Dan McKnight and Dave Smith dissect the constitutional crisis surrounding potential U.S. war with Iran, arguing that Congress's power to declare war is being ignored as National Guard troops face undeclared conflicts abroad. They highlight the logistical impossibility of an invasion without refueling assets, critique the "America First" hypocrisy of leaders like Ted Cruz, and detail the Defend the Guard legislation passed in states like Arizona and Idaho. Ultimately, the discussion urges citizens to demand legislative action to prevent endless regime-change wars, asserting that true national defense requires keeping troops home and restoring constitutional checks on executive power. [Automatically generated summary]
Transcriber: nvidia/parakeet-tdt-0.6b-v2, sat-12l-sm, and large-v3-turbo
|
Time
Text
War Drums Beat for Regime Change00:02:45
Hey guys, thank you for tuning in to a special episode of Part of the Problem and a special day in time.
We have, I'm very excited for this episode.
We have returning to the show, Dan McKnight, who has really been doing heroic work over the last few years with Defend the Guard.
And there's really nobody who I could think of that would be better to talk to right now in this moment.
So, Mr. McKnight, how are you, sir?
Good, Davis.
Great to be here.
It's good to see you again.
It's been a while.
Yeah, yeah, it has.
And unfortunately, the warfare machine has not quite been defeated.
I want to get into some stuff with Defend the Guard and kind of the bigger picture of what this grassroots movement that I think is one of, if not the most important grassroot political movements in the country today.
But before we even get into that, I just want to ask you, as somebody who's served in the war on terrorism, what this last week or two has been like for you as you see the war drums beating for the next regime change war in the Middle East,
the seventh of Wesley Clark's seven countries in five years, and the kind of the striking similarity to the war drums beating in 2002 and 2003.
You know, I was listening to Fox News yesterday and a little bit earlier today, and I swear you could, they might have just been rerunning 2002 Fox News shows.
I'm not sure.
I noticed some of the new cast of characters.
So I was like, oh, this is definitely 2025.
But what's all of this been like from your perspective?
No, absolutely.
They had to get the old scripts off and dust them off, right?
And just hand them to the next blonde lady with a low-cut shirt and let her read them.
It's been an emotional rollercoaster, Dave.
We came into this season and I know you were there with us, excited about having a president who is promising no new wars.
And then we see a war break out overnight, but we didn't have anything to do with it.
Only to find out that maybe we had something to do with it, only to further find out that maybe we provided the weaponry and only to find out later that, oh, yeah, we're also shooting down rockets in defense of another nation, only to find out later that it was all a farce and we were just playing cover for them to be able to attack another country.
So it's been an emotional roller coaster.
Those that have served in the global war on terror, we know firsthand what regime change war looks like and what it looks like is a right rotten pile of garbage.
We haven't done one right ever.
We are terrible at this.
And since this is our seventh country, we're shooting the moon.
Wesley Clark had it right.
This is the clean sweep.
If we get Iran done and we screw this one up, we've now screwed up all seven of them on our list.
And we call that in my industry, we call that perfection.
And so if that's what we're going for, complete failure, we're almost there.
But we are disappointed.
The Flawed War Powers Act00:05:59
We are frustrated to see that America has been drug into another endless undeclared war, that Congress has abdicated their responsibility and only principled people like Tom Massey or Rand Paul or Marjorie Taylor Greene are standing up to do anything about it, only to have people like Mark Levin call them constitutional idiots.
It's been disappointing.
It's been frustrating.
But I'll tell you what, if we don't do something about this now, this will be our children's problem to handle or our grandchildren.
And that's why we don't fight in Washington, D.C. anymore.
We fight in the states where we have a real chance to actually affect.
Yeah, no, I completely understand that.
And we'll get into the state level stuff because, of course, that's what Defend the Guard is all about.
But it really is something for somebody like Mark Levin, whose argument is that he's a constitutional conservative to be making a constitutional argument.
Like President Trump just the other day was asked by reporters whether or not he's going to directly attack Iran.
And he said, I don't know.
That's nobody knows.
And that's my decision to make a loan.
Like, are you going to argue with me that that's what the framers intended for a president to sit there and say that is my decision alone, whether or not, I mean, they were so clear that the war-making powers would be vested in the Congress and idea, you know, in theory through the people.
And yet, we, you know, even according to Benjamin Netanyahu himself, who is the biggest liar on the face of the planet when it comes to when Iran will develop nuclear weapons, he's over 70 in terms of those predictions.
But even he said in his interview with Brett Bayer just a couple of days ago that he thinks they could be a year away from a nuclear weapon.
Now, this is not backed up by any of the experts.
This is not backed up by any of the intelligence.
But even according to Benjamin Netanyahu, there's a year, aka plenty of time to have a real debate about this, plenty of time to get a congressional declaration of war.
And there's not, again, except for I think the three you mentioned, and maybe there's one or two others.
But, you know, JD Vance and Matt Gates aren't in the Congress anymore.
So I don't know even who else it would be.
But we have all the time in the world to debate this in the Congress, to have a declaration of war.
And they're just like, no, we don't like doing it that way.
So we'll let Donald Trump decide.
It's so- You're absolutely right.
And you talked about Mark Levin, such a little petulant man.
He said that he ridiculed Tom Massey the other day.
He called him little Tommy because Tom said, Hey, president, you have the War Powers Act from 1973.
If you're going to do this, you have to report back to us.
And Mark Levin had the audacity to say that Tom Massey doesn't know the Constitution because the War Powers Act is not in the Constitution.
Well, Mr. Levin, you're right.
But you know what else isn't in the Constitution?
The president having the ability to take us to war without authority.
Also not in the Constitution.
We just glance over that part.
And so, you know, Levin, he's a petulant little man.
He wears one flag.
It's blue and white.
It's not red, white, and blue.
And it is frustrating.
But you're right.
There is very few people in Congress that will stand up not only to Mark Levin, but to the president as well.
And to your point, there are National Guard troops right now on their way being positioned in the Middle East.
There's over 30,000 troops in the Middle East.
Most of them, half of them, excuse me, I should be accurate, are from the National Guard of the states.
And if we have time to respond to a real threat, is the National Guard the force that we should be using to respond to that threat over time?
No, the president has the ability to respond in real time to real emergencies that are real threats and imminent right now.
