Title: Piers Morgan x John Kiriakou — Full Interview
Show: Piers Morgan Uncensored
Date: 2026-07-05
URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ccqYPH1Np0U
Duration: 0:57:00

---

[00:00] Well, back to my panel now. I'm pleased to say we've been joined by the former CIA officer, John Kuryaku, who I'll come to in a moment. John, welcome back to you. General Kim, you were shaking your head throughout a lot of that interview with a a British former general. Uh, you didn't agree. >> Well, a couple of things. He first said that NATO has never operated in that region. He's just absolutely wrong. Operation Ocean Shield was conducted by NATO as part of the counter piracy operations. So, they have been there before. Second, the special relationship is not something that simply uh uh was a

[00:33] whim of the media. Uh I lived that my entire 30 plus years in the military. I served side by side with Brits. We we shared intelligence and we shared foxholes. So I think that special relationship still exists. Uh and this notion about uh in his lifetime, he had never seen something this whacked up. For God's sakes, the 300,000 dead and wounded at Gallipoli because of British arrogance seems to me a fairly good comparison. Uh so it just always bothers

[01:04] me when somebody with a nice Oxbridge uh accent comes on and starts lecturing to the Americans. You're sounding and and and one last point, there is a solution to the straight of hormuz, which is I do not believe that Iran wants to fight with the British, the French, the Germans. 1981 to 1989, the United States escorted Kuwaiti flagged and escorted Kuwaiti tankers in and out of the straight of Hormuz. We can't do that this time

[01:36] because the Americans are belligerent. I wrote an article recently and the title was where are the allies? So why aren't the allies like Britain and France and Germany who have far better capabilities in counter measure and they're not active belligerent in this war? Why are you not escorting the tankers in and out? China would join you as well. So, as everybody is ringing their hands as the United States is bringing the world economy to its knees, why doesn't Britain and France and, you know, god

[02:08] forbid NATO take on that mission? >> Just out of interest, General, where were you educated? >> Uh, the United States Military Academy and Bishop Okonnell High School, a trade school in Arlington, Virginia. >> You have a remarkably eloquent and clipped American accent. I have to say I don't not >> from being around the Brits for it's it's that special relationship I've had with the Brits over these years. >> Uh John Kiryaki, welcome back to Uncensored. Let's just talk for a moment about the domestic jeopardy that I think

[02:41] Donald Trump uh is risking here. And I think it's significant. The polling is terrible. Uh it's the first time I can remember an American uh armed forces at war, even if they're not calling it that, which has not had the majority support of Americans. Gas prices uh are skyrocketing. Food prices are and will go higher because of the issue with the fertilizer. You've got the midterm elections coming. I mean, General Kim thinks he's already given up that. I'm

[03:11] not sure that's how Trump will be thinking, but certainly all the polling again suggests that the Republicans could lose both the House and the Senate now if this continues the way that it's going. Uh it just seems a hell of a throw of the dice by Trump and I I'm increasingly thinking he's made a massive miscalculation. What's your view? >> Oh, I think this is a disastrous miscalculation. Where do you even begin? You know, there there's a very significant split right

[03:41] now within the Republican party here in the United States. There were a lot of Republican voters who voted for for Donald Trump because they believed that he really was the no foreign wars president. You might recall uh February 14th, Valentine's Day, 2016, during a Republican debate in which Donald Trump called George W. Bush a war criminal for getting the United States involved in uh in the war in Iraq. And now all of a sudden it's as though it's John McCain's

[04:13] neoonservative Republican party. Again, it seems to me that that Trump surrounded himself with some people like Tulsi Gabbard, for example, and JD Vance, who were reportedly have been opposed to these foreign interventions, but then others like Marco Rubio, who is sort of the the successor to the John McCain uh wing of that party. And the party and the president himself don't know which direction to go. Well, I

[04:44] think Lindsay I would add Lindsey Graham I'd add Lindsey Graham into that. Lindsey Graham >> I think he's been extremely vocal% right. >> But what you're really it's so true about the split in the party. I saw Matt Walsh yesterday from the Daily Wire making the point that almost every Republican he's been talking to is against this war. and he said a that's highly unusual when you have a Republican administration that's gone to war um for Republicans to be as against it as he is hearing personally

[05:15] anecdotally he thinks it's not showing up yet properly in the polling but I saw a thing about enthusiasm for the midterms and I think the Republican enthusiasm now is down to like 60% and falling like a stone right which again >> that's the danger >> and I think that's the kind a quiet that's the quiet voice there of people saying we don't get this this guy the whole point of Trump was he would not take us into foreign wars especially in the Middle East and definitely no boots

[05:46] on the ground you know I do think if he commits boots on the ground and it goes even half wrong as many military strategies think it could then I I think it's it's this becomes his legacy and and again I just asked the question and I would ask it to I would ask it to the president myself if he if he calls me. Um, I would just say, "Why did you do it now? I don't get it." >> I don't think I've ever seen a gathering of more spineless people in my entire life. This is just simply It's like a

