Tucker Carlson examines the looming U.S.-Iran war, with Lindsey Graham pushing Senate-backed strikes on Iran’s oil infrastructure if Hezbollah targets Israel. Former Colonel Douglas Macgregor warns of catastrophic fallout: 20% of global oil disrupted through the Strait of Hormuz, Iranian missiles hitting Haifa and Tel Aviv, and Russia’s likely involvement, risking a regional conflagration. With U.S. forces depleted (army at ~450,000) and sanctions failing to curb Iran’s missile/cyber advancements, Macgregor argues the Biden administration’s fixation on Hamas could trigger Armageddon—economic collapse from $33T debt and 5%+ Treasury yields, domestic terrorism risks, and unintended escalations like Egypt’s intervention or Israel’s nuclear gambits. [Automatically generated summary]
Certainly the Biden administration is pushing us in that direction.
What's new and interesting and ominous is that very few Republicans, the opposition party, are pushing back.
Instead, some of the party's leaders are encouraging it.
unidentified
Here, for example, is Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina from last weekend on NBC. You said this week that the only way to keep the war from escalating is to hold Iran accountable, part of what you're talking about now, and that it might mean bombing their oil refineries.
Have you had any discussions with the Biden administration about this?
A bit.
Here's my message.
If Hezbollah, which is a proxy of Iran, launches a massive attack on Israel, I would consider that a threat to the state of Israel existential in nature.
I will introduce a resolution in the United States Senate to allow military action by the United States in conjunction with Israel to knock Iran out of the oil business.
Iran, if you escalate this war, we're coming for you.
Are you effectively poised to declare war on Iran?
That's very strong language.
I am poised to use military force to destroy the source of funding for Hamas and Hezbollah.
Few others in the Republican Party will be that open about their intentions, but very few disagree with him.
Certainly not in private.
They agree.
So what would war with Iran mean?
Well, it's hard to know because virtually no one who's talking about it in public is operating from a deep interest in America's interest.
Is this good for us or is it not?
Former Colonel Douglas McGregor is the CEO of Our Country, Our Choice, and one of the first people we turn to for analysis of events like this because he is interested in what happens to the United States.
He joins us now.
Doug, thank you for coming on.
Do you think that we are moving toward war with Iran?
And it looks like the chosen destination is indeed Armageddon.
There doesn't seem to be any real appreciation for the implications for us.
unidentified
And frankly, for Europe and the world, as well as the Middle East, of such action.
Take for an example, just on the economic side, about 20 percent of the world's oil passes through the Straits of Hormuz every month, probably 25 percent of liquefied natural gas.
And you're talking about shutting down two to three million barrels a day of oil from Iran.
You know, this entire region is involved in the war.
This is not an Iranian monopoly by any stretch of the imagination.
But the point is that when we're looking at 10-year Treasury yields up over 5%, and people are increasingly convinced that the Fed has lost control, the economic side of the house is catastrophe.
Then when you look at the military side, you have to look at the arsenal of missiles that Iran possesses.
And they can reach out 1,200 miles with great precision, very high-explosive conventional warheads that would do enormous damage, destroying whole city blocks in places like Haifa, Tel Aviv, even Jerusalem, though I doubt they would attack Jerusalem.
The bottom line is that we need to think this through, and everyone right now is emoting.
There is no thinking anywhere, as far as I can tell.
Maybe, amazingly enough, Mr. Erdogan in Turkey, who came out this morning and indicated he was willing to mediate the dispute between Israel and Hamas.
Whether or not anyone in Washington or Israel is interested in talking, I don't know.
But if we could sideline Turkey and keep Turkey out of the fight, that would ultimately help Israel enormously.
So what would happen to the United States if we followed Senator Graham's advice and just began bombing?
Critical infrastructure in Iran.
What would happen then?
unidentified
Well, all of the bases that we have in Iraq and Syria, unfortunately, where we still have over a thousand Americans, all of those would be targeted.
And this time, they would target them accurately.
And this destruction would be wholesale.
I would expect trouble here at home and in the United States because of the open border.
Hezbollah has a very large operation in Mexico.
There are no doubt many, many, many Hezbollah agents inside the United States.
We can only begin to imagine the kind of trouble they could cause.
The missile and space program in Iran is very, very advanced, as is their cyber warfare capability.
All of these things would be brought to bear against us.
But what's most important, I think, for Americans to understand is if we attack Iran on the basis of Hezbollah's alleged willingness to attack Israel, if Israel invades Gaza, we will end up in a fight with Russia.
Russia will not sit by quietly and watch Iran destroyed by the United States air and naval power in the region.
And once Russia enters this...
It becomes much more than just a local conflict, maybe more than just a regional war.
