Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly, and Marco Rubio dissect Iran's nuclear threat, noting 460 kilograms of 60% enriched uranium could yield 11 bombs within days. They assert military operations successfully neutralized Iranian naval and missile assets while warning that European NATO allies have weakened through socialism and radicalism. With Paris and London within range of Iranian missiles, the trio argues dismantling Tehran's capabilities is essential for global safety, even as diplomatic talks continue with remaining leadership tiers. [Automatically generated summary]
Gonna play our guitars and sing you a country song.
We'll all be flying higher than a jet liner.
And if you want a little bang in your yin-yang, come along.
Throughout our meetings.
With the Iranians, we heard the following from them.
The Iranians have the inalienable right to enrich.
Go ahead, delegate.
Yes, hello.
I was standing here with my gender equity card before you called on the previous speaker.
Can't you see?
None of us are free.
No, no, no.
Still all of us are free.
Freedom is back in style.
Welcome to the revolution.
Yeah, we're coming to your city.
Gonna play our guitars and sing you a country song.
Sean Hannity.
The new Sean Hannity Show.
More behind-the-scenes information on breaking news.
inspired solutions for America.
All right, Leonard Skinner, Simple Man.
That can only mean one thing on this radio program.
The End of NATO00:13:14
That is all things self proclaimed, Simple Man.
That means all things Bill O'Reilly, all things Bill O'Reilly.
Oh, you can find that at billoriley.com, Mr. O'Reilly, sir.
Glad you're with us.
How are you?
Thanks for having me.
I have been saying that this conflict in Iran is going to come to a swift end.
And I come to this conclusion, Bill, because for a couple of reasons.
One, I know Donald Trump.
Two, I listen to what he has to say.
Three, I look at what they've been able to accomplish.
I listened, I had Secretary of State Marco Rubio on last night.
We went into great detail.
And where we are today is we really have two remaining Issues that have to be dealt with.
I'm not saying any of them are simple.
I think all military efforts are complicated.
I think they're all dangerous.
We always pray for our troops, but I think it was a necessity.
And what precipitated the president going in is something you and I discussed last week, and that is the 60% enriched uranium that could be further enriched to 90% in 7 to 12 days.
And the fact that they brag that they have 460 kilograms, enough for 11 nuclear weapons.
And we learned in this conflict.
That their ballistic missile range is far longer than the world had estimated, which means that their ballistic missiles currently, without any improvement, could reach Paris and London.
That would be an existential threat to the entire world.
So the president has said today that they want a ceasefire.
Apparently, these negotiations are going well.
We will either have in the next two weeks a negotiated settlement or the president will have to remove the 60% enriched uranium by force.
And that's going to be up to the Iranians.
The second part of it is the Straight of Hormuz, which we'll get to separately.
What say you, Mr. O'Reilly, sir?
Well, if you know President Trump, he doesn't give major addresses if he's got bad news.
So that's number one.
So you figure he's got something on his mind tonight that's going to be positive for his administration and the country.
We don't know what that is yet.
It might be just as great as hits.
I don't know.
But it's not going to be a negative.
It's not going to be like, oh, this is harder than we thought it was going to be, or we're not doing well in this area.
Not going to be that.
By the way, Bill, by any objective measure, can any intelligent person.
Make that point.
If we look at past military efforts and conflicts that we have had, look at, for example, World War II slamming the beaches of Normandy D Day and how difficult that mission was at that time and how many American lives were lost that day.
And every loss of life is a casualty.
That's our national treasure.
However, to wipe out their Navy and their ballistic missiles and their drone system, most of it, not all of it, we can't find every bit of it.
But to have such a successful intelligence military effort with limited casualties like this is unprecedented.
You would agree with that?
I would agree with it, but with a caveat.
So, hearts and minds has to be part of any war equation.
And there are a lot of people who don't want to believe that this is a successful operation, they don't want to believe it.
People believe what they want to believe.
And these people, and you saw them on the King's thing over the weekend.
They don't want to believe it, so they're not going to believe it.