[06:17] vacuum. Pierce, like, President Trump woke up one morning and decide to go attack Iran because Israel convinced them. As if Iran does not pose a nuclear threat, as if there's no, hang on, hang on. the red line for you to say that they're an imminent threat. >> Hang on, Dor. Dor, we'll take your insult, but let me just respond. The the reason people think that's what happened is because that is what the Secretary of State of the United States told everybody on camera. Just to remind you, Marco Rubio said when he was asked why did America take preemptive action in

[06:49] this way, he said because another country brackets Israel had informed the United States they were attacking Iran. And the expected result would be that Iran would under that incidence it would then attack American interests and therefore they had to get in first. And JD Vance has also said the same thing. We're not making this up. This is something coming out of the multip war. Pierce Pierce why did why did Trump join the 12-day war at the end of the war? >> Well the 12day war

[07:19] >> Israel had been fighting alone for 11 and a half days. Why did Trump why did Trump swoop in these nuclear reactors? because he believes that a nuclear Iran poses a major threat. Marco Rubio, Pete Hagsth, >> they've all said many different things. The president himself said, >> we were told, we were told the 12 has killed thousands of Americans over the years. He understands the American people, this is their story. They don't need a reason to understand that there's evil in the

[07:50] world and stand up for evil. And by the way, the Brits are the ones who taught us this. >> Sure. the the importance of standing up against evil. Like what I don't understand about any of the people you brought on, are we just then going to surrender and let Iran just grow into a nuclear armed terror regime or does anyone, including you, have another idea of how to prevent this? >> Uh, yeah. I think the the honest answer about that is that the >> I didn't think so. >> Well, I haven't answered. >> Well, I'm While we're doing that, I'm going to take a look at my spine here.

[08:21] Apparently, it's beenated. Not all of you, but some of you told me to call General. I think that there's I see three with spines, including myself here. So, you're you're one of the >> But there's nothing there's nothing Look, I don't think there's anything particularly heroic or courageous about launching the biggest military attack of modern times with the with the most overwhelmingly powerful military in history uh against Iran. That doesn't take particularly. >> It's not to be hero. Who needs to be heroic? I don't understand what the

[08:52] impend I don't agree that there was an imminent impending threat. I think the imminent the only Well, let me answer. The only imminent impending thing was that Benjamin Netanyahu told Trump, "We're going to attack." We now know from Anthony Blinken, a previous Secretary of State, that he tried the same thing with Obama and Biden. Told them he was going to attack. And then both Biden and Obama said, "Well, we're not coming with you." And then guess what? Israel didn't attack. And that is why people believe when you add Rubio's

[09:24] comments and Vance's comments that what happened here is that Netanyahu railroaded Donald Trump into going along with this in a way that was actually rejected by Biden and Obama and that the actual threat, which is we're going to do it anyway, he probably wouldn't have done it anyway if it wasn't for the Americans. So, you know, history will tell us, I guess, the answers to these questions. But it was fascinating to me that Blinken said what he said. And as to where we are now, how does it square?

[09:54] Surely, Doran, you must see the unbelievable risk of committing ground forces to Iran to get enriched uranium from deep under the ground when we know how heavily protected it is and we know how cunning the Iranians have so far been in the way they've responded in this war. I think it's a terrifying potential escalation that could lead to the deaths of many many many Americans. Right. And and I say I say for what? Where was the impending threat? Where was the evidence? Is it takes me back to

[10:25] 2003? Well, hang on. You say I'm spineless. Let me answer you about spine. I was editor of the Daily Mirror newspaper in the UK, one of the biggest selling newspapers in the world at the time. I took on my own government, Tony Blair, the Labor government. We were a labor supporting newspaper. I waged one of the most ferocious campaigns against a war in media history and it failed. And we know what happened in Iraq because I did not believe that there was the evidence that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction or that he was about to use

[10:56] them or hit London in 45 minutes or any of that And you know what? It turned out very sadly I was right. And yet 20 years later, utter mayhem followed that illegal invasion as I saw it see it. So I don't think it's necessarily lacking in a spine to say sometimes that these wars are wrong and they're f on false pretenses and that the public is entitled to stand up and say not in my name. That actually can often take more courage than simply

[11:26] dropping a load of bombs on people. Pierce, we see that Iran has fired now thousands of ballistic missiles, including those that land in Israel in population centers, they fired two ballistic missiles towards Diego Garcia, which yes, had they not fired them to the east and they fired them to the west could have landed in London, the warhead on a single ballistic missile, if it's a ton and a half. >> Do you know what the impact zone is? It's a hundred square blocks in London. What would it take for you to acknowledge that there is actually an

[11:56] imminent threat? We have ballistic missiles landing all over. At what when the nuclear the nuclear warhead is on the ballistic missile and it's on its way to Israel, do we then say, "Okay, this is an actual threat or do we stand up today against a terror regime that has developed proxies throughout the Middle East that created Hezbollah, created Hamas, created the Houthis, took over the United States embassy in Iran, has driven trucks and blown up thousands of of of hundreds of Marines and have tried. MI5 has prevented 22 mass

