All Episodes
Previous Next
Feb. 5, 2025 - Health Ranger - Mike Adams
50:03
Col Douglas MacGregor joins Mike Adams for breaking news analysis of Israel, Ukraine, Mexico, BRICS.
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's interview on Brighteon.com.
I'm Mike Adams, the founder of Brighteon.
And we have an extraordinary guest today, a repeat guest, a fan favorite, Colonel Douglas McGregor.
And he is the, I don't know if the title is CEO, I think, yeah, of OurCountryOurChoice.com.
And Colonel Douglas McGregor, I think, has had just such a well-informed, intelligent voice about geopolitics, what's happening, Russia, Ukraine, Israel.
Even, you know, now Panama and more.
Welcome to the show, Colonel.
It's always a pleasure to have you on.
Thanks.
Happy to be here.
Well, I consider you, Colonel, to be the voice of reason when talking about geopolitics and America's role in the world.
And I was absolutely shocked.
And my first question to you is that Senator...
I'm sorry.
Secretary Marco Rubio said over the weekend that America can no longer be the unipolar dominant power in the world, I'm paraphrasing, but that the world traditionally has been a multipolar world.
I was shocked to hear that, but happy to hear that.
What did you think when you heard that?
Look, he's telling us something that's self-evident.
We've known this for years.
It's just that the people inside the Beltway prefer the fantasy to reality.
The fantasy is that we're the center of the universe.
That nothing can happen anywhere in the world without our participation.
That we are the indispensable nation.
We're the indispensable market.
It's all nonsense, Mike.
We're no longer 50-60% of GDP globally, or GNP globally.
We're falling down below 20%, 23%, somewhere in there.
And we're going to continue to fall, not because We've made a lot of mistakes, though we have, and we could do a lot better, but the rest of the world has recovered.
Much of the world is bouncing back from, in some cases, 80 years, in other cases, hundreds of years of absence from the world stage.
So I think he's admitting to something that everybody knows who has a brain, and that's about it.
Now, what are we going to do about it?
That's a different matter.
We'll have to wait and see.
Well, the fact that Secretary Rubio stated this, I believe in a Megyn Kelly interview, doesn't it also speak to the idea that President Trump himself also has a similar realization?
I mean, I doubt that Rubio is diverging from Trump so early in his tenure, but isn't Trump also recognizing this and realizing that America is going to have to compete on energy and not just dollar-sanctioning everybody in the world?
Well, that much we've got to set aside, I'm not sure.
As for the recognition that we live in this multipolar world, yes, he understood that back in 2017. That's not news.
He's always understood that.
The difficulty for President Trump was to sort through the sort of mountain of misguided thinking and outright lying that surrounded him.
And I'm afraid he's back in that same position again.
So we'll see how rapidly he can get out of it.
I saw your tweet this morning where you said that he's, and you've used the metaphor, that he's fed like a mushroom, right?
They keep him in the dark and shovel crap to feed him.
So you've stated multiple times you believe that's also the current situation.
Like he's getting crazy numbers about Russian casualties from the CIA, obviously.
Other examples?
Oh, listen, it's not just that.
He has a picture of our energy industry that's misleading.
We have achieved, for all intents and purposes, peak oil inside the United States.
And we have neglected to explore, develop, and drill for anything new for years.
You don't snap your fingers and say, I want more, and get it the next day.
It's going to take us many, many years to explore, develop, and produce more petroleum.
But right now, we're at peak oil, and there's nothing we can do to compensate people that are in trouble because of what's happened in Russia.
We can't, quote-unquote, defeat, beat Russia, Saudi Arabia, other major oil producers.
And I think we need to come to terms with that.
We also got to get away from this tariffing of everybody in sight.
Tariffs, as he demonstrated when he was previously president, can be very effective.
But they have to be judiciously applied.
And China, for instance, is something you're not going to be very effective at tariffing.
You stop and think about it.
We have a trillion-dollar trade deficit.
They have a trillion-dollar surplus with the rest of the world.
It is China that today is the economic engine of growth, not the United States.
He's got to come to terms with that.
We're not going to, quote, win anything by trying to harm them.
We have to figure out how we fit in, how we compete, but do so on a level playing field, and do so in a way that makes sense for us and our competitors.
But this business of threatening, bullying has got to stop.
I have more questions for you about those tariffs, but let me go back to energy that you mentioned, because I think this is a key component of America's competitiveness.
Now, I recall that during Trump's first administration, the United States was a net energy exporter.
Of course, Biden shut down the Keystone XL pipeline and seized up federal waters, coastal waters to stop exploration and so on.
But if Trump reverses those policies, many of them can be reversed through executive order.
Can't that put America back on the track to energy abundance within two years?
No.
No.
You're unreasonable in your expectation of rapid reversal.
These things take time.
He's talked about suppressing prices of oil.
He's talked about suppressing all sorts of prices.
He doesn't have the power to do that.
