Africa, the Middle East, and elsewhere, is immediately tarnished as a Nazi.
There's no respect any longer for the preservation of Western civilization.
Anyone who stands up and says, We can't absorb these people.
They don't want to be absorbed.
They need to go home, is immediately attacked.
Well, the AFD just won in local elections, I believe, a significant, what, 32 or 33 percent of the vote.
That doesn't give them national power yet, but is that in process?
Do you think there's a political revolution underway?
Yes, I do.
The Germans, Remember, have been on the national apology tour for 80 years, apologizing to everyone in sight for all the terrible evil things they did and for quote-unquote starting the Second World War.
The truth is the Germans did not start the Second World War.
Everything that happened in Germany was a reaction to communism, Bolshevism in Russia, the emergence of Stalin's Russia.
And the fear of communism and the mass murder programs in the Soviet Union in the interwar years.
The Germans, and they're not the only ones, virtually all the Europeans were horrified by it.
But, you know, this is the phony narrative that was created that this happened exclusively in a vacuum, that Hitler woke up and decided to start a world war.
No, he had help from somebody named Stalin.
Without Stalin, there could not have been an invasion of Poland.
Without Stalin, there could not have been an attack on the West.
So that's all misleading and fundamentally wrong.
The Germans need to put an end to the apology tour.
Perhaps they will, because it's gotten them into this position they are now.
They are now a nation living on the precipice of poverty and destruction.
Absolutely. So I think the AFD will win some more elections.
But right now, the fools and the CDU, the Christian Democratic Union, Have declined under any and all circumstances to cooperate with them, with the AFD. This is why, beyond Germany, however, as you know, the churches are burning in France, and in the UK they're jailing people who protest the illegals, and in order to make room in the jails, as I understand it, they're releasing violent criminals onto the streets.
So the UK government has basically decided to commit national suicide as well.
Has Western Europe lost its ability to defend its culture, its borders, its language, its very existence?
Well, I think that's the point, isn't it?
That's where we started.
There is a failure of character.
People are afraid to stand up and dismiss out of hand all these ridiculous allegations about all the destruction that European states have wrought in the world.
In fact, without the Europeans, without us, there is no green revolution.
Without the Europeans and us, there is virtually no technology.
Nothing on the scale of what exists today would exist without us.
But instead, people apologize.
And we've had universities populated with committed Marxists, communists, anarchists, call them what you will, who've been preaching this nonsense for decades.
Surprise, surprise.
The elites that are governing have imbibed all this nonsense.
So this man, Starmer, the Prime Minister of Great Britain, seems to be determined to set up an Orwellian state that is designed to punish and suppress the English-speaking British peoples and raise up anything that is not British, anything that is not European, and exalt it.
The only solution is to remove him.
And I think at some point, something like that is going to happen in Great Britain, because the elites there have betrayed their people.
And I would say that this is true across most countries of Western civilization.
Canada, for example, Australia, New Zealand as well.
The elites have betrayed their own people.
At what point, I mean, you've studied and taught history.
At what point are these tipping points reached in history where failed systems finally either collapse or are radically reformed in a way that makes them sustainable?
Well, actually, I did not teach history.
My background is in international relations and comparative political development.
I usually have to say that.
Sure, I read lots of books and I studied history because you can't study international relations without some understanding of political economy and economic development as well as history.
That's right. I think the issue right now is that we have been on a long march Into the land of what I call wishful thinking, in pursuit of the unattainable.
The country where everything is free, nothing costs anything, everybody is a ward of the state, and they all live happily ever after.
It's kind of post-modernism on a communist model.
And I think people, wittingly or unwittingly, have fallen for that.
All you have to do is go to the elections, and each time you have a major election, People are promising everybody everything for nothing.
Well, it's failed.
It can't work.
And we are now reaping the harvest.
And in the meantime, we've been told that we will improve and benefit from the influx of all these non-Europeans in great numbers.
They will expand and improve our society and our cultures.
They haven't.
They won't. And we need to come to terms with that reality and defend what we have.
We've always had people inside our societies who were different.