[12:29] casualty terror attacks in London since 2022. >> Okay, let me bring John back in. John, your response to that? >> Where do you even begin? The the Iranians have been reactive to this, not not proactive. You know, it people people watch on the news the what's happening in in Lebanon, in Gaza, in the West Bank, in Syria. There has to be a response. You can't just say, "Well, you

[12:59] know what? We're an existential threat to the Israelis, so of course the Israelis are going to have to bomb us." That's that's just not real life. I can tell you in all the years that I was in the CIA, no matter who the Israeli prime minister was, every single time an Israeli prime minister came to Washington, no matter who the president happened to be, the Israelis would say, "Please help us bomb Iran. Please help us bomb Iran. Please help us bomb Iran." And the president's always said no until this one. I think that President uh

[13:31] President Trump was duped by uh Benjamin Netanyahu and now we're in a war that that is not ours uh from the beginning and that we cannot win. And this is another thing too, my own experience in the CIA and and at some of the highest levels of government. I was the executive assistant to the CIA's deputy director throughout the uh the Iraq war. There's never an exit strategy. It's easy to attack a country. It's easy to overthrow a government, but then what do you do? That's the hard part,

[14:02] >> right? Uh I mean, Aman Dean, that is the reality. And that is why Donald Trump was always so vocal. I'm not going to do this. And yet here he is. He's doing it to the biggest the biggest uh place he could possibly be doing it uh with the greatest risk. And that's the bit I don't understand. I I think you're one of the spineless three. So maybe you'd like to respond to >> No, he's got a spine. Oh, he's got a spine. Okay, great. We're down to two. >> Okay, we're down to two. Two spineless people.

[14:32] >> So, just the CIA guy and the guy that rightly called the wrong illegal wars. Got it. Uh, okay. Well, look, this war was going to happen by hook or crook because at the end of the day, you know, the Iran represented not the perfectly rational, logical player in the established global order, you know, in this poker table, the global poker table where the Russians, the Chinese, the

[15:03] Brazilians, the Indians, the Europeans, the Americans, you know, you see, at the end of the day, If you come to the poker table and you try to cheat and undermine everyone and to try like I mean to be uh absolutely lousish and brutish about it at the end of the day you will be escorted out of the premises unceremoniously and then you'll be you will be terminated with extreme prejudice and this is the problem with people who don't understand that the Iranian threat was accumulatively growing stronger and more dangerous you know as the years progress again what is

[15:36] so normative about Iran's politics in the region. You have to understand that Iran was expanding across the region. A region that actually contain more than 50 plus% of the world's traditional energy reserves and that is a threat to the global established financial order that is backed by the dollar as a reserve currency. You cannot allow Iran to become the hgeimon of the entire region

[16:06] and then Iran can do whatever it wants when it comes to charging you know for the you know for the petrol with other currencies undermining the status of the US dollar as a uh the uh reserve currency of the world. If you if you allowed Iran like I mean to have such unchecked power across the region is going to be tremendously I mean as always President Trump say tremendously you know dangerous to the status of the United States you know financial system

[16:37] as the financial system of the world you know and add to this the fact that you cannot like I mean basically say that Iran's politics and you know rhetoric towards its neighbors it's not just only Israel some people always saying like it was an existential threat towards Israel. Since I was a child, their entire rhetoric wasn't just only about Israel and America. It was also about Saudi Arabia. It was about Kuwait. It was about the UAE. The fact that they UAE trading with Iran for more than 40 years. And at the first sign of trouble,

[17:09] they threw more than 2,500 ballistic missiles and drones at the UAE. What does that tell you? It tells you basically that their entire plan, their entire uh military strategy was about hijgemony over the oil rich neighbors. As simple as that. They recruited so many uh young men, 700,000 to be part of non-state actors, you know, illegal non-state actors. In what world can we tolerate that? And the United States at

[17:39] the end of the day if they want you in for the America first crowd America cannot be first at home if it's not first abroad if it's not first overseas because at the end of the day the entire milit the entire economic system of depends on it being the hedgeimon of the world and the guardian of the maritime global established the maritime imperial. >> Yeah. Okay. But look, you're making an assumption that America is going to win this. And I think I think that's quite

[18:11] an assumption to make right now. I don't because because at the end of the day is the calculus of the firepower. >> At the end of the day, despite all the we will see whether whether the firepower alone can win this war. >> It's not just only firepower. At the end of the day, what is the victory? Arabs always say, you know, that victory is just to be patient. is your patience outlast your enemies. Here is basically the My guess is my guess is there is no economic patience in Iran anymore. My