The world is not at his command.
Our economy is in deep trouble.
We've got a lot of triage to be performed here inside the United States.
So be very aware of these tendencies to say, and look, I like Donald Trump, always did.
I voted for him.
There was no choice, by the way.
But Donald Trump is the sort of guy, he's a marketer.
And he's a marketing genius.
He says, oh, it's going to be so great.
You're going to love winning.
We're going to win so much.
I'm going to build a wall.
It's going to be 1,800 miles long.
And I'm going to make Mexico pay for it.
Okay.
Go back and examine that stuff.
Uh-uh.
None of it happened.
Got to be very careful about what you promised, particularly at this point in time.
Because we're far weaker than we were when he took the presidency in 2017. The world today is radically different.
Yes.
Clearly.
Clearly.
And at the same time, I think, I'm guessing, you, as I do, support the vast majority of the things that Trump has done in his first couple of weeks in office.
I mean, he's moving at incredible speed on addressing many issues.
Of course, he's running into resistance.
Of course.
The deep state doesn't like what he's doing, but I specifically want to ask you about USAID. So this, you know, global CIA slush fund for regime change, which is, they pretend, oh, it's, you know, it's tourism training for Somalia or whatever.
No, it's not.
You know, they're hiring CIA operatives to overthrow unfriendly regimes, whatever.
But Trump cut that off, and the Democrats are screaming, they're losing their minds over this.
What do you know about USAID and what it has been used for?
What are the implications of this being just frozen for now?
USAID, along with the National Endowment for Democracy, these have been fronts for those people who are advocates for regime change.
These are the people that want to intervene in other people's countries.
They have agendas.
Those agendas are largely...
They're irrelevant to the interests of the American people and have been for a long time.
And they've squandered a lot of money.
They've also made lots of people very rich who participated in these scams.
I'm glad he's done it.
I wish we'd have done it 20 years ago.
But sometimes these things take longer.
Thank God he's done it.
I think it will have an impact.
But don't kid yourself.
These people are not going away.
They're the same people who are enthusiastic about, quote-unquote, harming Russia.
With the proxy war in Ukraine.
They're responsible for the deaths of 1.2 to 1.5 million Ukrainians.
They're the people that have destroyed the Ukrainian economy, the Ukrainian state.
They're the people that have driven people out of the country.
They're responsible for having converted Russia into what was a potentially friendly and helpful nation into a hostile power.
And they're responsible for having...
Compelled the Russians to turn around and build a military establishment that is arguably the most lethal and best in the world.
And I'm talking about largely their army ground force, which is unmatched anywhere in the world today.
So these people are a disaster.
I wish there were courts of law where they could be tried and hanged because they've done that much damage.
It's not just in Europe.
It's also in Africa.
It's all over the country.
It's why nobody trusts us.
Nobody wants us in their countries.
Because we're seen as color revolutionaries.
Oh, we're here to remove you because we don't like you.
We don't like what you're doing.
And of course, in the final analysis, nothing to do with liberal democracy at all.
But that's a cover for the interventionism.
But can't, you know, if there's a restaurant in your town that's got horrible food and horrible service, and you're like, I'll never eat there again, but then one day there's a sign out front that says, under new management, you know?
You might try it again.
I know that's a simplified example, but on the global stage, is it possible that with Trump and Rubio, and I heard that Darren Beatty from Revolver News, he's going to take, I think, the undersecretary assistant position.
I think that was Victoria Nuland's position at the State Department.
That's extraordinary.
But is it possible that the world could take a fresh look at a relationship with America under this new management, so to speak?
Well, first, Darren Beatty's a good man.
I didn't know that.
I'm very happy to hear it.
There are a number of people at lower levels in the bureaucracy in the Department of Defense, I think, are equally good people.
So I'm very happy about that.
Will this make any difference?
Well, it's back to the original proposition you discussed at the outset of the discussion.
Where is President Trump?
What's wrong with him?
Why is he repeating the lies and the disinformation that was picked up and hurled at us for three, four years by the Biden administration?
Why was he talking about a million Russian dead?
Why was he saying that Putin's economy was a disaster?
Why was he saying that Putin's in danger of being removed?
His society is unstable.
All of that is absolutely false.
It's 180 degrees from the truth.
Why would he do that?
It's because he is accepting what's handed to him on the plate.
You know, that's a very dangerous thing to do.
And what has he got for a national security advisor in this man, Waltz?
What's Waltz going to tell him to do?
Waltz is going to tell him to do exactly what Sullivan was pushing under Blinken and Biden.
And he's a national security advisor.
What is Hegseth going to do?
Oh, sure, Hegseth, you can reverse all these dumb programs and ideas like DEI, affirmative action, and so forth.
That can be done at the stroke of a pen.
Ultimately, you're still going to find resistance and you can...
Gradually remove that.