Anything that's a year out, two years out, five years out, or in Bibi's case, 30 years out, because that's what he's been saying for the last 30 years is that they're three weeks away.
We should probably use the active duty military with the authority of the war powers and have the president respond back to Congress.
But either way, your point is right.
There's time and we should be doing everything we can to avoid another war and killing senseless people, whether they're Iranian or Israeli.
It doesn't matter.
People are people and we should have a human approach to this and we should be doing everything we can within the president's actual power to solve this issue.
All right, guys, let's take a moment and thank our sponsor for today's show, which is the Wellness Company.
What if the secret to more energy and sharper thinking is not more fuel, but better cellular engines?
Recharge from the Wellness Company is a doctor-formulated nutraceutical featuring a first-of-its-kind blend of methylene blue, NAD, and PQQ, a powerful trio that supports mitochondrial function, cognitive performance, and cellular resistance.
Methylene blue crosses the blood-brain barrier to enhance memory, focus, and executive function.
This unique formula helps reduce inflammation, combat oxidative stress, and support long-term cellular resilience by optimizing how your cells function.
It may also support healthy aging and contribute to a longer, more vibrant life.
And right now, you can get 10% off plus free shipping by going to TWC.health slash problem and using the promo code problem.
Fuel your body, sharpen your mind and recharge your life.
Once again, that's twc.health slash problem, promo code problem for 10% off.
All right, let's get back into the show.
Yeah, 100%.
So I did not, and I've heard a few, I've listened to a little bit of Mark Levin over the last few weeks, but you know, too much listening to Mark Levin is not bad for your health.
That'll put you into a seizure.
I did not know that he had actually made the argument that the War Powers Act is unconstitutional because that is true, but that's our argument.
That's not your argument.
The whole, in fact, if for people who want to look into it, Murray Rothbard had a great piece.
I'd have to search to find it, but maybe if you Google Murray Rothbard War Powers, you can find his piece on it.
But yeah, he laid out the, right, exactly.
The point is the War Powers Act actually lets the president have 90 days of undeclared war, which is against the Constitution, where the Congress has to declare it before the president can launch a war.
Anyway, that is wild that he actually made that argument.
Biblical Justifications and ISIS Lies00:11:48
Using our argument against us, he also uses the America first argument against the America first crowd, saying that defense of Israel and letting them off their leash, letting the junkyard dog loose is an America first approach because he says so.
Mark, you don't get to use, you don't get to use the Horton rule against us, right?
Scott Horton's rule is you attack the right from the right and the left from the left.
Well, Mark, you misunderstand the principle.
You're not moving us further to the right.
You're moving us further to the center, to the war party, using right arguments.
And it just shows you that that little angry man, it's time for him to sail off into the sunset.
And if he wants to live in the West Bank or someplace where he's truly aligned with the government, he should go do that because what he's living is not an America first life.
Yeah, 100%.
I couldn't think of anything that is less America first than launching an aggressive war of choice on behalf of a foreign country.
I mean, I think that's a pretty reasonable standard to say that is not what anybody ever meant by America first.
You know, one of the reasons why I always just loved the Defend the Guard concept and as it became like the movement that it has become is that it was something that was led by yourself, obviously at the top of the list there, but by combat vets.
And I remember back in, you know, I first got, you know, into all of these kind of topics and interested in politics and foreign policy and these things during the Ron Paul presidential campaigns.
And I remember when it first came out in 2008, the first report that like their financials were released, and it showed that Ron Paul got more money from active duty military members than all the other candidates combined.
There was something like 12 other candidates in the Republican primary, and they got more than Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.
It was more than all the other presidential candidates, active duty military, were sending their money to the only guy who was saying, let's end these wars right now.
And of course, this was in 2007, 2008.
This was only, you know, a few years, although they were very bloody years, but only a few years into the war on terrorism.
And so I just think it's like incredibly powerful to point out that these guys like Mark Levin and Ben Shapiro and Douglas Murray and the whole rest of them are all a bunch of chicken hawks.
They all advocate for all of these wars, but never served in any of them.
Meanwhile, the American people don't want another war.
And then probably most importantly, the actual people who you're asking to make this, you know, ultimate sacrifice, they don't want to go to war anymore.
And I mean, that to me, I remember when I saw this in 2008, I was like, well, that should be the end of the conversation right there.
I mean, why are we even continuing?
Like the boys who were asking to go do this don't want to go do it.
So sorry, unless you guys want to go do it for them.
You shouldn't get to fight an elective war against the will of the people who have to go fight it.
That's right.
And you know, here's the thing about the military.
We're not a conflicted bunch like a lot of people think we are.
We don't want to go to war.
But if we do need to, and it's in the actual defense of our country, there is nobody that will stand up first and go charging into battle with proper authority, with respect for our constitution, and willing to pay that price with everything up to and including the value of our own lives.
That's the military.
That's who we are.
We sign up for that.
What we don't sign up for is to go guard oil wells in Syria and die in Tower 22.
We don't sign up to shoot down drones over Israel that are being fired from Iran.
We don't sign up to fight all across the Horn of Africa in the Coco Wars.
You know, there's things going on around the world that the National Guard, the military in general, is being used for.
And we didn't sign up for that.
We signed up and swore an oath to defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.
And if you want to talk about domestic enemies right now today, if anybody here caught Ted Cruz's conversation about why he went to the United States Senate, it was to promote and defend Israel first.
That was his initial campaign promises.
I'm sorry, Ted Cruz, you might be from the right, but you're not right.
And we will defend the Constitution against those positions.
He is beheld or beholden to AIPAC.
He defends them as a non-foreign lobbying organization.
And things like that are what put America's military in danger because he is beholden to somebody else.
Some other countries will, and it's going to put the military in a place that they don't want to be and they shouldn't be.
And it's important that we recognize combat vets and people that have been there do recognize that when we're going into these wars, if we're going to do it, a couple of things need to happen.
Give us the right authority, give us a clear mission and a definition of success, and then get the hell out of the way and let us do it and come back home.
Don't make us stay there and police their streets and build water facilities and schools for children.
Let us go win the war that's defending America and let us come home.
That just doesn't happen anymore.
And we haven't done it since the last war that we actually won, World War II.
And the last thing I want to say on that is this.
When Ron Paul ran for president, I had just come home from Afghanistan and I was pissed.