[18:43] guess is their economy will collapse. >> My guess is that the Iranians will have a lot more patience than Donald Trump. We shall see. We shall see. >> You we we will see. >> All right. We'll have to wait and see. I've got to leave it there panel. Thank you. Interesting debate. Thank you very much indeed. >> Well, I'm pleased to say that I'm joined now by Rudy Giuliani, the former New York mayor and lawyer to President Trump. Rudy, welcome back to Uncensored. >> How are you, Pierce? >> I'm good. I missed you. You're well. >> I do. Me, too. You're doing very well. >> Thank you. Look, >> we don't agree completely, but uh but I I I really appreciate your ability to uh

[19:16] to really put out both sides, and I I want to compliment you on what you did do. Fuentes. >> Oh, thank you. >> That was that was one of the best interviews I've ever seen ever. particularly after particularly after um he basically got that interview from Tucker where Tucker put him on his lap and was patting his head. >> Well, I just I think people like Fuentes, you've got to challenge them. That's the point. You can't you can't give them a free >> really well and you did it without being uh nasty or

[19:47] >> you're like a good cross-examiner. I would have hired you as an assistant US attorney. Do >> you know what? I sometimes think I wish I'd been a lawyer. Uh but that's for another for another life. Uh Rudy, let's talk about Iran. Rudy, you've said, I think, that Trump is reasserting himself on the global stage. Do do you still feel that a month in? >> I do. I do. And you know, I I I have to tell you, knowing him 40 years, I can tell you that his uh views on on Iran uh go back long before all I mean in the

[20:20] 1980s, he he's actually on record talking about it, but I can remember having conversations with him where we both felt particularly after the Marines were hit in uh in Lebanon, >> uh we we wondered why Ronald Reagan didn't take him out. uh after after the hostage taking the hostages, embarrassing the hell out of the United States and then killing our Marines. Uh I I think he this this is like uh this

[20:52] should have happened like 35 years ago and a lot of people would be alive today and the world would be a lot better. But we c we can't live with nuclear weapons in the hands of an irrational regime. Uh this is not Putin. This is not Zjun Ming. They're terrible people. They're very evil, but they're not irrational. They don't want to die. The Ayatollah and the people around him uh rationally displaying the fact that they do want to die. The Ayatollah knew he was going to

[21:23] get hit. He sat there and I think he thought he was going to go up to paradise and find his 72 virgins. So this really fits in what my biggest hero used to say, Ronald Reagan. Ronald Reagan used to say, "Mutually assured destruction is the way we kept this world together for a long, long time during the Cold War." But it's immoral because it rests on the fact that both sides have to have a rational leader. >> You get a crazy man in either either spot. Goodbye world. And we got a crazy

[21:56] man who wants to get nuclear weapons, has already killed thousands of Americans, chance every week that he wants death to America, I don't know how much more how much more of a threat you have to have. Um, >> but but given but given he's been replaced, it it appears by his son, although we haven't seen the son as supreme leader, and the son has now lost his father, his mother, his wife, and two of his kids reportedly. um may even have died himself. We just don't know.

[22:26] But but clearly the ideology hasn't died. The IRGC remain in place. And I just think and General Kimit just shared this this uh concern that if America was to now commit ground forces into Iran to try and get, for example, the enriched uranium, it could be one of the most dangerous operations American forces have ever engaged in. And if, as you say, you're dealing with unstable people who don't mind dying for their cause, does that not concern you, Rudy?

[22:57] >> Of course it concerns me. Uh, I mean, when when we lost our first soldier, you say to yourself, is it worth it? And now what, 13? Uh but the reality is it worries me more that we have a world in which uh a a I mean at one point Iran was a a substantial power in the Middle East. It looked like they had a um they had an empire across the northern part of the Middle East. I mean they controlled Syria, they control Lebanon. They had

[23:28] three or four uh proxies that uh were extremely dangerous. I mean, Hezbollah was undefeable at one point that we we thought. Uh so to to let them move back into that situation again puts the whole world in danger. Uh why do you think they they they shot that missile um uh that what what did it go 2,2500 miles? They want they wanted to show Europe, you know, we we can hit you at this point.

[23:59] >> And they've actually attacked the Emirates more than they have Israel, >> right? which has to tell you that their uh that their aim here is either totally irrational or it's to be the dominant power uh in the Middle East. >> Or there's a third there's a third uh way you could look at it which is it shows you they're actually being quite rational and quite cunning. They they know they can't compete with America stroke Israel militarily. They can't

[24:29] compete with the military firepower in terms of just numbers. But when it comes to strangling the global economy by closing the straits of Hormuse and when it comes to attacking the Gulf States in the way they have, attacking refineries and tourist areas and so on, uh you know, killing for now stone dead the business models of those states until this is over. Uh that shows a lot of rationality actually. It's a rational response to defending yourself when you can't do it purely with military

[24:59] firepower, isn't it? They've they've shown a cunning which appears to have been underestimated by America and Israel. >> Well, I'm not sure it was. I mean, I think I I I think I always thought uh an action against Iran would be a major war. >> It's a it's a country that's been building up militarily. In fact, I think had it been two or three years ago, it would have been even worse. we've deteriorated them a lot in the last uh two years. But I mean the reality is uh that probably makes sense at the