But the things that I'm talking about, the perilous state of the armed forces, the backwardness of the armed forces, the fact that we are still organized to refight World War II 80 years after World War II ended, and are absolutely not fundamentally changing at all, because change is not simply a function of a technology.
It's how you organize to fight, how you develop capabilities, and you put them inside a framework that is effective.
That's not happening, and I don't see any evidence of anybody in the Pentagon interested in that.
And then when you move to the State Department, I'm glad Darren Beatty is over there, but he's standing on top of a group of people who are dedicated to everything that people like me utterly hate and despise.
I went through this ambassadorial prep course when I was nominated to be the ambassador to Germany.
And I sat there and it was a combination of women and large numbers of what I would call LGBTQ whatever characters.
And their agenda had nothing to do with the countries where we were going to be ambassadors.
And in fact, they wanted to push these bad agendas in places where people loathed it.
They were going to be offensive to the countries where they were serving.
I mean, it was a disaster.
You know, you've got to go in there and root all of this out.
It's not going to happen quickly.
It's going to take time.
Everything takes time.
Anybody who tells you, well, in a year from now, it's going to be different.
They're smoking something, and it's not tobacco.
That makes sense.
But thank God that that process has begun.
Trump ending so many DEI programs, ending pronouns in, you know, government emails.
And Hegseth is, he says he's going to root out the wokeism and the DEI and the military.
But you're right.
I mean, it's a process, right?
So to say it is one thing.
To get it done takes time.
The other thing is they don't necessarily know how the hell to do it.
I've got to be frank with you.
There was a commandant of the Marine Corps named Gray.
The Marines all worshipped at his altar.
He was a very fine officer.
And he was a very tough-minded character, and he had many good ideas.
But when he became commandant of the Marine Corps, he walked into the room, and it was full of all the three stars of the Marines because...
Thankfully, the Marines don't have more than one four-star.
And he said to the officers there, he said, if you've been on station for three years, I want your papers, meaning retirement papers.
If you haven't been on station for three years, I still want your papers, and I'll review it.
In other words, he recognized that he wanted to make profound change in the Marine Corps.
The only way he could do that was what?
Retire vast numbers of senior officers.
That wasn't personal.
It wasn't because he didn't like them.
It was a professional necessity.
Now, that's what needs to happen across the Department of Defense, but it's not enough.
Gray had a vision, and you can argue about it, whether it was right or wrong or good or bad, but he had a vision.
We have no vision.
We have no willingness to look at reality.
We've learned nothing from what's happened in Ukraine.
We don't want to learn from that.
We want to go back and relive World War II. We want to defend island chains in the Pacific against Chinese forces that are never going to go there.
We want to make amphibious landings in places where they'll never happen.
We want to send armies by the hundreds of thousands via sea and air to the Eurasian continent where it's never going to work.
Everything has changed.
You try to send hundreds of thousands of troops across the Atlantic and the Pacific, They're going to be sunk.
They'll never get there.
Those days are over.
Now, Eisenhower recognized that that was the case in the 1950s, and he fought back against it, but his successors didn't understand it, and so they allowed this to metastasize.
Well, we've reached the point now of terminal cancer.
I would argue that all of our institutions have reached obsolescence.
They're suffering from terminal cancer.
It's time to completely change those things.
This administration has not come in with an understanding of that.
You need a new national strategy, not just military, but national strategy, as well as national military strategy.
You need to re-examine all your assumptions about the world we live in, because thus far, this administration has demonstrated that they don't really understand just how profound the change is.
I wish I could say that Marco Rubio finally got something right, and I'm grateful, but I'm afraid it's too little too late.
It's much more profound than he indicated.
Well, Marco Rubio also, in a comment, said that he recognized that U.S. dollar sanctions are not as effective as they used to be because nations can choose BRICS currency.
Now, Colonel, you and I have been talking about this for at least two years, maybe longer.
But finally, to hear it from an official in the State Department, that's significant.
Except that it may be too late.
BRICS does not have one currency.
They have several currencies.
The difference between them and us is that theirs are going to be backed by gold.
That's right.
That's very important.
Ours is not.
And if you look at Great Britain today, look at the London Metals Exchange, Britain's in a very, very serious position because a margin call on the gold holdings, which means people that have invested in it own it.
They want it.
They can't get it because large...
Quantities of it may not exist.
This goes back again to Dr. Ron Paul.
Remember Ron Paul said, I'm a member of Congress.
I think we should inventory our gold holdings.
What happened?
Nothing.
No one would let us into Fort Knox.
No one would let us go into the Federal Reserve in New York, underneath the streets, connected to J.P. Morgan and other banks and find out what was really there.
I don't know what's really there now.
I think we're in a very dangerous period.
Colonel, just to back up what you said, if my producers will show my screen, gold has hit $2,840 today.
All-time high, skyrocketing, for the very reasons you mentioned.
The London Exchange is, I heard, eight weeks out of being able to deliver physical gold that people demand.