I was angry at America.
I was angry at the mission.
I was angry at our generals.
I thought that what we were doing there was a waste because I'd seen us change missions from shock and awe to counterinsurgency to winning the hearts and minds to provincial reconstruction, all in a year and a half while I was there.
And I was pissed when I got home.
When I heard Ron Paul start talking about these things, I actually opened up my Constitution and started reading and following along.
And it wasn't just me.
It was an entire generation of pissed off vets.
The problem with today is all those pissed off vets are no longer the military.
We now have 18, 19, 20-year-old kids that have joined a military at a time when their entire life has been fought, has been alive, has been fighting these endless wars.
They don't know anything but war.
And so when you ask these young privates, these young buck sergeants today, do you want to be fighting these wars?
They're cockstrong and ready to say, yeah, let's go fight them.
Let's go kick ass and do our jobs as military.
What they don't understand is the context or the history behind it.
And the founding fathers never intended for us to be a permanent occupying force.
Yeah.
Amen.
You know, there was something where I just, I just felt like if we were a sane country, just not out of our minds, the statements that you just mentioned that Ted Cruz said, his reasons for wanting to be a senator, and then further than that, saying like his biblical justification that God commands us to support Israel, which is, I mean, just logically speaking, it's on the name,
it's on the level of me naming my son Jesus Christ and then insisting that, look, the Bible says that my son is your Lord and Savior.
It's like, no, you named him after the Bible saying that.
That wasn't what the Bible was talking about.
But I do not think it's that much to ask.
And I'm a libertarian.
I believe in like in freedom and natural rights.
If you believe that your God has commanded you to support the state of Israel, and if that's your major motivation in life, fine.
But you just get to be nowhere near any political power, let alone war-making decisions.
I mean, it's just too crazy.
I was thinking, I was on Piers Morgan the other day, and it was after we had booked this interview.
And this was another thing I was thinking about, like, what the perspective of this from a combat vet must be.
But at one point, you know, he said, I forget exactly how we got to this, but I said, you know, we're supporting all these regime changes.
I'm supposed to celebrate that Bashar al-Assad fell and now a member of Al-Qaeda has taken over the country.
And he said something like, he was like, well, you know, Nelson Mandela was on the terror list and then he ended up being a good leader and helping his country.
So we'll see where Jalani goes, you know, but I'm like, whoa, wait a minute.
You sold us this entire war on terrorism that it was that we were going to go take out Al-Qaeda, the guys who took down the towers in my home city.
And now you're telling me that in the latest phase of the war on terrorism, that actually, look, you got to make up with Al-Qaeda because Iran funds Hezbollah and that's a problem for Israel.
So we got to take out the regime that fights wars against Al-Qaeda, side with Al-Qaeda.
I mean, this is like, if you had said this, your point to the younger generation who wasn't alive for this time, but if you had said this to the American people, let alone the American military in like, you know, December of 2001 or 2002 or 2003 or something, that, oh, yeah, actually, we're going to have to forgive and forget with Al-Qaeda while we continue to fight these terror wars.
I just, I found it just a truly astounding ask of the American people.
And if you think about the guys that have been there who've lost friends, who've lost loved ones fighting Al-Qaeda, fighting ISIS.
And now you look in Syria where we've got American dollars supporting ISIS in one faction.
We've got American dollars supporting al-Assad in another faction.
We've got American dollars in intelligence supporting the rebels.
We've got American dollars and American boys shooting at American dollars and American boys, all in support of an unclear mission in a regime change war that's clearly going to end terribly.
And if my friends are killed by ISIS and now we are supporting ISIS in another country, not a different ISIS, not ISIS 2.0, literally the same damn ISIS, the same evil people, the same leaders are now running a country with our support in our money.
It's frustrating at a micro level, at a macro level.
It's treasonous, if you ask me.
And when Al-Assad fell in Syria in December, 48 to 53% of all the American boots on the ground were from the National Guard.
We weren't even there fighting a war.
We were using the National Guard to occupy a country that we had no business being in.
So this issue of Syria is very close to my heart.
And the last people that were injured, last American troops injured or killed in Afghanistan, or excuse me, in Syria, were National Guardsmen from North Carolina, Georgia, and Arizona.
It's the National Guard has become the easy occupying button for a runaway foreign policy.
And it's time that we put an end to it.
It's just ridiculous.
And one last thing about your biblical reference: the Old Testament did say, I will bless those that bless you, speaking to Abraham.
And that's been interpreted to say that they were talking about the nation of Israel.
Well, they weren't.
They were talking about the people of Israel at the time, a religious and an ethnic group.
But guess what?
If you're Christian, you believe that the Mosaic law of the Old Testament was fulfilled when Jesus Christ came to earth.
And the New Testament now says that Israel is more about the people that follow Jesus and have turned their lives over to Jesus.
No offense, Dave.
Have the people of Israel, are they followers of Jesus Christ?
It's a minority.
It's a very minority.
They think he was a great man in most of the country, maybe even a prophet or a rabbi or a leader.
But I wouldn't say they've given their life to Jesus Christ.
And so the New Testament is clear.
The evangelicals have got this story all backwards.
And I'm not a super religious guy.
It took me 10 minutes to find that reference in a Bible on my own.
I knew that the New Testament replaced the laws of the Old Testament, but I don't know how to make that argument because I don't wear a holy cloth around my neck.
Yeah.
Yeah.
No, I listen.
I agree with you on both counts.
I'm not a super religious person.
I mean, I believe in God, but I'm not like this book is right and this book is wrong kind of guy.
But I know enough to know that this argument is just completely ridiculous.
And this is an absurd propaganda interpretation of the Bible.
And particularly if you, particularly from a Christian point of view, where, yeah, like this was already answered when Jesus came.
That's kind of the whole point of Christianity.
So let's get into a little bit because obviously we've had you on before to explain this and we've talked about it on the show before.
But just for anybody new who doesn't know, just lay out what is the Defend the Guard movement all about?
Grassroots Vets Oppose Border Wars00:12:37
Absolutely.
The Defend the Guard is a bill that's been around for a few years.
It's a piece of state-based legislation.
We realized that we couldn't fight in Washington, D.C., because nobody in D.C. would give the combat veterans the time of day.
So we left the swamps and we decided we were going to fight in Boise, Idaho, and Bismarck and Phoenix and Tallahassee instead of in D.C.