[25:29] beginning because that's what I thought. I thought they were doing this in order to get the Arab states to put pressure on the president to call a ceasefire. >> Yeah. >> But the reality is it's the opposite. European countries want a ceasefire, but they want I mean they they would they would surrender if I declared war on them and I'd be able to take them over. I mean, they're all a bunch of uh useless cowards. But uh >> do you really believe that, Rudy? >> Oh my god. Yeah. I mean, the the prime minister in uh

[25:59] your uh your country, sad to say, sad to say, uh I have people from England telling me, "You're going to be a Muslim country in 10 years." >> I mean, there are the Anglican church uh the Catholic Roman Catholic Church is is bigger in England now than the Anglican church. And and and Charles Charles III might be the Muslim monarch of uh of England. I mean, they taken over and they want to take over and it's Irraim and and Iran is the fuel behind that.

[26:30] You take out the Islamic Republic of Iran, the whole thing moves in the other direction. >> You realize Rudy only 5% of the UK is Muslim. Dude, >> uh it doesn't matter. I mean, they have tremendous they have tremendous power. How many maralties do they have? >> They have a few But this idea, there's a lot of Americans increasingly concerned that a lot of you guys seem to have this idea that we're literally being overrun by Muslims. And I don't know where it's coming from because I live I LIVE IN LONDON. I DON'T

[27:01] get any feeling I'm being overrun by Muslims. >> Well, I was in London about a year and a half ago and it seemed to me there were awful an awful lot of women with veils on that I had never seen before. And uh you have you have debates over whether Sharia law should be respected. Of course it shouldn't be respected. Sharia law is a is a cult of death. I mean the Quran is a cult of death. >> But Sharia law has no legal standing in the UK. >> Well, not according to a lot of reports

[27:32] that I read in diff in different parts of of England. It actually dominates. And Stemer seems to be very very affected by uh by them politically. He seems to want to make them happy, make them uh contented, and certainly he doesn't seem to be trying to make them English. Uh nor do the French seem to be trying to make them French. Uh they're uh they're uh they're contrary to immigration and assimilation. They just do the immigration part. Immigration and then follow Muhammad. What did Muhammad

[28:03] tell them to do? Take over. you're you're suggesting that all all the millions of Muslims who live in the UK have a kind of radical mindset and I would say back to you that that is simply not the case. All the evidence all the evidence suggests that that is not the case. >> I don't I I don't think they all have a radical mindset. In fact, the majority of them don't. I I I know Muslims in the United States, right? I' I've I've studied I've studied the Quran. >> You have about the same number of Muslims in the United States that we have here and most of them are very

[28:35] >> they're very very silent. They are they are um there's a very very um excessive uh militaristic form of the Muslim religion which is justifiable based on the literal words of the Quran. And then the rest of the Muslims are very silent. uh you rarely hear an objection to the horrible things that they do and very often you hear a defense of it from it's very hard to get Muslims to stand up to

[35:18] lost. Uh even if they're won by the Democrats. Uh the fact remains is that nothing is going to get done uh in the United States Congress. Whether the Republicans still in charge or whether the Democrats are in charge, our legislative body seems to be generally irrelevant. Uh but look, I think that Donald Trump now recognizes that the advice he took or the or the orders that he issued are not achieving the results uh he wanted. Unfortunately, Iran has proven to be a pretty clever uh

[35:50] adversary. The Iranian the Israelis went for regime decapitation. The Americans went for u blow up as much stuff as possible. Uh, and the Iranians kind of did a jiu-jitsu move and said, "Okay, we're going to move down to the straight moves. If you want to do regime decapitation, we're going to do economic decapitation." >> As we used to say, old dead Carl Clauswitz, um, he he had some great lines and one of them is after a war starts, it takes on its own character.

[36:20] And while this president may have hoped for a quick and easy victory as he had in Venezuela or a negotiated settlement as he had in Syria, uh this war has definitely taken on a character of its own. >> And before I I go to our two other very patient guests. Thank you to both of you. Just one final question purely on the military reality of any kind of ground invasion because if it seems to be the case, the only way to guarantee getting the enriched uranium which is

[36:53] believed to be buried uh way below uh the ground and heavily protected. If the only way to do that is with ground forces, is it not going to be incredibly hazardous to do that in a country like Iran when they believe that regime change is absolutely on the mind certainly of the Israelis and probably quite a few people in the Trump administration too. In other words, they have little to lose. Uh that if America was to put ground forces down

[37:23] potentially with IDF, we don't know. Um, is that not a very dangerous mission, General? >> Extraordinarily dangerous. Uh, these two gentlemen to my right, uh, don't remember what you and I do, which is a 1979 mission to try to get the American hostages out of Thran. >> Uh, that was an absolute goat. Uh, >> well, I'll leave it at that. >> Yeah. Uh but unfortunately when you also not only have a tough target but it's the your mission is being bleeded out by

