So let's start there.

Okay, so by the way, on the issue of taking down the Starlink, Musk and someone in the White House, I don't know who, I'm going to hypothesize it extremely likely, by the way, Musk denies it.

The reality is only he, no one in that organization would have followed any other directions other than from Musk himself.

So it's extremely likely that Musk turned that off after a phone call, either with the president or someone else in the administration, in the White House itself.

That's extremely likely.

It's also interesting that literally yesterday, Musk threatened Democrats, threatened Democrats, that if they ever were to investigate him, he would come after them.

I mean, that's public.

And by the way, prices here in the United States are not going to be impacted at all, but it gives a lifeline to the Russian economy.

Is there any potentiality for an off-ramp to this thing at this point?

The person who holds all the keys is the President of the United States.

God help us.

No, I'm not exaggerating.

It's only one single man, one, that can make the decision to move forward or stop this.

And as I've said before on your show yesterday, and many others.

Unfortunately, the president's ego is getting in the way of what is in the best interest of the United States and of the American citizens.

This is why I bring up something like a potential landing because, you know,

General, what exactly is going on here? So.

I'll be blunt.

Remember how I've said on your program before that the leaders that Trump absolutely fawns over and loves to be around are the leaders of Russia, China, North Korea.

There's one more that's in my head, but I can't actually think of who it is at the moment.

But those three are prominent.

And so what he's doing is literally Again, he's being played like a fiddle by Putin.

Oh, I'm sorry, the fourth one, Israeli prime minister.

though they've made good adaptations with the drones and i mean i think the russians

What do you know about this situation?

So I've been reading all available news from the UK.

This is actually something where British intelligence and U S intelligence might key phrase might have had a breakdown of analysis.

However, we don't know that completely yet.

It appears that by the way, just for your listeners, this air force base, this Royal air force base is in the middle of nowhere.

It's surrounded by farmland.

Um, it's remote as you could probably imagine.

gauge that? What are the things on your checklist?

What do you think of Hegseth's characterization?

So first of all, I completely agree that he has been firing people based on their political ideology in his perception, which of course, military officers are not political, but anybody who does not agree with him is actually labeled as such.

The concept of reducing the number of admirals and generals is a good one.

Just as an example, the British Navy has over 35 admirals, but yet they only have 15 combat ships.

That's clearly out of sync.

The problem is that the Secretary of Defense has already proven that he's trying to purge the military, already fired 80 people, 80 generals and admirals.

And because of their gender, because they're not white like him, or because they were associated with General Milley or others, incredibly competent generals, and he's getting rid of them.

What are you hearing, if anything, from military officials about this new memo and what the point of it might be?

Why would he even be needing to entertain a deal on the Strait of Hormuz if the Strait of Hormuz was already open?

Exactly.

That's exactly the point.

He's telling a lie while telling a lie.

And it's very sad for the people around the world who are paying so much more for gasoline and oil prices and food prices.

So the bottom line up front is, this truly only can be done through negotiation.

And that is very difficult and it takes a lot of time.

Randy, clock's ticking on the midterms, isn't it?

to do saturation

yeah that's right they would do saturation so then they did not do that so this appears to be the one off like you know hey i'm upping the ante slightly but not big time.

Now, I need to – so that's comment number one.

I think it was one-off because this was never intended to destroy the aircraft carrier, even though it could have if they had just sat there.

Okay.

But practically, very unlikely that eight missiles would get through.

Second thing I want to say, in the Middle East, this idea of a – An eye for an eye, you know, a nose for a nose, however that saying goes.

Okay.

What do you make of Secretary Hegseth at this moment?

So the Secretary of Defense is proving yet once again that he is a clear and present danger to the national security of the United States.

He single-handedly has purged over 20 senior officers based on gender and race and people that were associated with senior leaders that the president or he disagreed with.

He has removed over 45 candidates to be a general and admiral.

There are only five four-star generals in the Army right now against 10 open slots.

This is very, very dangerous.

We have a very, very hollow and, quite frankly, a B-minus team leading at the top of the military.

What is your reaction to this breaking news tonight, that Dan Driscoll's had enough?

That's right.

The CENTCOM commander should be providing the best advice and counsel to be able to say, which apparently he has done more actively, you know, that leaked where he said, Hey, boss, what the hell are we firing all these missiles at? Because we haven't got any targets that are worth a $12.7 million missile.

So I don't want to be critical.

I also want to say, what the hell is going on? And we are now at a point where if someone wanted to do something in Taiwan, we'd be screwed.

And also, in Europe, the Russians are going to be more and more aggressive, in my opinion.

Germany is the only saving grace in Europe.

The problem is there's a little bit of a history there about Germany rearming.

What do we do to dissuade them from exploiting that window of vulnerability?

But before we go on to Tehran, considering that these strikes are going deeper inside Iranian territory, could it still be aimed at degrading Iran's ability to control the Strait of Hormuz? Or has the objective possibly shifted now, whether it's degrading Iran's military capabilities as a whole or something bigger?