It looks like a Ponzi scheme.
Actually, I'm talking about the London Metals Exchange there.
Looks like they have committed, I mean, this is my opinion, I can't prove it, but looks like they have oversold and they don't have the gold to deliver to people.
That would be fraud.
That would be a crime.
But that's what it's looking like to me.
What happens, Colonel, if they default on their gold deliveries?
Well, that's going to have a profound effect on the continent as well as here.
And remember that a lot of that gold that they've got, People want it because they want to pack it up and send it to New York City, to the banks that are there.
Again, we don't know what's in New York City.
And I'm sure all the bankers will tell you, oh, there's nothing to worry about.
You know, back in June of 1929, Secretary of the Treasury Mellon gave a very famous speech because people then were beginning to sense that an earthquake was imminent, that something bad was going to happen on the stock market.
It was going to happen in markets around the world.
The credit markets, so forth.
And so he gave a speech.
And he said, Americans need to understand that we live in a world of unbroken prosperity.
And so everybody breathed a huge sigh of relief.
They said, well, Mellon wouldn't lie to us.
Well, Mellon had already liquidated everything that was not gold and converted it to gold.
The rest of it was converted to cash.
And he sold off anything that he thought could conceivably be a liability.
But he didn't tell anybody that.
You have several things happening right now in London and in New York that I think are similar.
So I'm very sorry for what's going to happen, but I think Starmer is not responsible for all of it, but he's made it much worse.
You remember when Liz Truss came in and within a few weeks she was gone because she said, I'm going to do what Margaret Thatcher did.
A lot of things are coming out of Trump's mouth about what he did before or what Reagan did.
It's not going to work.
This is a different world.
It's dangerous.
And there's no willingness to step forward and say something like Churchill did, which is, I have nothing to offer but blood, sweat, and tears.
Well, he was right.
And he did the right thing by telling the truth.
We need more truth out of Washington.
I just don't hold much hope for it.
All right.
Let's pivot back to Ukraine for a moment.
I'd like to ask your opinion of how you believe this will conclude, and let me provide the context that, at least in my opinion, Russia does not appear to be in a hurry, and Trump does not appear to have any leverage whatsoever over Russia right now.
And you said 1.2 to 1.5 million casualties of Ukrainians.
No, I said dead.
Dead?
That's what I was going to ask.
I said dead.
We don't know.
But we're finding out that it was much worse than we ever thought.
Wow, because I have not heard that number until just now.
That is extraordinary.
That's highly alarming.
But go ahead.
What's your take on where this goes, or how does it conclude?
Well, you've already answered your question because you said the right things right up front.
Russia's not in a hurry.
It doesn't have to hurry.
It's watching as the so-called NATO alliance crumbles, disintegrates.
Why is it disintegrating?
Because the economies are failing and the financial systems are bankrupt.
So it's going to happen across Europe.
So why get excited about marching into Ukraine at this stage?
Into Western Ukraine, that is.
Secondly, you're right.
We have no leverage.
And that's what President Trump needs to understand.
And that's not what he's being told.
I still think that President Trump has this view of the United States.
That, you know, we're sort of symbolically Superman from the 1950s.
You know, you remember the old Superman thing that would come on television and he would stand there and say, fight for truth, justice, and the American way.
Well, that United States is gone.
We're not in that position.
So he has no leverage.
And that's why I've urged him repeatedly to disengage.
Get out.
Why?
Why pretend?
That something there is going to be won.
Why pretend to think for a second that the Russians should pay any attention to anything we say?
Absolutely not.
To disengage, though, now, wouldn't the offer to Russia have to be rather generous from Russia's point of view?
For example, you get to keep Odessa or something that the West cannot possibly agree to, but Russia will probably demand sooner or later.
If you can't stop it from happening, what makes you think you're giving it away?
Who are you kidding?
Good point, right.
Where is the great United States Army?
The great United States Army is in ruins.
It's got old equipment, old tanks or gas guzzlers.
Can't get 100 kilometers without running out of fuel.
You've got old helicopters, and most helicopters, as you know, if they flew anywhere near the front in Ukraine, were shot out of the sky.
So what are we going to throw in there?
What about the European forces?
Those are boutique armies.
They're designed to suppress people that we don't like in Chad or Central Africa.
It's no longer serious.
We have nothing to put up.
When you have nothing to put up, before you embarrass yourself, get the hell out.
I've said this publicly.
I really hope that President Trump eventually comes around to understanding it.
Cut the aid to Ukraine.
Just end it.
Most of it has been stolen.
Zelensky is being paid $11 million a month out of cash that we send over there.
The man is a crook.
He's in charge of a criminal operation.
Just forget him.
So stop all of the aid.
As soon as you stop the aid, the war will end and people will stop dying.
Right now, the Ukrainians have nobody to man anything new, yet we want to send a billion dollars worth of equipment there.
For what purpose?