And you can present them with all kinds of evidence.
But you see it.
You're a historian.
There's never been any level of military success like this in the history of warfare with as few casualties, correct?
Yes.
After I interviewed Lindsey Graham, and I gave him my usual hard time to back up what he was saying, I was convinced that the Muellers.
Had the capacity to use nuclear weapons in a very short period of time.
Now, I didn't want to believe that.
That's my journalistic training.
I went over it for an hour with Senator Graham.
But I also understand that Putin's the big winner here, not the United States, because NATO is finished, finished as an alliance.
And it's a very simple equation.
You're the president.
And all you want from the NATO European countries is some cooperation in helping the United States and Israel dismantle the nukes.
That's all you're asking for.
And it's easy.
We're doing all the heavy lift here.
All they need to do is let us land or maybe give us some intel or maybe throw in on Hormuz a little bit, and they won't do it.
You don't have an alliance.
So Putin's sitting back there going, this is great.
I love this.
Let me tell you where I think you're wrong in your analysis.
You're right about Putin is loving it.
I will concede that point.
I think you're dead on accurate.
I think you're also right in your observation that NATO is finished and we spend nearly a trillion dollars a year.
We pay two thirds of the bill for NATO anyway.
And we have the continent of Europe and individual countries.
They have been in a precipitous decline now going on for a couple of decades.
They've neglected defense.
They've embraced socialism, climate alarmism.
And they.
Have also allowed unfettered illegal immigration without assimilation, resulting in Sharia courts and no go zones.
Okay, so the real loser is NATO.
Not the United States, Bill, because we don't need NATO.
We will find bases to land our planes moving forward at a far lower cost point than we're currently paying.
We're not going to lose at all.
The biggest loser in that battle is Europe.
They will be the big, they have now totally put the final nail in their coffin, as far as I'm concerned.
Here's where I disagree with you.
So I expect Putin to ramp up in Ukraine.
And that's not good for the United States or Europe.
It's not good for any of the world.
And Putin is now emboldened.
So, hello, Latvia.
Hello, Baltic states.
And we're going to have to pay a lot of money, taxpayer money, to blunt Putin.
And we're not going to have the allies that we used to have.
And the reason this is all happening in Europe is because of socialism.
And Spain is the best example.
Spain is now a socialist country.
They don't admire the United States.
They don't even like us.
I'll never go to Spain again, Hannity.
I don't know whether you've ever been.
Beautiful country.
I haven't been to Spain, but I've been to France and I've been to Great Britain, and those countries are gone.
Europe as a continent is gone, Bill.
It's over.
I don't think they can recover.
I do not believe they have so neglected defense, they have so embraced their radicalism, their unfettered immigration.
Did you ever think you'd have nearly 100 Sharia courts in Great Britain, Bill O'Reilly?
No, you did not.
And that's the reason they're not cooperating, because they fear they being the leadership of these individual countries.
They fear terrorism and the strength of the Muslim community, which is considerable.
And that's why they're not helping out.
Because all you've got to do is say, listen, if you have a nuclear threat at your doorstep, which they certainly do, and you don't care about that, then either you're emotionally disturbed.
Or there's something else, and the something else is they don't want their soccer games blown up.
They are operating out of fear.
But the United States needs allies, and Japan is now proving that in vexing China.
Japan's really stepped up there, and it helps us to have them, but we're not going to have them for at least the next two and a half years.
Let me, and I know you spoke to Lindsey Graham, and Lindsey Graham is looking at the other side of this conflict, and what he is seeing.
Is normalization, recognition, we'll call it an expansion, if you will, of the Abraham Accords.
And that would mean that hopefully peace in the Middle East for many, many decades to come.
And I hope that's the net result of that with that bill.
And I was on that Gulf trip with the president when he went to Riyadh and Saudi Arabia and Qatar and he went to the UAE.
I was there and I learned a lot.
And the And every one of these countries wants a great relationship with the United States.
So there will be new alliances.