It's very, very difficult to understand what the administration's intents are because, quite frankly, they don't know and they keep changing.

What I see from the evidence that has been emerging over the past 10 days, combined with the information that you're sharing with me now about, even though they're unconfirmed, it's very likely to be mostly true.

What this is, is a significant expansion to degrade Iran's capability to offensive capability.

The problem is that's the way it's been for the past five months.

Um, I find this goes hand-in-hand with the Secretary Defen- Defense's lackluster performance on Capitol Hill today, where basically he accused other senators, Democratic senators of, of s- uh, senators of suffering from Trump derangement syndrome.

In other words, he basically calls people names because he said that the war in Iran has cost the taxpayers $37.5 billion.

Um, could the US sustain this war with shorter range missiles and, and dumb bombs, um, that don't require that level of precision or a, a, a long range?

What is your reaction to all this? What is your take on this, you know, with that experience that you have in evaluating and looking at, you know, the, the dynamics between and the relationship between the political and the military side?

Sure.

I am certainly hopeful that something, some framework will be signed for moving forward.

That way we can hopefully end hostilities and move to, uh, uh, lessen or eliminate the stranglehold that Iran presently has on, on 20% of the oil, and certainly oil prices around the world.

I will tell you that I am highly skeptical at the same time.

Uh, the reason why, it's, it's unfortunate to say this, um, I think the Iranians, minus the propaganda, because both sides have tremendous amounts of propaganda, I think the Iranians are in it for the long game, and they are more thoughtful about what they're going to offer and give up.

I think that the, uh, Ir- that the Iranian regime is actually far more, uh, powerful on the world stage than it was before, before the, the, this president decided to attack them with the Israeli prime minister.

If, if it's signed this weekend, what would need to be in it for you to conclude that the military campaign actually achieved a meaningful strategic objective, even with the tragedy and the chaos and, and everything else? [laughs]

If the final points, as he says, have not been approved by all parties and he doesn't have a deal, why did he call off further strikes?

It's my opinion that Iran is more powerful than they have ever been.

Now, that does not mean they have a great navy or a great air force, of course, because those have been mostly wiped out.

But the reality is because of their strategic position, they can control the transit of commerce through the strait, and they can also hold the world hostage.

So in other words, even if they negotiate away their nuclear material, the reality is Their new nuclear weapon is shutting down the street.

They can hold the entire world hostage at any time.

And they now know it and they did not know it prior to the war that Trump started.

What does it look like to you is the hold up here with these negotiations? Is it the frozen assets or is it the uranium talks?

Okay, if the final pr- points, as he says, have not been approved by all parties and he doesn't have a deal, why'd he call off, why'd he call off further strikes?

It is, it is my opinion that Iran is more powerful, um, than they ever, have ever been.

Now, that does not mean they have a great navy or a great, uh, air force, of course, because those have been mostly wiped out.

But the reality is because of their strategic position, they can control the transit of, uh, commerce through the strait, uh, and they can also hold the world hostage.

So in other words, even if they negotiate away the, their nuclear material, the reality is th- their new nuclear weapon is shutting down the strait.

They can hold the entire world hostage at any time, and they now know it, and they did not know it prior to the war that Trump started.

What does it look like to you i- is the hold up here with these, these negotiations? Is it the frozen assets or is it the uranium talks?

I truly believe it's the President's ego.

I was planning to have you on to talk about the Apache downing, but now we have the retaliation to talk about as well.

Okay, so if indeed all those reports of all those facilities that were hit are accurate, that sounds like a 10 or 20 times response that is not a like kind response.

That is a significant material response to the downing of that Apache helicopter.

Secondly, there's a lot more to this story, which I don't know yet what is going on.

For an air crew, first of all, when you have an Apache that is hit, it depends on exactly how significant the hit was.

Helicopters do not survive well.

and they don't survive well in the water because when the blades hit it's possible that that can also then cause the entire frame to twist and turn simultaneously with it hitting the water now i wasn't there i don't know exactly what happened the pilots will be debriefed about about it it is a significant miracle that those two pilots were able to get out over water i mean that is That's extraordinary.

So if you put all these together, along with the Axios report of him cursing Netanyahu, everything indicated for the last two weeks that trump wants out so what changed if anything did change

Um, there's a lot to unpack there, but I'd love to kind of get your general thoughts on the developments today.

So first thing is, is that the attack does not surprise me.

Israel continues to attack targets, targets in Lebanon.

Uh, number two is that this was a very measured response.

I mean, a total of 15 missiles is not a large number, um, compared to...

It was more of a, they were sending a message.

That's number one.

Israel can Yes.

So is it even worth the paper it's written on?

That's exactly correct.

Unfortunately, any two-way agreement when it doesn't include the powerful third party is basically not worth the paper it's written on, correct? Okay, so what happens from here then? I think this is something where we would be hopeful that there would be continued de-escalation.

The problem is the Israelis still are using, as they always have, they are defending themselves and also, quite frankly, attacking other neighbors to be able to secure their frontiers.

And that, of course, means the United States is powerless in trying to provide any incentive to Israel, unfortunately.