That's not an issue, but those people came in small numbers, and they adopted our value orientation and our way of life.
That's true in Great Britain.
It's true all over the continent.
That's not what we're getting now.
The invasion is exactly what you said it is.
It's an invasion designed to replace us, those of us that the government and the ruling elites don't like, with more obedient supporters, more What's the right word?
Satiated consumers?
Yes, and Mexico has announced it's going to be busing illegals across Mexico to the border with Texas.
So now there's free air-conditioned transportation for the illegals that are making their weight.
How nice.
I'm sorry? How nice.
Yeah, I know. Such a convenient invasion.
OurCountryOurChoice.com, I have to ask you, longer term, because I know you're a strategic thinker, is it that at some point, perhaps in the next elections, that your organization might endorse candidates or even field candidates or have candidates that closely follow what Our Country Our Choice is advocating?
What's the plan politically?
We are talking about becoming the foundation for a new party, potentially in the spring.
We aren't there yet.
We have a lot of work to do.
And we're going to wait and see how this election turns out.
And we certainly hope that this election will change things, that things will improve.
But we have to be realistic.
You mentioned to me before this began whether or not I had any feelings about people who should be sitting in the cabinet We all welcomed RFK Jr.'s decision to join President Trump.
We see this as the kind of unified effort that we desperately need.
We don't need the Uniparty.
We know what that is. That's the swamp.
But we do need a unified effort that is trying desperately to transform what Americans want into reality.
And I think there's a good chance.
We are going to wait and see how this turns out.
The problem that I see, though, is that unless you are willing to get out of the beltway, get out of Washington, reach out across the country, pick up people, individuals, Americans, and bring them in and put them into positions of authority inside this vast bureaucracy in the executive branch, you're not going to get very far because the people that you're picking from inside the beltway, they have an interest in changing nothing.
Nothing.
Remember, everyone is interested in maintaining the flow of money.
That's right.
They don't want to disrupt it.
That's our problem.
100 percent.
100 percent.
And I have asked that question of Trump supporters and his campaign manager and, of course, RFK Jr., has been asked that very question as well many times, and he has said recently that he believes Trump learned a lot of lessons, harsh lessons, from his first administration and would not make the same mistake, but time will tell.
But, of course, I say that the Secretary of Defense should be...
Half jokingly, Jill Stein.
You know, just to throw water in the face of the establishment.
But I'm not serious about that.
But I am serious about RFK Jr.
should run HHS if he's given the opportunity.
That would make a significant difference in my opinion.
I think, kind of like your take on this, but I think that RFK Jr.
is now one of the, perhaps the very best thing about the Trump campaign.
What do you think? No, I wouldn't disagree with you.
I think so. I think he's a good and decent man, and he's quite serious, and he's very knowledgeable.
And if he ends up in Health and Human Services, and he is allowed, allowed to do what he wants to do, he could have a very powerful and positive impact.
The problem in Washington is that a president comes into office, he can only do two or three or four things.
Within the space of perhaps the first year.
Some people would say even sooner in the first six months.
After that, his power begins to erode or ebb.
So what are the top priorities for this president when he comes in?
I've never heard Donald Trump say what they are.
The only thing that I've heard with absolute certainty that he says he wants to do is secure the border and begin what he called the largest deportation operation in the history of the country.
Well, I certainly support it, but I haven't seen any details.
I'd like to see some details.
I've heard lots of assertions, but they're empty, unless there's some meat on the bone, if you understand me.
So that's fine. Clearly the border and what's happening here is number one.
I think right next to it has to be, end this nonsense overseas.
The world has changed. Having forces distributed all over the globe is no longer...
Maintaining order. We're simply putting people out there who can become reasons for anger, objects of hatred.
More important, in any real war, anything that far forward is going to be very difficult to protect.
We'll lose them. I think it's time for us to come home.
People say, well, that's isolationism.
Well, when we lived in this sort of isolationist environment that people complain about, we were probably the most prosperous and successful nation in the history of the world.
I think the objective is not to be isolationist.
We want to do business with everyone.
We should trade with everyone.