And I think Western civilization, which was saved by Winston Churchill, boy, I will tell you, you talk about Neville Chamberlain Starmer, it is breathtaking to me that clearly Europe has forgotten the lessons of history, not even 100 years ago.
And they were willing to have a nuclear armed Iran.
And meanwhile, we learned in this conflict that they have ballistic missile.
Range capable of hitting Paris and capable of hitting London.
And they won't even send a ship to help keep open the free flow of oil at market prices.
In the Strait of Hormuz.
How insane is that?
It's absolutely stunning.
It's absolutely stunning.
It's over, but it's not going to impact us.
You know what we're going to have, Bill?
We're going to have another trillion dollars to spend on national defense here.
And one day they will be kissing our ass, begging us to help them for the very conflicts that could very likely arise that you had previously mentioned vis a vis Vladimir Putin.
Putin's going to cause trouble, there's no doubt about it.
And these cowardly Europeans, A, can't stand up to them.
They don't have the power to do it.
And B, at this point in history, they probably let Putin march into Moldova and take it.
They probably.
Bill, how will they stop them?
Well, I mean, there is armed capability.
They don't have the will.
They don't have the military might.
They don't have the ability to stop them.
They would cower.
And a lot of this is the European media, which is absolutely.
It's actually worse than the American media, if you can imagine that.
Demonizing the United States every night, BBC.
Agent France, all of that, just demonize, demonize, demonize.
And the population of Europe, you know, they're dependent on the government.
It's basically a welfare situation.
Gimme, gimme, gimme.
I don't care what really happens in the Gulf.
Well, when your heating bills triple, which they will if this continues, you're going to care.
But this is very, very, it is evident.
Stunning that Great Britain, because that's the real bulwark.
Tony Blair or Prime Minister, this would not be happening.
But Sturm is weak and he's afraid.
And you can't conduct foreign policy if you're weak and afraid.
I can tell you that the net result of all of this is there's going to be a reconfiguration of the world order.
And Europe now is floundering at, I don't.
Think Europe can recover.
I don't think Europe would ever take the necessary steps to insist either on assimilation or expelling people that have no interest in assimilating to their mores and their values in their individual countries.
I see no go zones continuing.
People deny that they're real.
I've had reporters on Fox in those no go zones, and they're very real.
So I'm not sure if there's a path to recovery for them.
Especially because of the political reality and the fear that they have among now their own population.
I think it's over.
The final equation to the story is all the weakness in Europe and in the United States, the Trump hatred here, helps Iran.
Because they think that they can hold out because of all the pressure on President Trump and they'll get a better deal.
And that helps.
The mullers.
Fear in Europe00:14:43
But tonight.
Bill, the mullers are dead.
I don't know what mullers you're talking about.
The mullers are.
We're now at the fourth and fifth tier of remaining leadership.
So I will tell you this, and you are correct, and Lindsey Graham rightly convinced you, but I will tell you who convinced me.
It was Steve Witkoff, and it was Secretary of State Rubio, who was on my show last night.
It was this was a clear and present danger, and that's why the president acted.
We'll never be able to calculate how many lives likely were saved because if they got these nuclear weapons with their increased ballistic missile range and capability.
This could have been a modern day Holocaust, and Donald Trump prevented that from happening, so we'll never know how many people's lives may and likely have been saved.
All right, Mr. O'Reilly, we're just up on the clock, my brother.
We appreciate you being here.
All things Bill O'Reilly at BillO'Reilly.com.
Sir, I know this is the highlight of your week.
Everything's downhill from here.
Have a great Easter with you and your family, okay, sir?
Thanks for having me, you too.
800 941 Sean, if you want to be a part of the program.
Quick break, right back.
We'll continue on the other side.
Digging to expose how the government wastes your money each and every day.
This is the Sean Hannity Show.
The other one, the other one, the
other, the other, the other, the other, the.
He gives you the latest breaking news when he hits the air.
This is the Sean Hannity Show.
For me, there have been two, and let me be very clear.
I don't care about the radical, no kings protest lunatic left in this country.