[37:54] every broad sheet like the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times makes life kind of difficult. So um I I simply think that that may be again to use another trope a bridge too far at this point unless we pull some real magic out of our house hats. And I don't think we're going to be quote invading or conducting an invasion. Uh that brings to mind of your audience another attack into Iraq to go up to Baghdad. >> You can't do that kind of invasion with a couple of thousand troops. You need a

[38:25] couple of hundred thousand troops. So what I see those ground troops being used for primarily is short uh quick operations. Probably no further in than the latoral to go against the speedboats, the the the mine factories, the missile factories along the beaches. Maybe even a dumb idea like Car Island. Although I think the better way for Car Island is just take out the electricity. That way you can quickly turn it back on when you need it. >> I mean the problem and I'll come to our

[38:56] other guest now, Doran Spielman. The problem here is that Donald Trump has kind of signaled everything that America may do. He does it on a kind of every few hours basis on social media >> and then he changes it two hours later. >> Right. Right. And and the problem, Doris Spearman, is you know, I can remember watching uh movies about the codereers in World War II where there were whole teams of people whose job it was to crack sophisticated codes that the Germans were leaving, for example, uh planning their military operation. The

[39:28] Iranians don't need any code breakers. They've got the president of the United States just broadcasting it all. So, you know, they know that there may be an attack on Hog, for example. They know that the Americans may do XY Z because Trump keeps saying that's what they may do. Is that apart from anything else? Is that is he sensible? Look, these are all uh the million-dollar questions how we're going to look back at President Trump uh you know 100 years from now. I can say this that he's definitely uh knocking off

[39:58] balance a lot of terror regimes throughout the world including Venezuela. I think he's sending a different message than has been sent. It's not the typical diplomatic message. This is kind of the Trump dealmaker where he comes in and we've seen him multiple times when he offers with one hand a carrot and with the other hand if it's not taken. He's got Marines moving in and I'm not sure that it's the incorrect way. I think we'll know when this is over. But I I do Pierce kind of want to zoom out a little bit. I think you know this is not a new story. I think we need to kind of take a few

[40:29] steps back here. This is a story uh that I can say as a Jew who's you know we're going to be celebrating Passover in two nights. It goes back to the Passover story. This it's really a question. Are we going to you know stand up against oppression? Are we going to make a move that there's no guarantee what we're going to do, but we have a chance at changing a paradigm, or are we just going to accept, okay, you know, we're slaves, we're oppressed, and we're going to allow a terrorist regime that has expressly said they want to kill and

[41:01] destroy the United States multiple times. They've said that they want to destroy Israel. Are we going to allow them to become nuclear? Are we going to allow them to build up their ballistic missile program or are we going to say, you know something, there's no guarantee. But we're going to hearken back to a story that is 3,000 years old, which has inspired multiple stories throughout the world, which is, you know what, there's no guarantee. There's never been a guarantee to defeat evil. But there is one guarantee. If you don't stand up to it, you're going to lose. Aman Dean,

[41:32] you've made a point that it's you got to filter out all the noise in a fastmoving situation like this and try and get to the reality of the movement of military assets. You say deployments don't lie, narratives do. The rest is theater for markets, publics and gullible media. And of course that is often the case in every war. Um, again, from where I sit out here, it's not that I don't think that the Iranians are a very bad regime. They are and have been since they took

[42:03] power in 1979. It's not that I'll lose any sleep over the death of Ayatollah Hani. He was an appalling human being who terrorized his own people, who sponsored terrorism all over the region, uh, largely aimed at Israel. So, I can totally get all that. Um however launching such a full throttle attack on a country with 90 million people where the regime clearly has a lot of firepower to protect itself 250,000 of the IRGC you have half a million

[42:35] paramilitaries have nearly a million regular army that they've got a lot of people around to enforce their will and so far there's no sign of any public uprising there are a number of reasons for that not least of which bombs flying around. Um, but I just don't see any sign of a victory here. I see a lot of bombs going off, a lot of show of military might, but I also see the Iranians winning the economic war quite easily and quite devastatingly. You know, I'm looking at the markets. I'm

[43:06] looking at uh the oil production, gas production. Uh and now I see Trump in a message this morning uh in which he talks about potentially going after desalination plants in Iran. Well, the first reaction of Iran to that would be to go after desalination plants in the Gulf States, which would be utterly devastating. I mean, for people who don't quite grasp what that means, you're talking about desert states that rely on desalination plants for water. If you get rid of those, they don't have

[43:37] much drink your water left before they all start dying. So these are incredibly bleico serious threats that Trump is lobbing out all the time whilst at the same time saying actually you know what we're talking to them and it should be over soon. I I just find all this not just confusing but borderline ridiculous. Well, peers, March 2019, so that's about seven years ago on my podcast. Um, I talked about