And the Defend the Guard legislation says this essentially: that the National Guard from the state, whether it's Idaho or Arizona or Texas or wherever, shall not be released into federal service for the purpose of fighting in undeclared wars, period.
So, what it says is Congress has to declare war before the National Guard can be activated.
It's a fail-safe, it's a pause, a moment in time when the governor and the legislatures of the state get to flip a middle finger to the broken rule of law.
You're not taking our sons and daughters, our teachers, our mechanics, our tradesmen, our police officers who have volunteered to protect our state and our homeland to go fight in Qatar or Iraq or Syria or anywhere else in the Middle East or the East or Europe or Africa, unless Congress has done it with the right authority.
Then the National Guard can be activated.
This is constitutional.
All we're doing is redefining the terms of the Constitution clearly in today's lexicon because it's been abused and mistreated.
We're not rewriting the law at all.
We're clarifying it and giving the governor legislative prohibition ability to tell the federal government to beat, to beat it, pound sand.
You're not taking our boys to go fight in some undeclared war.
And we've got it in over 30 states introduced now.
We've passed the Senate in Idaho.
We've passed the Senate in Arizona three times.
We've passed the House of in New Hampshire and Virginia passed this year, 99 to zero.
Full bipartisan support in the House.
And we're moving forward in Arizona.
It's waiting to go to the governor's desk right now.
It's being stonewalled by a quote, America First Speaker of the House, Steve Montenegro, right now, who claims to be pro-America first, but he's holding the bill back.
It's already got the numbers.
We've already whipped the floor.
We know the vote count.
Senator Wendy Rogers has pushed it through the Senate three years in a row, and each year it gets the House, it's stonewalled.
And this year, it's Steve Montenegro.
So if you're in Arizona, go to defendtheguard.us, click on Arizona on the map, and there's a place there where you can tell Montenegro what you really think and feel about him.
Or even better yet, we've got about 150 volunteers that are in our organization that jump on the phones and they blow up people's phones in the state house.
And you want to talk about moving the needle?
150 volunteers calling five minutes apart to one person's office will change votes.
It happens all the time in real time.
If you want to be a part of that, defendtheguard.us forward slash phone bank and our great field director, Diego Rivera, he will train you and teach you how to be effective as an activist and how your five-minute lunch break, you can give us five minutes on your lunch break.
You can change United States foreign policy.
Yeah, 100%.
And it's like really, it's such an important time to do something like this because you really do.
And look, I don't, again, I don't want to overstate this because we don't know exactly what's happening here, but Donald Trump, just to be clear for everyone, to kind of put some urgency behind this, Donald Trump, First of all, I'll say this, okay?
I had some sources on the inside who told me about 48 hours before Israel struck Iran that Israel was going to strike Iran.
And they did.
So the sources were correct on that.
The same sources...
I was on the Atlantic tweet thread or something?
I was not on the Atlantic treat thread, but I know some people who know some people.
And then the same sources told me that on Monday night, America was going to join in on the war and America was going to attack Iran.
Now, Monday night comes and Donald Trump posts this evacuate Tehran tweet and then had his thing about unconditional surrender.
And so when I saw that, I went, oh, wow, this is the information I got was correct.
America's joining the war.
This is it.
It's happening right now.
That didn't end up happening.
And now it's being reported that Donald Trump is taking a week to two weeks to make his decision over whether the U.S. will formally, as if we're not already involved, but will formally enter the war.
And I'm just saying that it is a plausible thought here that the fact that so many people with tremendous influence like spoke out against this war.
And I'm not talking about me.
I'm talking about Steve Bannon and Tucker Carlson and Charlie Kirk and Marjorie Taylor Greene.
And as you mentioned, Thomas Massey and Rand Paul and Alex Jones and Candace Owens and I'm sorry.
Matt Gates.
Oh, yeah, Matt Gates was phenomenal on this.
And I'm probably missing a few others.
Charlie Kirk was actually very good on this.
And so when you put all of those guys together, you're talking about a huge percentage of the influential people in the MAGA world in Trump's own base.
And what that does is it lets Donald Trump know that this is going to be incredibly politically costly for him to do this.
This might be the thing that has prevented this strike from happening already.
And if they are aware that there is a grassroots movement of combat vets who are dead set against being used in this way, like I'm just saying, making these phone calls right now, you really cannot overstate how important it is.
This could be the difference between another catastrophic regime change war and avoiding one.
Look, if they know that they, they're like the National Guard themselves is just does not want to be used, or even if there are legislative victories and can't be used in this way, again, this could be the difference.
These are politicians we're talking about after all.
They respond to political incentives.
Now, of course, they might respond to big money incentives even more, but if the political incentive is strong enough, you can move these things.
As I'm sure you remember well, Barack Obama announced that we were going into Syria to do a regime change war there.
And it was the pressure from active duty military members, this massive internet campaign of active duty military guys saying, I will not go die for al-Qaeda in fighting for al-Qaeda in Syria that ultimately stopped him from doing that.
Now, look, he ultimately got the regime change anyway.
We fought a dirty war there, but still that was a heck of a lot better than having another Iraq or Afghanistan on our hands.
And so just saying, like, look, I'm not trying to, I'm not trying to be like pie in the sky here and pretend that the people really have all of the power or something like that.
But there is some degree of power that the people have.
And this is the time to exercise it.
Like no better, no more important time than this.
That's right.
And if you look at this, where society is at today, first, I want to actually address that last point.
The power is with the people.
We just have to take it back.
All right.
It's there.
It's ours.
We have given all the authority to Congress, who has then abdicated and given it away to the president.
The only way we're going to fix that is if we take it back.
And the only way we take it back is by taking action.
So you look in today's society right now.
We've got the no kings riots in thousands of cities across the country, the National Guard being deployed to the border for border security, being called into the streets of LA.
And then you look in Arizona where the National Guard, where the governor there signed a treaty with the Sultan of Oman to defend their border against Yemen.
So the National Guard is being split all over the world, not only fighting in endless wars, but also protecting other nations against potential enemies.
They're protecting our own southern border.
They're enforcing the rule of law, possibly violating the posse comitatus.
I don't think so, but some people do.
That was my best Donald Trump impersonation.
I don't think that, but others do.
So what better time was there to use the National Guard as the cudgel to force a correction?