There's nothing Donald Trump will ever say or do that they're going to like or support.
And Donald Trump has not lied to us.
This is not Iraq.
This is not Afghanistan.
He's never given up his principle of no forever war.
However, and there are people who said, this is going to be a forever war.
It's not going to be a forever war.
There are two people that have convinced me and two interviews that I think have been critical in terms of why now, why are we there?
One was with the Middle East envoy, Steve Witkoff, and he was the one that told us in great detail.
And we played it on this radio program more than once, but we described in detail how the Iranians.
Believe that it is their inalienable right to have nuclear weapons.
They would not give up on that even after Midnight Hammer.
And they have 460 kilograms of 60% enriched uranium.
That would be enough for 11 nuclear bombs.
The other person that has laid out the case as well as anybody is our Secretary of State, Marco Rubio.
And I had this interview with him yesterday.
Let's listen.
Joining us is the Secretary of State himself, Marco Rubio, who is with us.
Mr. Secretary, thank you for taking the time.
I know you're busy and you've got a lot on your plate.
Can we start with the question for those Americans that may not understand why now?
I want to go through this in great specificity and detail about the necessity of this.
Now, when the Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff came on this program and explained that the Iranians would not negotiate the issue of giving up their nuclear weapons program, bragged about 460 kilograms of 60% enriched uranium, That could be turned into weapons grade 90% in seven to 12 days.
At that point in time, it seemed inevitable to me.
They were going to, in spite of Midnight Hammer, they were going to cling to that quote, inalienable right, as they called it.
Was that the tipping point?
Well, it was one of the tipping points.
I mean, part of the tipping point is the fact that Iran's been doing this for 47 years.
We know what this regime is all about.
I always say, Iran, let me be clear.
I'm not talking about the people of Iran.
The people of Iran don't even like this government or this regime.
This is a regime that is led by radical Shia clerics, by people who believe that it is their calling.
I know this sounds fantastical, but it's absolutely true.
This is a regime led by people who believe that it is their calling and their purpose in life to usher in the end of the world.
These people want nuclear weapons.
Why do we know that?
because they are assembling all the things you need for nuclear weapons.
They're assembling long-range rockets that can eventually reach the United States, can already range Europe.
We saw them demonstrate two of them last week, despite denying that they had them.
They enriched uranium to 60%.
As you pointed out a moment ago, from 60 to 90%, which is what you need for a bomb, takes 12 to 14 days.
They bragged about still having that.
They demand the right to enrich, which is how you get from 60 to 90%.
They're the leading sponsor of terrorism, not in the region, in the world.
They can never be allowed to have a nuclear weapon, which is what President Trump made very clear from the very first day of his presidency.
In fact, from the very first day of his candidacy, when he came down that escalator in 2015, he talked about this.
He's actually been talking about the threat of Iran before he was even a political candidate.
And as president, he was not going to allow Iran to pose a threat to Americans now or future generations of Americans.
So we had to act with very clear purpose.
We are going to destroy their Air Force.
We have largely done that.
We were going to destroy their Navy, which we have largely achieved that.
We were going to destroy a significant percentage of their missile launchers.
We are well on our way to achieving that.
And we were going to wipe out their defense industrial base, meaning the factories that make the drones and the missiles.
We are on our way to doing that.
Those were our four objectives because those were the four things they were going to hide behind to then develop a nuclear weapon and threaten the world if they tried to do anything about it.
That was not going to happen under President Trump.
We are well on our way.
We are on or ahead of schedule on each of those four objectives.
And we can see the finish line.
It's not today, it's not tomorrow, but it is coming.
We are going to get to the point.
Where our military will have achieved all of its objectives in this mission, and they're doing so with extraordinary efficiency, something that I think will go down in history as one of the best run tactical military operations in modern times.
We'll get back to that timeline in a second, because both you and the president have said weeks, it's not going to be months.
One thing I think we've learned, and if you can expand on this, because if you have nuclear capability, you also need the delivery system.
Prior to Epic Fury, you felt and you were arguing that.