So that the Russians can take it over, inspect it, and put it into museums?
That's what happened to us in Afghanistan.
What are we doing?
It's just stupid.
And secondly, let me finish.
Yes, go ahead.
You know, then after you've stopped the aid, get us out.
Withdraw all U.S. military personnel and people in and out of uniform.
In other words, intelligence personnel, anything.
All out of Ukraine.
Once you do that, the Russians will say, okay, it's over.
We get it.
The Americans have finally agreed this is nonsense.
We have a new president with a new administration who's not going to beat this dog to death.
The Russians do not want to govern Western Ukraine.
It's very important for people to understand that they're not stupid.
They've lived with people in that region of the world for a thousand years.
They know what's happened over the last 300. The Western Ukrainians do not want to be ruled by Russians.
They don't want to rule them.
So the most that they would consider doing at this stage is advancing to the Dnieper River.
Now, you mentioned Odessa.
Odessa is a Russian city.
It was founded by Russians.
It speaks Russian.
Historically, it is Russian, just like Crimea since 1776. The point is that, yes, they could move on that.
How much further will they move beyond Kharkov?
I don't know.
Kharkov is another Russian-speaking city.
It's considered Russian.
But the Russians are not interested in moving into areas that are historically Ukrainian.
And they exist.
And most of them are in the West.
Some are still in the Northeast.
They don't want to rule those Ukrainians either.
But they have to think about their national security.
What happens if they don't go any further and they come to some sort of agreement without any guarantees, without any assurances that Ukraine will remain neutral and never become a platform for attack against Russia again?
They would really like to have those, primarily from the Europeans, especially the Europeans that border Ukraine, but also from us.
Now, that's what we can do.
We can hold back on that until we sort out the issue of just what is it that the Russians want and are going to keep.
We can't change it.
We can't stop it.
But that's it.
I think you've pointed this out many times, and I agree with your assessment, that whatever assurances the West would give Russia...
Russia can't take any of those assurances seriously because of the history of the Minsk Accords and everything else.
I mean, and Zelensky's not even an elected official at the moment, so who could even sign an agreement?
And why would Russia even believe anything that the West would say about anything at this point?
Well, you're right, but that's why actions speak louder than words.
If you want peace and an end of the war and want to set the stage for a negotiated agreement that would turn...
Whatever remains of Ukraine into some sort of Austria, then I think you withdraw your forces and your people and you sever the aid.
That much you can do.
Now, beyond that, that's a different question.
The Europeans have a vote, too.
The European governments are changing.
Schultz is not going to last.
Macron in France is not going to last.
Starmer in Britain is scheduled for elimination shortly.
All these countries have been on the wrong path, following us blithely down the road to hell.
Their populations have had it, and you have another explosion coming, and that is a war inside these countries for the survival of their populations, their culture, their identity.
And that means they're going to have to throw out the millions of non-Europeans they never wanted and were forced upon them by the previous regimes.
Putin knows that.
He knows how that's going to look.
And I think if we do what I just outlined, I think you can get a good agreement.
But let me give you an example of what's really bad.
Many people may not be following this, but in the Kursk Oblast, this area adjoining Ukraine, where the Ukrainians sent a force in of both Ukrainians and a lot of so-called internationals, in other words, mercenaries from other countries, they did a lot of damage.
And within the last month or so, They've killed large numbers of Russian civilians because the area has been largely emptied of civilians, but the ones that stayed behind were murdered.
And the Russians have found basements with bodies stacked to the ceiling and barns and so forth.
The Russians have now said, that's it, no more nonsense.
They've just unleashed the Chechens on them.
The Chechens will go in there and they'll clean house.
There'll be nothing left of any Ukrainian or international soldier that's there.
You don't win friends.
You don't seek and achieve a peace agreement when you do stupid things like the Ukrainians have.
And that doesn't even begin to address the terrible lies told about the Russians by us and by the Ukrainians of things that they never did, atrocities they never committed.
Yes, yes.
Gosh, we covered.
There were many staged atrocities blamed on Russia earlier in the conflict.
And you know, by the way, that's not to say nothing bad happened on the Russian side.
That's true.
And the Russians would agree to that.
In wars, things are done that are not good.
Things get out of hand.
That happened to us in Vietnam, and some of that happened to us in Afghanistan.
A little bit in Iraq, but not much.
It depends on the intensity and the duration of the conflict.
All I'm saying is that...
Yes, we can create a better environment that could be conducive to arrangements with the Russians, and the Russians want an all-encompassing, comprehensive arrangement for security matters in Europe involving us.
In other words, they want to make sure this nonsense doesn't happen anymore.
And by the way, we used to have this.
We had something called the Mutual Balance Force Reduction Talks.
We came up with measures and agreements dictating how many forces you would have at a particular area, who would monitor them.
They had monitors.
We had monitors.
People crossed back and forth.
It worked.
We need to do something like that again.
I think we can.