To the extent that we can help and assist people on occasion, that's fine.
But committing ourselves to unconditional support, or even conditional support, as we have with NATO, doesn't make any sense anymore.
The world has changed.
Yesterday's opponent is today's friend.
Tomorrow's opponent may be someone that we never expected.
We have to live in a flexible world.
We need to treat the world as potential liability partners.
In other words, let's work with people on a case-by-case basis and get out of this business of treating Certain numbers of people as permanent enemies and thinking that certain other numbers are permanent friends.
There's no such thing as permanent friends or enemies in international relations.
And get back to the idea that Washington promulgated and his successors followed for at least the first 150 years, and that was war is something to be avoided.
It's not your first option in the conduct of your foreign policy.
That's right. That's right.
Well stated. Last question for you today, Colonel.
About Iran, there's been a lot of speculation about why is Iran pausing so long in its anticipated retaliation against Israel?
Do you have any insight on what that is?
Or maybe will they not retaliate against Israel's assassination in Tehran?
I think there are a couple of reasons that are very important to keep in mind.
The first is that when it became clear that the Israelis were provoking intentionally the Iranians and the Hezbollah and so forth and the Iraqi militias by killing people, assassinating people, Putin traveled in the region and he essentially urged everyone to exercise restraint and patience.
And said this will exhaust itself.
Israel is not a strong country.
It's very dependent on our foreign aid and on the diaspora to keep it afloat.
We think that 500,000 to a million Israelis have left the country.
That's not surprising.
Israel is a place of very limited strategic depth.
They can't field forces for very long without putting the survival of the state at risk for reasons of economy.
Yes. So I think he said all of those things.
And I think he also said, if you can, let us wait until the outcome of the next election.
And maybe there's a way out of it.
Now, recently, he's concluded that the election isn't going to change anything as far as Russia is concerned in Ukraine.
It may be that the people in the Middle East have also reached the same conclusion.
They see us as inextricably intertwined with the Israelis and their enormous financial power exercised Through the very powerful and influential Jewish elite in the Western world and the United States.
But there's something else.
The Russians and the Chinese have come to the aid of Iran, particularly the Russians.
There are thousands of Russians on the ground in Iran right now.
They are assisting the Iranians in putting together as effective an air and missile defense structure as they possibly can.
At the same time, they've provided some new weapons systems, new electronic warfare systems, and improved satellite communications.
So I think the Iranians have concluded, we can afford the time.
We'll get stronger.
We'll be more prepared.
On the other hand, the longer this drags on, the weaker Israel becomes, because it's not a strong economy.
Most of its manpower is not engaged in prosperous activity.
And the hatred and hostility to Israel for what it's done has just metastasized.
So I think they've said, let's exercise patience and do what President Putin has urged.
And then finally, remember, we've got three carrier battle groups, I don't know how many ships total, over a thousand fighters, hundreds and hundreds of other aircraft, and of course bombers, from Diego Garcia to Italy, all ready to launch.
Well, what happens if they sit and sit and sit for long periods, particularly if you're at sea?
It's not easy.
It's very hard to provision and sustain that for a long period of time.
Again, I think from the Iranian standpoint, they look at it and they conclude, we can get stronger.
We will have more allies and more friends.
the Americans will become more isolated because of their failure to exercise the historic restraint over the Israelis that they're known for Well, I would add to that, and we're going to wrap this up, but I would add that reportedly Hamas has just been able to add 3,000 more soldiers to its group, and Israel has called up something like 15,000 reservists in the last couple of weeks, indicating the IDF is losing a lot more soldiers than they are admitting to.
And I concur with what you said about Israel's economy.
The Yemen groups there harassing the ships and actually destroying several of them have absolutely shut down port operations for Israel.
And Israel's economy is in a state of accelerating collapse as a result.
Not just tourism.
I'm talking about industry and investment as well.
So it does look dire for Israel right now from that point of view.
Yeah, and the thing that we don't seem to understand, and I'm somebody who has always supported Israel, I would like Israel to survive.
I don't know how it survives in this current setting.
If there is a war, it's going to be very hard for Israel to survive.