And the long-range missiles, the 1,200-mile-range theater ballistic missiles, are a very serious threat to us in the region and to Israel.
unidentified
And the sanctions have had no impact there, if anything.
The Iranians have pulled together the best human capital in their country, the best engineers, the best thinkers, and put them to work primarily on missile technology and on cyber warfare.
And that's where we stand right now.
We have to expect the worst as a result if we strike Iran.
I think we're probably at the weakest point in our recent history.
I think you've got to look at the realities of new weapons systems, new capabilities.
The United States Navy, if it's going to preserve its capability at sea, is probably going to be compelled to operate somewheres north and west of Sicily.
unidentified
If it comes within closer range, then it falls into this envelope where the Iranians can strike it.
And as I said before, we have to assume the Russians will come into this.
Once you move into the eastern Mediterranean, you are vulnerable to the Kinshaw missiles and other missiles, cruise missiles and hypersonic missiles that the Russians have.
This makes it very difficult to fly strikes in support of the Israeli Defense Force against Hezbollah because now you're flying a very long distance.
You deliver your ordinance.
You have to land in Israel in order to refuel.
Israel is going to operate under a hail, if not a rainstorm of missiles and rockets, making it very, very dangerous to do so.
So our naval power, while substantial, may not have the desired impact on the ground that we would like.
How much of that is ready to fight is open to debate.
unidentified
Much of it is sitting in Eastern Europe right now.
We don't have the means to rapidly ship a large force of 80,000 to 100,000 troops on the ground into the region, which means that we're reliant on special forces and right now 2,000 Marines and perhaps 2,000 special forces and special operations forces.
And as we've seen quite recently, within the last 24 hours or so, some of our special ops forces and Israeli special ops forces went into Gaza to reconnoiter, to plan for where they might want to go to free hostages and make an impact.
And they were shot to pieces and took heavy losses, as I understand it.
And I don't see that as a win for Israel in any way, shape, or form, and I certainly think it's very dangerous for us.
You know, as I've tried to point out to a number of people, until Britain entered World War I, it was just another European war.
Once Britain entered it, it became a global war.
Well, once we are a co-belligerent, we enter this thing, it's going to be very difficult for Russia and Turkey not to also come into this fight against us, because they will not tolerate The sort of collective punishment that Israel plans for Gaza.
The U.S. military does have an awful lot of generals, however, as you pointed out, multiples of the number we had, the absolute number we had during World War II. And they're paid to think about this stuff.
Why has it dawned on no one, apparently, who's spoken publicly anyway, that this could really harm our country gravely?
Why is no one saying that?
unidentified
Well, I'm sure there are people in the U.S. military who are aware, but let's be frank.
Most of the people at the top of the military have never operated under artillery fire or rocket fire.
There are too many unknowns and uncertainties here.
And you know, everyone always assumes at the beginning of such a conflict, well, it'll be contained.
We'll only have to fight these people, Hamas, maybe Hezbollah.
It never works out that way.
These things always last longer than everyone thinks.
The resources required are much more profound than what we anticipated.
Egypt's Nuclear Capability00:06:50
unidentified
And remember, we've already used up many of our war stocks in Ukraine, and we've left Ukraine in a state of ruins.
Places on life support, a half a million dead.
What are we going to do to Israel if we press ahead down this road?
And it seems, listening to Secretary of State Blinken this morning, who more and more sounds like our commander-in-chief, that there is no room for negotiation, no room for mediation.
Hamas must be destroyed.
We must go into Gaza.
If so, I think we're on this very dangerous road to Armageddon.
What is the objective of the IDF and of Blinken, of the United States and Israel, in this short term?
Destroy Hamas, but what does that mean?
unidentified
Well, to destroy Hamas in the minds, I think, of policymakers in Washington, as well as in Israel, is to systematically root them out and kill them in Gaza.
They're not going to stop and say, now wait a minute, before I shoot, I really need to think about this because that may be a civilian or there may be a family there.
And we've already made it clear that we will assist and support the Israelis in freeing those hostages.
unidentified
Again, the problem is, how do you get the hostages out when you're fighting in this extraordinarily dirty and complex environment?
What's to prevent the hostages from simply being executed as soon as you move in force into Gaza?
I think the Israelis know that.
I think our leadership in Washington knows it.
They may have even decided that if that happens, that's tragic, but the ultimate goal of destroying Hamas demands this.
Again, it's the issue of collective punishment.
I would encourage Americans everywhere to listen to King Abdullah of Jordan's speech in Cairo just a couple of days ago, where he made it clear that he agreed with the abhorrence of what had happened in Israel and loathes Hamas for its barbarity and savagery.
And as Americans see more destruction and more and more film footage and photographs come out of Gaza showing children, women, old men dying, being killed, the support for Israel is going to erode.