Now, is that going to solve everything?
No.
We have created hatred against us in Russia unnecessarily.
It's going to last a long time.
So it's not going to be an overnight change.
But if you've got somebody like Trump, Who is willing to say, that's it, I've had it.
You know, I'm jettisoning this old policy.
You know the old expression from Prime Minister Salisbury from 1900 in the British Empire, the biggest mistake in politics is clinging to the carcass of dead policies.
Well, Ukraine is a carcass.
That policy's bad.
I would argue Netanyahu and his group are another carcass.
We need to shed those because we've got more important things to do here at home.
Well, I'm glad you brought up Netanyahu.
I want to ask you about that, but let me just comment.
I think Keir Starmer has not received the memo that his political life is limited.
He thinks he's going to rule Britain for another decade or so, but he'll be in for a surprise.
I think all those leaders you mentioned, Macron and Scholz, they all need to go, and the people there are trying to actually eject them more and more in order to save their own countries.
But Netanyahu, so...
Obviously a quagmire in the Middle East.
We've got Senator Lindsey Graham once again.
He seems to do this about every month.
He says, let's bomb Iran.
He's saying it again now.
Netanyahu, of course, I would consider him to be an outrageous war criminal at this point.
But there seems to be some level of, quote, peace.
I never know what to call it in the Middle East.
What do you think happens next with Israel?
Well, first of all, let's turn our attention to Netanyahu who is, I think, visiting tomorrow, or has he arrived today in Washington?
I'm not sure.
I haven't tracked that, but yeah.
I'm sure he and President Trump will talk.
Understand that Mr. Netanyahu's supporters, billionaires, what we call oligarchs in Eastern Europe, had a lot to do with Donald Trump's victory in taking the White House.
That's true.
They are strong supporters of Netanyahu.
Netanyahu takes the position that until Iran is destroyed and reduced to rubble, Israel will not be safe.
And he has lots of support for that position.
Donald Trump, I think, is sympathetic to that, although personally, I don't think he supports it.
He's someone that always wanted to find a way forward with Iran.
You know, Iran is not what we say it is here in the United States, not what the mainstream media says about it.
It's not what the Israelis say.
And Iran is the one Islamic state in the world that is really positioned to leap ahead into modernity in a very positive way.
So I think a war at this stage would be disastrous.
But Iran is a nation state with a lot of people that may or may not like their government, but they will defend Iran with their dying breath.
And Iran is prepared for a very, very tough war and would do enormous damage to Israel, regardless of whatever.
Help or assistance we provided.
So I think President Trump knows that.
President Trump also knows that there is a mutual defense pact that's being signed between Iran and Russia and that Russia will not sit by and watch us try to pulverize Iran out of existence.
I don't think President Trump wants to bait President Putin and drag us into a war.
We don't need to fight.
So I'm hopeful.
That this meeting will go well, but there's no guarantee.
And there's also no guarantee that under great pressure from his donors, his inner circle, from people like Waltz and others who are advocates for this war, people like Hegseth who fall into that category, and by the way, so does Rubio.
And Noam, Christy Noam also.
What?
Noam as well.
She's...
Oh, I don't know anything about her.
Oh, okay.
Yeah, she's all about supporting Israel no matter what.
Yeah, well, just because she wants to get elected, she doesn't understand anything.
The others, I think, are true believers.
And they may think that such a war could be fought, waged, and won in relative isolation from the rest of the region.
I don't think that's possible.
What Israel has done since October of a couple of years ago...
As to poison the waters against itself in the region in a way that I think is unrecoverable.
You cannot tell everybody in the region that they are subhuman animals, that they are grossly inferior to you and richly deserve to die, and then insist that as a result, as the supreme race, you have the right to exterminate or destroy the people that are living.
In Gaza or the West Bank or southern Lebanon or anywhere else.
That's the first thing.
Israel is now in a potentially dangerous position with regard to Syria.
As Syria is supposedly this jihadist state that everyone thinks can be tamed.
Well, we'll see.
Who knows?
But Mr. Erdogan is really in control.
He's the dominant force in Syria.
And arguably, from a military standpoint, given his armed forces, is probably the major military power in the region.
He and his population are both very martial, that is, militaristic.
They have a long and distinguished history as soldiers, as fighters, and they hate the Israelis for what the Israelis have done to millions of Palestinians.
At the same time, on the other side, you have Egypt.
Egypt is the last place that wants a war.
Egypt is a place that desperately wants peace.
But you have a population of almost 100 million, and they have become ferociously anti-Israeli.
Sisi cannot sustain himself there unless he adopts that posture.
And if you look at the Egyptians, they are preparing for war with Israel in the Sinai.
Jordan is the...
It's the one that's harder to predict because Jordan is so dependent on us for money, so dependent on us for everything, that King Abdullah is paralyzed.
But at the same time, King Abdullah is viewed as an Israeli puppet, as an American puppet.