Right now, the National Guard is the only constitutional mechanism that we have to defend the homeland, to enforce the rule of law, to keep these rioters off the streets and throwing bricks and cars off of overpasses and burning down buildings and dumpsters and just creating chaos.
The National Guard is our mechanism.
They should be home to repel an invasion, to put down an insurrection, to enforce the laws of the union.
That's what it says in the Constitution.
You know what it doesn't say?
Fighting undeclared wars overseas.
It doesn't say it at all.
The National Guard is here to defend America in our home interests.
And when you talk about the movement of active duty military being the ones that pulled the rug from underneath President Obama, it's exactly right.
That campaign caught fire and it was wild how fast it happened.
And we're doing the same thing right now.
We're using veterans with skin in the game, skin in the game, and maybe even a limb lost to tell their stories and say, it is no longer my obligation to fight your undeclared and endless wars.
And it won't be my children's or my grandchildren's.
Legacy members of the military, families that have served for generations, are backing out and saying no more, not until we get this fixed.
And it's a sad state of affairs when people in your country who have proudly served the military in the past are waking up to recognize that they're nothing more than a pawn in the defense military contractors puppet show.
No longer.
It's time to put an end to it.
And the only way we can do it is through the Defend the Guard movement.
And there's only one opportunity left this year, and it's in Arizona.
If it doesn't happen in Arizona this year, it doesn't happen anywhere until next January at the earliest.
And you want to talk about the ground support.
We got Defend the Guard on the ballot in Texas in the Republican primary, asking Republican voters what they thought of the Defend the Guard movement.
And it passed with 83% support.
It outperformed Donald Trump.
It got 60,000 more votes than Donald Trump.
Funny part about it is, Dave, the no votes on Defend the Guard in Texas matched almost identically the same number of votes that Nikki Haley got for president on the same ballot.
So you want to talk about where the political alignment, where the separation is.
The MAGA movement is anti-war.
We are anti-war until it's time to go to war.
And then when it's time to go to war, we will do it constitutionally.
And then we're going to go in and we're going to defend America and we're going to kick ass and come home.
Yeah, it's one of the, it's one of the great tragedies of our time, of my lifetime, is that you have this.
And again, I'm not trying to paint like with a broad brush.
Like obviously, like there are, there are troubled people who go into the military and there are people who go into the military, you know, for maybe not the best intentions, but there are so many of these young men who go into the military with the noblest of intentions, with the idea that like I would put my life on the line to make sure that like you and your little sister and your mother and your daughter are protected and don't have to, you know, like, and man, if there was a time when you had to do that and someone really threatened our country,
those brave young men are what you need for your society to survive.
And throughout all of human history, that's how societies only survive if they have these brave young men who are willing to risk it all in order to protect their societies.
And to watch that be manipulated, you know, for the interests of foreign countries and bankers and weapons manufacturers and watch this, this like, it's something out of like a Greek tragedy to watch the most noblest of instincts in humans be manipulated for these like most evil of ends.
It's just, man, there is a place in hell for the people who are.
The greatest warrior, one of the greatest warriors ever to serve in the American military wrote a little pamphlet, right?
War is a racket.
Smedley Butler, two-time military.
I got it right here on my shelf.
Yep, it's right here.
In fact, I've got a little statue back here next to Thomas Aquinas of Smedley Butler.
He's an absolute hero of mine.
But you talk about the honor of people that joined the military willing to stand up for this almost altruistic viewpoint that I'm going to defend America, my mom, your sister, all of it.
I'm going to do it.
It's going to be on my shoulders.
I was that same guy.
In 2005, when we were getting ready to go to Afghanistan, me and seven of my buddies, we were in Fort Hood, Texas, training, getting ready to go.
Well, Fort Hood happens to be just a couple hour drive from Crawford, Texas.
And what's in Crawford, Texas, you ask?
President George W. Bush's ranch.
We were so bought into the mission.
Seven of us bought a used van for $1,500, snuck off base on a weekend Liberty Pass, and we drove to Crawford, Texas to go tell President Bush we were going to win his war for him.
That's how Pollyanna we were.
That's how altruistic we were.
We got to the gate and of course, Secret Service stops us at the gate.
But they radioed back to that house and asked him to come outside and wave at us.
And he did.
You couldn't see the door, but they told us he waved and God, we were ready to go.
I was ready to go catch a bullet for that man.
And then I got there and realized nobody knew what we were doing.
And then a few years later, I read the Afghanistan papers where he didn't even know who the commanding general in Afghanistan was because if he was busy jerking off his dad and dealing with Iraq, he'd taken his eyes off the prize.
So you talk about that honor.
A lot of young military men are, they buy into the mission.
They buy into the red, white, and blue and the apple pie and baseball and spreading democracy.
Spreading Unbelievable Lies to the Military00:15:41
And we believe it.
And then at the end of your career, you look back and you're like, we didn't do any of it.
We didn't do any of it.
We got played.
And the only way to restore that honor is to get rid of these people like Lindsey Graham, who, by the way, who has a bronze star from combat, even though he was a lawyer in the Air Force.
I don't know how he got a bronze star for valor and combat.
This is what happened to the military.
Everybody gets to come home with a chest full of ribbons so that they can justify the purity of the mission that they went on.
And we've just got to stop it.
We've got to get back to being warriors.
And every war that America has ever won has been on the backs of corn-fed Midwestern men, not pansies from inner cities, not some weird cultural society woke.
I can't even call it what I want.
It's been on the back of corn-fed men.
And we've got to get back to that again once.
And the only way to do that is to get rid of some of the culture problems we have that start in Washington, D.C.
Yeah, no, that's that's 100% right.
And it's, it's funny as like, um, as the, you know, like, look, obviously over the last year, there's been kind of like a turn in the culture wars and some people feel like, you know, the woke insanity is receding a little bit.
But like, if you're wondering even why it rose up so much to begin with, it's like, well, maybe, I don't know, maybe it's because we took all of our brave young men and threw them in the in this meat grinder of these forever catastrophe wars that don't aren't even, you know, the thing is like the lies, like it's just so unbelievable.
The way they just watching it over the last the last week particularly, but the way they just, it's like, it really does bring me back to 2002, 2003, because they'll say these things that are like, okay, it's not even technically a lie, but you said it in such a misleading way.