And the world has always underestimated Iran's abilities, whether their nuclear capability or ballistic missile capability.
And you felt it was too dangerous a threat not to address in this operation, ballistic missiles and the nuclear threat at the same time.
So now we've discovered that they have the ability and the range that is much further than we had thought going into this.
Apparently, they now have the capability and the range that their missiles could reach Paris, London.
Is that true?
That's correct.
In fact, but they denied it.
Remember, anytime you hear Iran, you know, you had an image a moment ago of this guy, Arachi, their foreign minister.
This guy is a liar.
This guy was on television like a week ago, two weeks ago, denying that Iran had any missiles that could go beyond a certain limitation.
And then they fired two of them.
Now, we don't think they have many of them, but they are soon to have many of them.
We've destroyed and are destroying the factories to make those things.
Those things, the ones they launched the other day, could reach Wall into Europe.
And actually, they had fired it on Diego Garcia.
One of them failed, one of them was shot down.
But they fired him at Diego Garcia, which is really far away.
So they were moving towards eventually having a missile that could reach the continental United States.
That's what they were aiming to do.
They were aiming to become.
The next North Korea, except not a North Korea run by a regime that is troublesome and hard to understand, but an Iran run by radical Shia clerics with intercontinental missiles that could reach the mainland of the United States eventually.
That's what they were going towards.
That's what they would have ultimately achieved had President Trump not taken these steps that he's taken.
Mr. Secretary, do you believe the North Koreans, there have been numerous reports that they have been assisting Iran with both their ballistic missile program and their nuclear program?
Well, I can't comment on that other than to say that there's nothing any government is doing or any country in the world is doing now to help Iran that is in any way impeding our mission.
Do they have countries that have helped them in the past?
Yes, they have.
I mean, and by the way, Iran also helps other countries by providing drones and rockets and things of that nature that they've developed themselves.
But understand this.
Iran, this is a country that has trouble coming up with drinking water.
This is a country whose economy is in shambles.
It's going to be even worse off after this operation.
This is a country.
Whose people have been protesting in the streets because not just the lack of freedom, but the lack of economic opportunity, because they've taken all of their money, all the money they have, the little money they have because of sanctions, and they've invested all of it in sponsoring terrorism, in building long range missiles, increasing the range of their missiles every year, and building thousands of them, building these one way attack drones that they're using against their neighbors.
This is what they've put their money towards, and this is what they were going to continue to do.
They refused to negotiate on missiles, they refused to even negotiate on terrorism.
And they refuse to negotiate on enrichment.
They demand the right to enrich.
So for all these people out there talking about how this could have been avoided, they were given every opportunity in multiple talks, and all they did is either reject or delay.
And that's not going to happen under President Trump.
He's not going to allow Iran to become a nuclear power on his watch and threaten America now or in the future.
Mr. Secretary, I guess the ideal situation would be a negotiated settlement.
and had said publicly over and over again before Midnight Hammer and before Operation Epic Fury.
And he's saying to the people that the fourth, fifth tier, whatever level of leadership remains, he's saying to them now he would prefer a negotiated settlement.
Now, apparently they have some power because they promised the president that they would allow 20 specific tankers through the Strait of Hormuz.
And my understanding is those tankers made it through.
So they must have some degree of power.
The difference here is will the fourth, fifth tier level of leadership be smarter than tier one, two, and three?
And will they make the deal or will they be facing, you know, death themselves in the near future?
Well, first of all, we can't ignore that for 47 years they've avoided and rejected any effort to negotiate.
That doesn't mean we're going to stop trying.
The president of the President Trump always, always would rather have negotiations than war.
And he will always, we gave him 60 days early last year.
We gave him additional time to negotiate after Midnight Hammer again earlier this year.
But each and every time those things have proved fruitless.
But we're going to keep trying.
There are messages being exchanged.
There are talks going on.
There is the potential for direct meeting at some point.
We're always going to be open for that.
But we're not going to be, we're not, what President Trump is not going to allow is he's not going to allow fake negotiations to be used as a delay tactic to buy more time, to buy themselves space.