So he's in a lot of trouble.
Saudi Arabia is not going to play ball with us.
There will be no return to the Abraham Accords.
Those days are over.
If you go through the capitals of the Arab world, And you hear repeatedly behind closed doors, Sykes-Pico is over.
That was the arrangement that created Israel.
It's done.
It's over.
And it's a question of when, not if, they plan to rid themselves of this Israeli state.
So I think that's a very grim outlook.
I hope I'm wrong, because I've always believed that Israel had many virtues that the world would benefit from.
But I'm not in the region.
I'm not an Arab.
I'm not a Turk.
I'm not a Persian.
And their view is radically different.
So Egypt, in particular, when Trump halted all foreign aid, he exempted two nations from that halt.
And it was Egypt and Israel.
And Egypt, I believe, receives about $5 billion a year in U.S. money.
If they were to go to war with Israel, they would clearly...
Give up that $5 billion.
And that would bring into question the Suez Canal control, which is obviously critical to the United States.
What are your thoughts about Egypt's loyalties and role here?
Well, two things.
They're acutely sensitive to the loss of that aid.
But behind closed doors, they've had reassurances from the Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, and others that they would make up the shortfall.
Interesting.
So I think that they're willing to risk that.
For that reason.
And then secondly, they've looked at Mr. Netanyahu's map for greater Israel in the Middle East.
That reaches the Suez Canal.
Yes, and it reaches southern Turkey.
Yeah, they want nothing to do with that.
They will not allow that canal to fall into the hands of the Israelis.
And if we join that fight, the British and the French would be the most likely to get involved, although I guess conceivably it could include us.
We don't know what can happen over the next two or three months.
That would be part of the problem.
The other thing is that the Israelis have been working to cultivate their relationship with the Greeks in the hopes that if things go badly with Turkey, that they can induce the Greeks to go to war with the Turks, to take the pressure off them.
You have the Kurdish problem in Syria.
The Turks have had it with the Kurds.
The opportunity for the Kurds and the Turks to sort of...
Bury the hatchet and reconcile things, I think is over.
And they're already beginning to look like they're ready to go into the Kurdish areas in eastern and northern Syria.
And I think that's going to be awful.
And I think one of the reasons that President Trump wants to get our troops out of Syria is he doesn't want to end up in a warlike posture with the Turks.
That makes sense.
Because if we stay there and try to defend the Kurds, we'll be at war with Turkey.
Which is a NATO country.
The other thing is, remember...
Remember that the Turks, they're not overtly anti-Iranian.
They don't hate the Iranians.
They're not necessarily friends, close friends and brothers.
But when it comes to the question of Israel, they're going to cooperate.
I think it would be a mistake to assume that if this becomes the regional war that it could, that everyone in the region will not ultimately turn on Israel.
Wow.
All right.
Last...
Question area I want to ask you about, although I know Europe is your expertise, but you have such a broad view of what's happening in the world.
I want to ask you about Mexico and Trump's pivot, Rubio, etc.
It looks like the U.S. is beginning to justify military operations against the drug cartels in Mexico.
It looks like the president of Mexico has so far bowed down to Trump's tariff threats and has agreed to send, I believe, 10,000 troops to the border.
We'll see what happens.
But two questions for you, Colonel.
Do you think that the U.S. military will, in fact, launch operations in Mexico?
And secondly, if you believe that's the case, what would the ramifications?
B, for security in southern Texas or border states as well as in Mexico.
What's that look like?
Keep in mind that whatever the president of Mexico says is irrelevant.
She has no power.
She's a facade.
The drug cartels govern and control Mexico.
So let's get that up right front.
Secondly...
10,000 Mexican soldiers are going to do what the drug cartels want them to do because they're probably being paid by them as well.
I'm sure the generals are all on the payroll.
Right now, the cartels dispose over formations and organizations that are as well-equipped or better equipped than the Mexican military.
I hope that we will secure the border, number one, and secure the coastal waters.
We're going to join the United States and Mexico, in the Pacific and in the Atlantic.
That should be our number one priority.
As far as going into Mexico to attack targets or whatever, or potentially to destroy something, that's another matter.
And that's something that we can do.
It's not necessarily something we want to do.
Our first priority should be to secure that border.
Now, when we secure it, if we really do, Mike, You're going to have a war with the drug cartels because you're cutting off billions of dollars of revenue.
You're going to have a war inside our country, in our cities, and even in rural areas where the drug cartels have established themselves.
And the whole business of illegal immigration is bound up with the drug cartels.
So illegal immigration is going to loom large in this whole process, which is why the first thing you do is secure the border.
Nothing gets in anymore, period.
40, 50, 60,000 U.S. troops on that border.
And I would make them regular army, but I would also look carefully at mobilizing portions of the National Guard and using them as well in different settings.
This has to be done professionally and expertly.
We have to have a system whereby we have a surveillance regime that looks 100 miles plus into Mexico.