[44:08] the reason why Saudi Arabia went to war in Yemen against the Houthis. And in that, uh, conflict, I sold in that podcast, I said that the one of the reasons is that Saudi Arabia wanted to protect above everything else water dalination. Because you see during the Gulf War between Iraq and Iran between 1980 and 1988 and I grew up in the eastern province of Saudi Arabia at that time and I was from Bahrain. Um so I know all about like I mean the situation

[44:40] um you know in the Gulf at that time and how it was really harrowing and um really threatening. But at the same time the Saudis realized that their water dissalination plants on the Gulf were under threat from Iran in a future conflict. Because since I grow up like I mean I always hear about Iranian threats from across the water. So it's not something new. So the Saudis moved many of these water dissalination plants to the west to the Red Sea even though it will cost far more uh you know in terms

[45:12] of economics of doing it. However, then 2014, the Iranians chased the Saudis all the way into the southwestern flank of their country and they push the Houthis into taking over the power in Yemen and you know after a bloody civil war and then they absolutely start threatening water dissalination in the west of Saudi Arabia. So you know peers the Iranians has been threatening to close the straits of hormones since I was a

[45:43] 7-year-old child and that was 40 years ago. I mean I feel old now and they've been threatening the water dalination you know of the Saudi Arabia and the other GCC countries for 40 years and they've been threatening to attack energy facilities. In fact, the attack against energy facilities happened already at the hands of the Iranian proxies in September 2019 against Aramco, the biggest, >> right? But what they've been given what they've been given here is license to do it under the guise of retaliation

[46:14] because >> they had the license from long time ago. >> No, no, I'm not I'm not disputing what you're saying anymore. They always been doing it. >> No, I understand. But to to the world, what it looks like is that all right, fair enough. You know, Iran's getting bombed everywhere. the Israelis are bombing their refineries. Why shouldn't they bomb other people's refineries? So, they're using everything that's happening to them as an excuse to do probably what, as you say, they've wanted to do for a long time. But what they have worked out um is that they can control the global economy in a way that

[46:46] I think the Americans have massively underestimated. And I think it's come as a nasty shock. And >> I I don't think you you can't win a war this way, Pierce. I mean, this kind of reasoning, I'll give you an example. Imagine there's, you know, there's an AR illegal arms dealer on your street, right? And so, you call the FBI, you call the police, and they surround the house, and the guys inside the house start shooting at you, right? So, what are you going to say? Oh, you know, we gave them an excuse to shoot at us. You know, we gave them license to shoot at us. No. If you're going to go after the

[47:17] arms, then the guys are going to pick up the arms that they're threatening and you're going to use it. What's the difference? Iran would have used this anyway. They would have they would have closed the streets of Hermuz Pierce. So the difference is had we waited they would be closing the streets of Hormuz with a nuclear threat with an armed nuclear weapon. Could you imagine the price of oil if there's a nuclear Iran and they're crazy right? I've got ballistic missiles landing next to my home with massive warheads which if one of those landed in England god forbid you know and if it's unprotected can

[47:48] take out 50 blocks. If if we don't stand up now, Iran's this isn't giving license to them. This is trying to defeat them and they're using whatever they have at their disposal. >> Yeah, but then it comes down Okay, but then it comes down to to how an impending threat you feel Iran was posing. And I am not convinced as I wasn't by the argument about Saddam Hussein back in 2003. I am not convinced that there was an imminent threat from uh these weapons in the way that people

[48:19] have tried to sell it. And I think that's the problem. And I think that you know there are lots of bad regime there are lots of bad regimes around the world. Well, Dorian, there are lots of bad regimes around the world uh like North Korea that America does not attack. Right? Even though every argument you would use against Iranians works equally to the Iranians to the North Koreans. So there are reasons you don't do this kind of thing. >> Not at all. Not at all. >> Well, okay. >> Not at all. >> Well, there's a reason. Okay. No one's attacked North Korea. >> I'm I'm so I'm sorry. Like I mean that's

[48:49] a false equivalence. Like I mean comparing North Korea to Iran. >> First of all, North Korea did not recruit 700,000 young men from across the region from Iraq, from Iran, from Iran also from uh Yemen, from Lebanon, from Syria. They did not recruit all of these young people into joining non-state actors, terror militias, in order to destabilize their own countries and then attack neighboring countries with ballistic weapons. They were not supposed to get them in the first place. So you see the

[49:21] problem here is it's not North Korea is just sitting in its own little box. Perfect. You know, at least it is contained. It's a contained threat. However, Iran refused to be a contained threat. They >> that's just not true. Uh let me first of all I think it's a good equivalent for a number of reasons. Yesterday North Korea tested a ballistic missile that can reach the United States homeland. They're not sitting in their own but I also believe it's a it's a good comparison because United States and the