That's what he's not going to allow.
You know, the Biden administration spent four years, four years trying to resurrect the Obama nuclear deal with Iran.
They spent four years trying to talk to the Iranians and they strung them along for four years.
And I think they thought they could string this administration along for four years, but they're not going to string along President Trump.
He's not going to fall for their games.
He hasn't fallen for their games.
So we'll always be prepared to talk.
But we're not going to allow that or the failure of talks.
To impede our ability to defend this country and to protect this country from a real threat.
It's a threat to the world.
It's not just a threat to America.
The difference is, President Trump is the only leader in the world with both the capability and, frankly, the guts to do something about it.
Let me ask you about NATO.
You said that our NATO allies have been disappointing, specifically.
I know you're talking about Spain, Great Britain, France, even Italy now.
And that after all of this is done, we will re examine this relationship and, especially, When it comes to, we pay two thirds of the freight when it comes to NATO defense.
And if it's just, quote, about us defending Europe, you said, you know, at this point, how do we call that?
And we can't have our landing rights in European nations, our allies, at a time when we need them.
What good is that alliance?
And is the NATO alliance at risk?
Sean, I've been one of the strongest defenders of NATO during my time as a United States senator because I found great value in it.
And it wasn't just about defending Europe.
I said it also allowed us to have military bases in Europe.
That allowed us to project power into different parts of the world when our national security was threatened.
If now we have reached a point where the NATO alliance means that we can't use those bases, that in fact, that we can no longer use those bases to defend America's interests, then NATO is a one way street.
Then NATO is simply about us having troops in Europe to defend Europe.
But when we need their help, not their help, we're not asking them to conduct airstrikes, when we need them to allow us to use their military bases, their answer is no, then why are we in NATO?
You have to ask that question.
Why do we have.
Billions and billions of dollars, hundreds of billions of dollars over the years, trillions of dollars, and all these American forces stationed in the region.
If we can only use, in our time of need, we're not going to be allowed to use those bases.
So I think there's no doubt, unfortunately, after this conflict is concluded, we are going to have to reexamine that relationship.
We're going to have to reexamine the value of NATO and that alliance for our country.
Ultimately, that's a decision for the president to make, and he'll have to make it.
Reexamining Alliance Value00:02:48
We're going to finish the job here.
As I said, we're very, very close to achieving our objectives on all of these things that I've outlined.
But I do think, unfortunately, we are going to have to reexamine whether or not this alliance that has served this country well for a while is still serving that purpose, or has it now become a one way street where America is simply in a position to defend Europe, but when we need the help of our allies, they're going to deny us basing rights and they're going to deny us overflight?
I think these are very legitimate questions that we need to be asking, and this is going to have to be very carefully examined after this conflict is over.
And you stand by weeks, not months, away from this conflict coming to an end, sir?
Yes.
Yeah, I think we're very close to achieving our objectives.
I don't want to put a timeline on it, but we can see the finish line.
The finish line meaning we will have achieved all of the objectives that the president outlined, and those are important because if we achieve those objectives, we will make it nearly impossible for Iran to have a nuclear weapon anytime in the near future, and the world will be a safer place, and our country will be safer, which is the number one job the president has.
Now, I don't care if you're a radicalized Democrat, I don't care if you're one of the no kings lunatics, I don't care.
If you're one of these isolationists with a big mouth that don't know what the hell you're talking about, if we had listened to you and not to the likes of President Trump and Steve Witkoff and Marco Rubio and others, this would have been a threat that we would have handed off to our children and grandchildren.
I have no desire to debate people on the issue, it just is a fact.
And this is now going to come to a swift end, and the world will be a safer place.
That is my strong belief.
And Godspeed to our great troops and our great military.
Big break, right back.
We'll continue.
The final hour of The Sean Hannity Show is up next.
Hang on for Sean's Conservative Solutions.
All right, arguments about birthright citizenship before the Supreme Court today.
President Trump was there, the Attorney General Pam Bondi was there.