We have many, many ways to do this.
We have aerostats.
That can move, that have technology on them.
We had something called J-Lens, which was developed for Joint Theater Missile Defense.
We can use that technology.
Two or three of those, either tethered or moving, can be enormously helpful.
That allows you to bring fewer forces and do more effective interdiction.
It also allows you to anticipate where things are coming.
But that has to be a robust force, so that if they take a shot at you, If they shoot at you with a shotgun, you should put a 25-millimeter sabot round from a 25-millimeter chain gun through them.
In other words, you've got to demonstrate that you are in charge and you have the power to destroy anything that is thrown against you.
But you have to be serious.
You have to have good rules of engagement so that soldiers know what they can and can't do.
That's why it should be regular Army first.
Too often, the National Guard is reluctant to shoot, and for good reason.
They are not as well-trained, and they're not as familiar with these things as the regular Army.
The regular Army has done this before.
We controlled that border from 1846 to 1948. We need to remember that.
And we're going to have to do it again if we're serious.
Now, once you do that and you start this deportation, which will involve the roundup of people and moving them out, along with the criminals, not just the criminals, which is what Tom Holman's talking about right now, but large numbers of people, all of that is going to be an enormous undertaking.
That's going to demand the full attention of the presidency, the American people, and it's existential for us.
If we don't do this, we will not survive, Mike.
Our republic will go out of existence.
We'll end up looking like a poor man's Brazil.
And I don't think that's where we want to go.
I think we want to remain a great power, an important great power that has real influence in the world.
But for us to do that, we've got a clean house first.
So those things have to be done.
And part of that also involves something else that has to be seriously considered.
And I know Donald Trump understands this because he did before when I saw him.
He has to be prepared to ask Congress to declare war.
On the border cartels.
Wow.
Wow.
Okay.
More than just an executive declaration, but Congress actually voting.
All right.
Colonel, we are out of time, or almost out of time.
I want to plug your website, OurCountryOurChoice.com, and just give you an opportunity here to tell us about what is Our Country, Our Choice, and what's your goal?
What are you headed toward?
We say my country, my people, My Bill of Rights.
Those are the sort of three foundational aspects of the organization.
We're interested in retaking control of the federal government, the state governments, the local governments, and putting control and legal authority into the hands of Americans who truly believe in America first.
Not Ukraine first, not Israel first, not anything else first, America first.
And we are having a lot of success.
And we're getting a lot of interest because people have figured out it doesn't matter who you vote for right now.
You get the same bad outcomes.
We're still seeing bad outcomes.
All of us are thrilled with the executive orders that are addressing some of the issues we've discussed.
But those are not enough to govern over the long term.
There's a larger war that has to be fought and won.
We've been talking about that.
And that's where we need Americans who are focused like a laser on America.
Everything that happens overseas is irrelevant next to what happens here inside our country.
Well said.
Well, Colonel, it's always a pleasure to hear from you.
Thank you for taking the time to join me today.
Sure.
Thank you, Mike.
All right.
Take care.
God bless.
And the website, folks, again, is OurCountryOurChoice.com, and you can support them.
You can join.
You can read the news.
I think they have a newsletter there.
Colonel Douglas McGregor, I think, is a voice of great experience and wisdom, and I hope and pray that the State Department and the Trump administration would listen to the concerns that Colonel McGregor is bringing to our attention.
So thank you for watching today.
Of course, I'm Mike Adams, the founder of Brighteon.com, here in Texas, fighting for America and for Texas as well.
I mean, we are a border state.
We've got to clean up the problems.
And it's beginning to happen here in Texas.
So thank you for joining me today, and God bless you all.
God bless America.
Take care.
We've got a fantastic Preparedness and Survival series streaming for free right now at brightu.com, which is Brighton University.
It's called Off-Grid Survival Skills, and you can go there.
It streams all the way through February 11th.
You can just watch it for free.
Enter your name and email there.
And you can also optionally purchase it, of course, and help support this platform.
And the content creator, who is Marjorie Wildcraft, But what's really cool about this is that there are all kinds of bonuses included here.
If you choose to purchase the full download of the series, which is optional, again, you get these 29 bonus videos here about wild plants that you need to know for food and medicine here.
I've got a whole list.
Trauma, first aid, herbs for anxiety, medicines from wild weeds, how to...
Even treat a dislocated elbow with a poultice made from herbs and things like that.
Alternative to dentists if you're in a situation where you don't have access to a dentist.
Incredible bonus videos and bonus materials are all part of this and it will teach you how to be self-reliant and how to survive in really dire circumstances when the power grid's not working, when the infrastructure is failing.
And again, this whole series is streaming for free right now at Brighteon University, which is brightu.com.
It's just the word bright followed by the letter U. Go there.
It continues streaming through February 11th, and you can watch it all for free.
So check it out at brightu.com, and you'll really learn a ton of information.
▲
Export Selection