And I don't think that's the desired outcome.
In other words, that's why we've always had presidents that have exerted a certain amount of influence to restrain the Israelis.
Because it wasn't just because we had interests that were at stake.
It was also to protect them from themselves.
Good point. Good point.
Yeah. All right, Colonel Douglas McGregor, it's an honor to have you on.
Thank you for your insight and your analysis.
I think it's spot on.
And folks, if you want to join Our Country, Our Choice, go to the website, just like I said, OurCountryOurChoice.com, and learn about the organization of which Douglas McGregor is the CEO. And Colonel McGregor, let's see if we can help you get to a million members soon.
I mean, you're halfway there right now, and you started from zero.
You know, what was it?
Less than a year ago, I think.
What was it? Yeah, no, that's true.
And I think there are a lot of Americans Thank you, Colonel.
God bless you. Take care.
Same to you. And thank all of you for watching today.
Mike Adams here. Brighteon.com.
God bless America. Feel free to share this interview on other channels and platforms.
Take care, everybody. We've got new protein products available for you at HealthRangerStore.com.
Check this out. You're going to love this.
This is formulated with Boku Superfood.
This is the Organic Super Protein Vanilla.
Now, this is the vegetarian or vegan-friendly format of protein.
And look at the main ingredient here.
It is organic pea protein and then coconut sugar, Satcha Inchi protein powder, vanilla bean powder, and so on.
This is very clean.
You know how a lot of proteins have issues with arsenic or sometimes contamination with glyphosate or sometimes E. coli.
These protein products, like everything we sell, are tested for heavy metals as well as glyphosate, E. coli, salmonella, various microbiology.
And we manufacture this ourselves.
So it's not outsourced.
We make it in-house with our clean room standards, with our epoxy floors and our non-porous walls and all of that to meet the most stringent requirements for clean food manufacturing.
And then we ship it out of Texas.
So we've got organic super protein vanilla here available.
And then also there's another version, which is chocolate flavored.
Here it is. Organic super protein, chocolate, and you know cacao prices are going up, but this is still relatively affordable.
And look at the ingredients.
Here we have organic pea protein powder and then cacao powder.
Organic coconut sugar is a low glycemic product.
It's very rich, it's sweet, but doesn't spike your blood sugar in the same way as processed white sugar.
So this is a ready to go mix.
You just mix this in with a blender, mix it with water or like a blender bottle or anything like that and you'll have a drink ready to go.
We've also got, of course, whey protein.
I'm showing these. Yeah, whey protein, this is my favorite.
I use that in my smoothie every day.
That's what's actually in this smoothie right here is whey protein and avocados.
And then we've got pea protein there by itself.
Also, if you want to do your own flavorings, I like to add bananas.
I like to add flaxseed or maybe cacao, maybe vanilla.
but there are a lot of other things that you can add to that in order to make it more of a superfood recipe, but that's up to you.
So whey protein, pea protein, and then the organic super protein, vanilla, and chocolate, available now at healthrangerstore.com.
Remember that every purchase helps support this platform so we can continue to bring you a message of truth and courage for humanity.
And remember that our slogan is healing the world through clean foods.
So we focus on bringing you the cleanest, the most nutritive, dense foods and superfoods and personal care products that can help you stay clean and healthy for a very long, joyous, prosperous, and abundant life.
You can find all of that at healthrangerstore.com.
And I thank you for your support.
Your own government has the power to activate a kill switch on all telecommunications, instantly shutting down all private phone calls and texts.
An EMP weapon or solar flare can achieve the same result.
Rolling blackouts or permanent power outages will also take out the power supply to cell tower antennas, rendering mobile devices all but useless.
During these emergencies, how do you stay in touch with the important people in your life anywhere on the planet?
The answer is the Bivy Stick at sat123.com.
The Bivy Stick is a two-way satellite text messaging device that uses a satellite constellation, not cell towers, to send and receive text messages.
It works anywhere on planet Earth, including in war zones or blackout areas.
In unpredictable times, the Bivy Stick helps you stay connected when it matters most.
▲
Export Selection