Like I had someone arguing with me online that they go, the phrase was, they said, I think that you might be right that Iran doesn't have nuclear weapons, but I think it's inevitable that they eventually will.
And you're like, wait, it's inevitable that every nation eventually will have nuclear weapons in this non-falsifiable counterfactual.
But wait, hold on.
What's the actual evidence right now?
Oh, so like he technically didn't say a lie, but it's just like so misleading.
And you're like, wait, but do they have nuclear weapons right now?
Oh, all of the intelligence says they do not, and that they're not pursuing them.
Oh, okay.
So sorry, bullshit lie off the table.
And it's just, there's something like, and I think this is something that, you know, look, even for somebody like me who's very anti-war and talks about this stuff all the time, it's like hearing you tell this story about you and your buddies being gung-ho and going to just to want to get a wave from the president, being willing to put your lives on the line to go win this war for him.
And then going through all of this, you just, you know, it's a reminder that like these lies, you know, lies are lies and everybody tells some lies.
And obviously in politics, there's lies, you know, that are told all the time.
But it's like, you're like intentionally spreading lies that are going to get other people killed, that are going to get other people to kill other people, to do horrific things to other people that they otherwise would have no problem with.
You're going to leave, you know, you're leaving little three-year-old boys and girls without dads or with a dad who's got a limb blown off.
I mean, this is just like, it's so consequential, these lies.
And the way people throw them out so flippantly without really like thinking about the weight of what the ramifications of this policy are going to be.
And then the way they talk about it, like it's all going to be so easy.
You know, it's, we'll be greeted as liberators again.
It's like they seem to have like no interest in even attempting to understand the actual dynamics on the ground of what doing something like this is going to look like.
That's right.
And that flippant comment you made is so true.
When we talk, the biggest objection we get from the military industrial complex or the neocon war hawks for Defend the Guard is that when people sign up for the military, they want to go to war.
They know what they're getting into.
That is so flippant coming from somebody that sits behind a desk with a fancy tie.
Look, nobody wants to go to war.
And if they do, we probably wouldn't want them in the military.
That's not who we want.
And also, we forget this.
We put civilians in control of the military for a purpose in this country to keep young, testosterone-driven young men from marching headlong into every conflict they could find.
Because we already do that on the weekends when we go to the bars, when we're in the military, you go looking for a fight because that's what we do.
You don't want a young 19, 20, 21-year-old with not a fully developed brain making decisions about whether or not they want to go to war and then letting them do it just because, right?
We have to be restrained.
And that's why we have people in charge of the military.
And we look now to the leadership of the military.
You can debate about his efficacy, but you look at Pete Hegsteth right now.
He is preaching our song.
And guess what's happened to him in the last two weeks regarding Israel and Iran?
Have you heard from him?
He's kind of been silenced.
He's been put in the corner.
Pete Hegsteth is a big supporter of Defend the Guard.
He actually came out and endorsed it last January.
And he, I think he understands the concept.
I think he might be one of the last few anti-war voices that's still inside the administration.
Tulsi Gabbard has been backbenched also.
We haven't heard from her in quite some time.
By the way, I'm going to say this out loud and proud.
Tulsi Gabber might be one of the greatest men in the military.
Is that offensive?
I don't know, but she's one of the greatest warriors I know because she fights for principles over mission adherence to some politician.
But there are people in the administration that still have the presidency here.
You talk about all the influencers, Charlie Kirk and Bannon and Tucker Carlson, Jack Pisobic, who is also commentator.
I should have mentioned him.
Yeah.
They're some of the greatest voices.
And if you look back at their influence over the 2024 election, President Trump does not get elected without those groups.
Without Charlie Kirk and Turning Point USA, without bringing our troops home in the Defend the Guard movement, without Jack Bisobic, without Tucker Carlson, he doesn't win.
And so he should be listening to those people.
In this one or two week pause, I'll take it.
I'll take it.
And we're going to continue doing what we've been doing.
We've been threading this needle.
Mr. President, use every ounce of diplomacy you have.
And if you make the decision to go to war, we beg you, we beg you, go to Congress, go to Congress and make them put their name on the line.
Go to war with the informed consent of every congressional district in America before you take that action.
The president does have the ability to respond to a threat.
He should and can defend America.
But Iran does not have a missile that can barely reach the far side of Israel.
They definitely don't have one that's going to reach all the way across the Pacific or the Atlantic, whichever direction you decide to go.
Or if the earth is flat, I guess it would be to the left.
They don't have one of those missiles.
So our imminent threat to America is only because we have troops positioned surrounding them and that we've attacked every one of their neighbors and relentlessly beat them back into the third world.
Yeah, it's really something.
You know, I was saying it's funny.
And I love the way you put it because there's no mistaking this because there was, I remember particularly before Ron Paul.
And then of course, once Donald Trump started taking on some of these anti-war talking points, this kind of receded.
But for years, it would kind of be like if you were to like make an argument like this, it's the attack would be like, oh, so you're blaming America.
You're on the side of Iran rather than being on the side of America, which is pretty impossible to do when you're talking to somebody who actually voluntarily signed up and risked their own life to go defend the United States of America.
I mean, they might still try like Larry Elder was the black face of white supremacy or something like that, but it does make it, it makes it a tougher sell for sure.
And there is something where, you know, again, I've tried to kind of drive this point home, but so much will be made of the, you know, Iran chants death to America.
And it's like, oh, well, I mean, we, they chant, do they?
Well, then I mean, I guess we have to go see about these chants.
And look, I am just saying, I am an American.
My only loyalty is to the United States of America.
I could care less about the Iranian government.
Like I'm a Jewish libertarian.
What do I have in common with the mullahs?
You know what I mean?
Like it's like, they're not my people.
But at the same time, I also learned the lesson of Frederick Bastia that there is a difference between your society and your government, which also could be a lesson of the Declaration of Independence.
Like governments are just something the people create to protect rights.
They're not like gods or kings, and they're not the same as our society.
I'm loyal to America.
I'm not loyal to the American government.
And if you're going to tell me that the part of the justification here is that they've made threats, it's like, well, then I just demand we be consistent and objective and go, but what about the threats that we've made toward Iran?
We put them on the axis of evil after 9-11, even though they had nothing to do with 9-11.
We then invaded and destroyed the two neighboring countries that touch it.