And at the same time, the anger and hatred inside the region, which already dislikes Israel, is going to be phenomenal.
unidentified
So Israel is doing something that I think no one has ever accomplished, at least not in my lifetime, and that is uniting Sunni and Shia against itself.
What about the argument often articulated, including by leading presidential candidates recently, that considerations like the ones you just raised, like the long-term effects of decisions or global public opinion, downstream terror attacks, thinking about any of that is a violation of principle and you're basically giving in to the terrorists by weighing any of it.
How would you respond to that?
unidentified
Most politicians follow public opinion.
Right now, public opinion supports violence against Tomas, and if that includes the destruction of Gaza, so be it.
Very few people look beyond that and understand the larger consequences.
In the last century, or I guess I should say in the early 20th century, the great powers intervened on more than one occasion to prevent Turkey from being destroyed, not because they loved the Ottoman Turks, but because they saw the alternative being chaos.
At least 100,000 Egyptian troops have been moved towards the border with Gaza, involving several divisions.
unidentified
Under great pressure from public opinion in the Arab world, in the Muslim world, they may have to engage the Israelis because no one will protect the population in Gaza.
That's a terrible, terrible possibility.
One that we don't want.
Because if that happens to Egypt and Hezbollah attacks from the north, that will bring in everyone else.
And we're suddenly confronting a war.
On a regional level that is going to harm us economically, physically in many ways, but could threaten the very existence of Israel, which I think is the root problem here.
But we do know that Hamas, as well as Hezbollah, have positions in Mexico.
unidentified
Of the two, Hezbollah is much stronger, much larger, and much better equipped and financed.
So we have to expect that once Hezbollah is in the war and we are against them and Iran, that much of our infrastructure will be at risk.
Something as bad or potentially even worse than 9-11 could happen here.
This brings us back to the whole issue of immigration and border security.
We've essentially ignored it.
The same politicians who are pushing for war against Virtually everyone in the Middle East, which is what it boils down to in the final analysis, don't seem to have thought carefully about protecting us or our borders from all of the terrible things that we've seen in Israel.
Think Carefully About Infrastructure Risk00:05:38
unidentified
How much damage could these same people do to us in a shopping mall in the space of 15 minutes?
It doesn't take much imagination to understand how dangerous this is.
Do you think that this war, if it comes, and as you said, it seems like it is, how will that affect American domestic politics?
War traditionally has been used by the people in power to shut down dissent.
Can you imagine that happening in this case?
unidentified
Well, I think they'll try.
Fortunately, thanks to people like Elon Musk, who bought Twitter and ended the censorship or suspended it.
The truth does get through and reach Americans, but Americans will figure out pretty quickly if two things tend to happen at once.
You have the war overseas and the war here, but remember the economy and the financial condition right now.
If you turn on any of the business channels for the first time in my memory, lots and lots of analysts are coming on and talking about the Fed having lost control.
The rising interest rates, the inability to manage and cope with the sovereign national debt of $33 trillion.
And that's the tip of a proverbial iceberg.
We already have Americans who are struggling with inflation anyway.
Now we're looking at potentially scarcity.
We've drained our strategic oil reserve for all intents and purposes.
If the Strait of Hormuz is shut down, if the Suez Canal is closed, we're in a lot of trouble.
In the short run, that's for sure.
How rapidly can we recover from all of this?
How many refineries can we put back into operation?
How much drilling can we do quickly?
The answer is not very much.
So draining that strategic oil reserve was a very serious mistake.
Stand at Israel's side and help protect Israel, we have taken a different route and cast moral turpitude to the side.
In other words, how do you help one without committing a war crime against the other?
unidentified
This is the problem with collective punishment.
This is the problem with annihilating Gaza and trying to sweep out its population.
That's unacceptable to us as Americans.
I don't think if you sat down any of Israel's most ardent supporters in the United States and said, are you willing to trade the lives of several hundred thousand people in Gaza for the lives taken in Israel by Hamas?
After all, Hamas and Palestinian Jihad were the fighters.
And I don't think anybody really wants that if they think about it carefully.
Therefore, you know, looking at someone like Erdogan, however slippery we may consider him to be, His willingness to mediate is a bright light in an otherwise very dark sky, and we should look to that because we don't want the regional war.
unidentified
It will destroy us economically.
We're already in bad shape.
We've already suffered because of the foolish intervention in Ukraine to try to destroy Russia.
Now we have Russia more powerful militarily than it's been since the 80s, and it's poised to enter on the side of Iran.
Do you know of any leaders in the United States, political leaders at the Pentagon, within the Biden administration, who are thinking clearly about this, which is to say who are framing their thoughts on it around what's best for the United States long term?
The problem is none of them hold high positions in government, and none of their voices or their analyses Or their viewpoints are going to reach anybody in power.
I think you have to listen carefully to what Secretary of State Blinken said.