[49:52] four parties and then the six parties spent many many years negotiating with North Korea who convinced the world that they weren't going to build a nuclear weapon. We threw money at them. We threw food at them. through uh access to the international system and they continue to say no, we'll never develop a nuclear weapon. Do you think that Iran is not following that same playbook? >> Of course it is. >> Yeah. Well, I'm I'm sure that's true. Um just hold fire panel for a moment. I want to bring in another guest now. General Sir Richard Sheriff. He's a

[50:24] former NATO commander. General, welcome to Uncensored. >> Thank you for having me. >> You you've been pretty scathing about this. You've called Operation Epic Fury staggeringly arrogant. And he wrote in the Daily Mail, "So we are living through, and as a lifelong soldier, I don't ask this lightly, the outbreak, are we living through the outbreak of World War II?" Certainly, I can't remember a more perilous moment in geopolitics in my lifetime, and I'm now 70. Um, I can't either. I'm actually 61

[50:54] today, and I can't uh remember that either. As it's gone on, we're a month in now. Does your fear about this escalating to that kind of level, has that increased or or decreased? >> It's increased without question. Um I think the uh the attack a month ago um was launched without thinking through the possible consequences. Uh I'm sure that military commanders would have

[51:25] waramed to death the potential for closing the straight of muzz and would normally have taken sort of action to prevent it but clearly it did not happen on this occasion and I think the assumption was made that a lightning industrial scale aerial assault such as we've seen would be enough to do what I mean we didn't know there's no clear design for battle. There is no clear strategy. Uh there is no clear idea of how this war ends. I

[51:59] think and my concern is that we are about to see escalation uh potentially putting troops on the ground on the islands of the straight of Hmurs and or wherever. Uh and then I think we have to take account of the the linkages the linkage between what's going on in Ukraine with Russia's genocidal war there. the fact that Russia is now supplying drones and targeting information uh to the Iranians and I've no doubt there are further and

[52:29] wider linkages. So I think this is a deeply deep deeply globally destabilizing event not least of course it has completely knocked the global econom the potential for knocking the global economy arry in a major way. Let's not assume the straight of Hormuz is going to be opened anytime soon because if America, if the Americans land amphibious troops in that for whatever on that coastline, this thing is going to run and run and run and we're going to be back into a worse situation. You're probably not old

[52:59] enough to remember 1973 and the oil crisis then. Well, you might be, but you know, we'll be back into that. But times 10. >> Yeah, I was eight actually then, but I do remember it vaguely. I I you know I think the trouble is no one's learned the lessons from history and I I I look at what's going on and I think you know you were the the deputy supreme allied commander for Europe. You see some of the rhetoric coming out of Donald Trump now uh very bellos and negative about Europe about NATO about what he

[53:30] perceives to be the lack of cooperation uh here for operation epic fury. If you were still in your old job, what how would you be handling this? >> Well, I think I would make the assumption that Donald Trump has pretty much single-handedly torpedoed NATO as an alliance. You have to understand NATO is an alliance which which flourished for probably nearly 80 years. And it's based on trust. It's based on common values. It's based on the doctrine of collective defense that that uh that

[54:01] that the alliance is there to support an ally if attacked. the famous article 5. From the moment we saw Trump too come into power, we saw van Vance and Hexath announce very clearly that America was not going to underwrite European security. Now I get that because the Europeans frankly have been freeloading from America for decades and so there's a part you know Europe has a part to play in this. But then move forward. The fact that two months ago, Donald Trump

[54:32] threatened to attack the territory of a NATO ally, Denmark, over Greenland. Nobody has forgotten that. Europeans will not forget that. That is a grotesque breach of trust that the lead dog in the pack turns on the other, a smaller dog in the pack as it were. So, no surprise uh that no NATO allies prepared to support Trump in this particular ill-starred V mission. Uh no surprise for a start because it's not a it's not a NATO operation. It's NATO

[55:03] does not look at cover the territory of of of of um of the Persian Gulf or the Arabian Gulf. uh and absolutely it does not support an ally launching a an unprovoked although may you may argue that but an attack which which could well be construed as illegal against a party that had not attacked it. So there's no way that NATO should or could support it. But the message for NATO now is that NATO's got to pull its act together. The European members of NATO

[55:33] have got to get their act together. recognize that yes, they have to maintain links with America and certainly in the UK's case, the intelligence and the military links are much deeper than political. They are built on frankly shoulder-to-shoulder brothers and sisters in arms over many years. But that America as a an alliance ally, a member of the alliance is not going to play a central part. Europe uh Europe needs to step up to the mark and

[56:04] drawing on Mark Carney's words from Davos develop and build an ally an alliance based on the middle powers which it can do if it's prepared to make the necessary sacrifices and European leaders are prepared to show the necessary leadership >> in one word is the special relationship done over kaput I I I think the special relationship is a fantasy put about if I may say so peers by the media and politicians It died if it ever was one. It died from in 1956 at Sueis. And it's crazy to go

[56:37] on banging on about the special relationship. >> Couldn't be clearer. Uh, General Schiff, thank thank you very much for joining me. I appreciate it. Thank you for having