So that might seem like kind of a threat to them.
Maybe we should all like, sure, if you want to say threats are bad, okay, yes, that's true.
It's not good when people make these threats willy-nilly.
It's, you know, okay.
It's not good, not good for de-escalation, which always should be the goal.
But let's put this in perspective.
How about the threats America's made to Iran?
How about the threats Israel's made to Iran?
We're supposed to like sit here and while all of the most powerful governments in the world are threatening the very existence of this country, I'm to judge them for if they have some bombastic language coming back.
It just seems crazy.
No, absolutely.
And if you just to go to the north a little bit to the Ukraine conflict, we think about the warning that we got that Niet means Niet, right?
Not one inch further to the east.
If we push NATO into Russia, Russia will respond.
We've known it since the 90s, right?
So we do have some responsibility for the reaction that we receive from other people.
If we choose hostility or if we choose force and force is thrust upon us, that's what's going to happen.
That's just the, that's the byproduct of our actions.
And it's so, it's treated as so anti-American to question our own motives.
It's, I like to always think about it in my own context.
If Ukraine, Russia, China, Iran, whoever, were to invade Mexico, Canada, Cuba, oh my God, that actually happened, and put missiles on our borders, what would we do in response as Americans?
Well, let's push that even further.
What if China built a military base deep inside of Nevada?
What would we do as I live in Idaho?
That's right to my south.
What would I do?
Should I be down there with my hunting rifle, right?
You want to talk about a war?
America would be an insurgency.
We would be the insurgents fighting against the occupying force.
Now, I do believe that we have some greater honor.
America is the greatest country on the face of the earth, the greatest superpower.
We do have, I believe, a divinely inspired constitution.
I think our government is corrupt as they come, but our constitution is divinely inspired.
We should be demonstrating that might and that superiority and that moral high ground inside of our country.
Instead of sending people to go fight in Iran or defend Israel's right to fight against Iran or Ukraine or the Congo, how about we fight to keep people off our home, our streets at home?
We fight to spend our money to end homelessness and drug addiction and violence and crime and gangs and all the other stuff that our country is doing wrong.
Tucker talked about this with Ted Cruz the other day.
What have you ever said about the homeless person you stepped over getting off of Union Station on your walk to work in Washington, D.C.?
How about you do something about that?
That is, D.C. is something that the Congress actually controls.
They could actually fix that problem in D.C., but they're so busy focusing on all the other countries around the world and flexing our might and spending our cash that they can't even do the one simple thing, make the walk from Union Station to Capitol Hill safe.
Seems like a really small lift.
Yeah, 100%.
I mean, look, I subscribe to like, I guess, my own version of a just war theory.
And I think wars of choice are immoral.
And I don't think you should ever get into one.
I think it's kind of obvious to me, just as like the most basic human moral calculation that if you're going to ever launch a war, you only do it when you absolutely need to do it.
And there is no other option.
But let's just say that there is a time where you would opt to launch a war of choice.
Like, okay, let's say I were to concede that point.
Well, like when your country is $37 trillion in debt and you got 100,000 drug overdoses a year and we've had maybe 10 million illegal immigrants come into our country in the last four or five years and have the worst political and tribal and racial and divisions of my lifetime.
That certainly wouldn't be the time that you launched a war of choice.
You know, that's a time when you pay attention to some of the problems you got at home.
So I completely agree with that.
Hey, I wanted to ask you about this before we're done, because I did think another one of the elements, which again is very consistent with all the war propaganda of the last 25 years, but one of the elements that I've found truly unbelievable, I find it unbelievable that the talking point is weapons of mass destruction 2.0.
That's pretty unbelievable.
But the other one that might even be more outrageous is that it's that nation building here will be or regime change will be easy here.
And that, you know, that this won't require U.S. troops on the ground and that the people of Iran hate their government and therefore they will embrace, I guess this hasn't formally been proposed, but certainly implied that the son of the Shah will be, we're now, Dan, we're now making the world safe for monarchy.
Make it again.
Right, right.
Maybe, maybe spreading monarchy will work out that.
And it's really funny that I've actually heard a few of the hawks refer to him as the rightful leader of Afghanistan.
So we, because he's the son of the person who the CIA put in power in 1953.
So we are now hereditary monarchists, evidently.
But as somebody who was, okay, look, Afghanistan is a different country than Iran.
I'm not saying that there aren't different dynamics, but they are their next door neighbor.
And as somebody who was a part of like a nation building effort in Afghanistan, what do you think about this when you hear people going like, oh, the logistics of this will be no problem at all?
This regime falls, a real great guy will take over and then there'll be more harmony in the region.
What do you think?
No, look, first of all.
We're talking about anywhere between 90 and 100 million people in Iran.
It's not Afghanistan.
It's not Iraq.
It's more than double the size of those countries.
Also, if the war is launched from the Gulf or from Israel, there's not a single fighter or bomber that can make it there and back in a trip.
So guess what happens now?
Now the National Guard, which owns most of the air refueling mission for the United States military, is deploying all their KC-135s over there right now to occupy the skies and provide mobile gas stations.
So the logistics of us to fight a war in Iran are infinitely different.
We do not have a beachfront in Iran.
We would be fighting from several thousand miles away and the sorties would be just way more complicated.
Next, we also know this.
There has never been a war that's been won, peace that has been surrendered or anything without boots on the ground.
So whose boots are they going to be and where are they going to come from?
Are we going to fight from Afghanistan as our base?
I don't know.
Then you're going to fight from, you're going to be fighting people from two directions.
Are we going to be fighting from Iraq?
I don't think so because Iran, their regime and Hezbollah and all of their proxies are in Iraq right now running that country.
Where are we going to fight this war from?
What's our beachhead?
And there was a report out just a couple of weeks ago.
Rising Civil Conflict Over Power00:08:04
I was just talking to Doug McGregor about this the other day.
There's a Marine Corps general that has said the Marine Corps is no longer capable of fighting as an amphibious mobile warfare unit.
They no longer have the capacity to fight from the sea onto land.
It's not their mission anymore.
So what's the war going to look like and where's it going to come from?
Another great military strategist that I know, he's a representative in the Idaho legislature now.
He was a 38-year naval aviator.
He was the longest serving Navy pilot in U.S. history.
He was the opposition force for the United States military.
He played China.
He played Russia in all the war games against the United States and he's undefeated.
He's never been beaten by the United States.
He said that our carrier groups, if we actually launched a war in Tyran and if China were to join that war, our carrier groups and our modern F-35s and F-22s would be gone and useless by the end of the first day, the first day.
And he knows because he's the strategist that does it.
And so what would the war look like?
I don't know.
Would it be like horseback in Afghanistan when the war first started?
I don't know.
Would it be trying to revive the M1 Abram tanks that we have taken out of our inventory?
Would we be driving across the Silk Road to try and get into Iran from some safe place?
You tell me.
I'm sure there's a plan in the Pentagon somewhere.
I'm sure it makes sense because some young butter bar lieutenant probably kissed some colonel's ass to get it done with a proper PowerPoint presentation.
I don't know what it looks like, but it would not be near what it was in Iraq when we invaded from Kuwait, and it wouldn't be what it was in Afghanistan when we had a foothold in the north with Mazar Sharif.
Yeah.
Yeah.
So, you know, in other words, the risks of this war just make the risks of all the previous terror wars pale in comparison.
And I think that's just, I think that's undeniable.
Yeah.
And, you know, one of the points that a lot of the hawks would make when they were supporting the U.S. backing Ukraine all the way.
And this was one true point that they would make, which I've conceded this in a few different debates that I've done on the topic.
But they would say that because like there were these dynamics in Ukraine pre Putin's invasion where you had people to the east of that country who were much higher percentage ethnic Russians and much higher percentage had favorable views toward Russia,
whereas the people in the west of the country were more ethnically Ukrainian and were more favorable toward like European being kind of more, let's just say more in corporation with Europe, broadly speaking.
And they said that after Vladimir Putin launched the war, this dynamic has changed a lot and that actually now the percentage of the country who are against Putin is higher than it was before.
And this is true.
People don't tend to like to be invaded, even if they were kind of sympathetic to you.
Before that, you come in there, you start dropping bombs, people start dying, and they start to develop a hatred for you.
And it's just interesting that people will say, because I hear this with Iran, where they go, look, the people really hate their government.
And you're like, listen, I am sure that is true.
There's lots of people in this country who hate their government.
There's lots of people in just about every country who hate their government.
And I'm sure that is true in the case of Iran.
But that was also true in Saddam Hussein's Iraq.
In fact, the overwhelming majority of the country were Shiites.
They didn't love Saddam Hussein.
But the point is you're going to go in there.
You're going to start dropping bombs on people.
You're going to start killing people.
And the fact that they didn't like their previous government doesn't mean that Thomas Jefferson is going to rise to power.
You know, it might mean, as it did in Iraq, that there's going to be an eight-year civil war where a million people are going to die.
And so the idea that these hawks, after that just people, after witnessing all of these catastrophes, could look at this and still think that like, just because there's like, there's some pictures in the 70s of women wearing mini skirts in Tehran, or just because there's some people who don't very much like their own repressive government, that they're for, and this is part of the reason why it was so powerful, even more so than the population question, although that one's very important too.
When Tucker asked Ted Cruz about the ethnic mix of the country and he just has no clue, you're like, so you don't even know who would potentially be fighting here for power in a civil war.
You don't even know like what the ethnic tensions or tribal hatreds are in this country.
And then, you know, to the point that you had mentioned earlier that, you know, again, if we're just gaming out all these possibilities here, you know, if you have a refugee crisis, as you did in Iraq and in Syria and in Libya, if you have a refugee crisis like that, well, this is a country of 90 million people.
So you're looking at the potential of having a much bigger, much more destabilizing migrant crisis, which all the right-wingers in Europe have essentially risen in prominence against, opposing the, you know, the mass migration into Europe.
Well, it was all caused by destabilizing this region.
And now we're flirting again for no reason with the biggest one yet.
No, absolutely.
And I don't remember who I heard the other day that was talking about that the Kurds would rise and take over Iran, which is about the most insane thing you can imagine.
Yeah, like Turkey, the neighbor to the west is going to allow the Kurds to take over Iran, create this Kurdish belt that stretches all across the Middle East.
Look, would I be okay with that?
That's not my business.
I don't know.
The Kurds were great warriors with us in Iraq.
But that's not really logical for them to rise up.
Dave, you talk about Iran going into a civil war if we invade because some unknown leader may try to rise.
There would be a vacuum.
There would be a conflict for power.
And you say that because of experience, but it's not like you've actually been there.
It's not like you actually have experienced that type of thing.
And so your opinion to some people, especially the Warhawks, is unfounded and unjust.
But to me, I find it completely compelling.
Our history, our experience, our pattern is a direct evidence of what would happen again if we do the same thing.
Because when you do the same thing over and over and again, you're going to get the same damn results.
And if we destabilize another country, another regime change war, and we do it on the back of our CIA and our military and our proxies fighting, we're going to get the exact same result.
There will be a conflict and the strongest bad guy will rise to power because that's what happens when you destabilize a country.
The strongest bad guy rises always.
Dan, I think you are doing the most important work in the country and I couldn't imagine having a better damn messenger doing it than you.
So thank you for what you're doing.
Thank you for taking the time.
Let everybody know where they can go to support you and support Defend the Guard.
Yep.
If you go on X, it's at troopshome US.
If you go to defendtheGuard.us, you can click on your state and see what's happening there.
And if you'll actually do this one thing, if you go to defendtheguard.us and click on any state, sign the petition that you support the National Guard being used to put down these no-king protests the proper way with the proper authority, because that will help keep them home from these endless wars as well.
And when it comes time, if you've got five minutes on your lunch break once a week, go to defendtheguard.us forward slash phone bank and sign up.
And Diego, our great field director, will train you and then get on our mail list.
And Hunter Dorenzes, our communications director, who is, we call him our autistic typewriter.
He is brilliant at communication.
He keeps us on point.
He does not let us venture off into anything that I would want to talk about.
We are laser focused on our mission and Hunter's the reason for that.
Our organization is lean.
That's it.
I've got three other consultants and the three of us.
And we are fighting in 30 states.
So if you think one person can't make a change, you're damn wrong.
Join us and help us with the fight.
Absolutely.
And if it means anything to anyone, I give you my highest possible level of endorsement for the entire project.
It's the most important project in America today.
Thank you so much, Dan McKnight, for taking the time.