Do you

Hey, what do you make of Hegseth accusing New Zealand of freeloading, re-defence spend?

I tell you what, it is an embarrassment as a person who has devoted 36 years of my life in service to the United States and to the peace in the world to have the Secretary of Defense go out to the Pacific and basically pause the $14 billion sale of weapons to Taiwan, to be able to pause the delivery of Tomahawk missiles to Japan, and essentially has told New Zealand, Australia, and other nations to, hey, you're on your own.

So is it even worth the paper it's written on?

That's exactly correct.

Unfortunately, any two-way agreement when it doesn't include the powerful third party is basically not worth the paper it's written on.

Correct.

Okay.

So what happens from here then? I think this is something where we would be hopeful that there would be continued de-escalation.

The problem is, is the Israelis still are using as they always have.

Hey, what do you make of Hegseth accusing New Zealand of freeloading, re-defence spend?

W- uh, actually, I haven't asked you the basic question, is do you even think a deal is gonna happen, an MOU is gonna happen at least, just the, the, the, the beginning of a long-term deal? Do you think even that will happen?

So I am very optimistic that an MOU could, could be, uh, signed or agreed upon, which it basically says what do they agree to in the immediate term, and then what do they agree to work on? Why do I say it? Because Trump has got to figure out a way out of this mess, because we're coming up on the 250th anniversary of the United States, and it is a total mess.

Uh, meaning that, uh, his various initiatives, like gold plating the statues and the bridges across the Potomac River, I mean, literally $5 million a pop.

Painting the bottom of the ref- reflecting pool because he thought it looked dirty.

Um, doing a UFC fight on the front grounds of the White House.

Um, it's dividing America more and more, and he, he may not...

He doesn't care, but unfortunately a lot of the Republicans that are up for election this fall care that- He's literally causing havoc.

So putting all these things together, are you worried that we may see, um, a significant escalation there?

Second, how easy or difficult is it for Iranian missiles to strike a US warship? And third, what if you add artillery and drones to the equation? How difficult is it then to strike an American warship? Okay.

When you think about an American warship going through the strait, the defenses of the ship are not the only defenses that are being used by the United States.

So you have that as the immediate capability, but then you also have drones and aircraft that are being flown overhead and satellites to be able to detect what is happening from where.

And then there are multiple layers to a defense for that ship that go way beyond the ship itself.

So one of the questions that I'm gonna ask myself on your behalf is, is this scalable? Meaning is this escort of the two ships, is that scalable to hundreds? And I'm gonna tell you, going to be very expensive for the united states to do that because it takes so much capability to be able to minimize not put out zero by the way to minimize the possibility of something getting through to a escorted freighter or to a u.s warship so i need to say that um it's Again, extremely complex.

I do not believe it's scalable to the idea of hundreds of escorts because we would be there forever and it will cost us a hell of a lot of capability to be able to safeguard those assets moving through the strait.

So why do you think they're doing Operation Freedom? I think two reasons.

General, last question for you is, considering what we know so far, what would you expect America's next move to be? Are we leaning more to a continuation of hostilities eventually through maybe the escalation trap or a higher likelihood of Trump just walking away?

That's

a lot.

Let me start at the beginning.

I absolutely regard the Secretary of Defense as a clear and present danger to the security of the United States.

Why do I say this? In World War II, the United States lost 23 generals and admirals to combat operations by the Japanese or the Germans, or by accident during operations, 23.

This Secretary of Defense has removed not for incompetence, not because of some kind of a moral judgment error.

He has removed nearly 30 generals and admirals from the military during wartime.

And is that a possibility or from the indications that you're seeing, it seems very unlikely.

So why is it, why do you think this war is not over yet, given the enormous advantage, military advantage of the United States and Israel?

The Iranians can just wait this out.

They can just continue to wait it out.

Remember that the Iranian regime does not really care about their people.

So the pain and agony that has been happening to their people, that's not necessarily number one on their list.

Because of that, the Iranian regime, which is very deep, the idea of decapitating the regime and we have a new regime, That's a fool's dream.

There is no such thing.

What was your reaction to that and what impact do you think that could have?

And it seems that these stories suggest that people inside the military do not think we're in a safe range on these issues anymore.

I completely agree with the assessments by The New York Times and the other, uh, investigations that have been ongoing.

Uh, this is something where we are probably in the lowest state of readiness, uh, quite frankly, probably since, uh, 2010, 2012, in that time period.

Uh, we have been...

Uh, these stocks will take, I was saying perhaps two years if they accelerate the funding and accelerate the assembly lines and so on, and make huge investments in our, i-in, uh, through our defense contractors.

But the reality is we are dangerously low on these ammunitions.

Uh, no matter what the president says, it is complete propaganda.

Now, what's disgusting and appalling, um, is it the commander-in-chief has no issue with a soldier betting on a military operation? He just wanted to know which side he placed the bet on, General Maner.

Slight similarities the early days of it.

So I am hoping that the Chinese will not decide to confront the Americans on this straight.

I think the Chinese are blunt.

Remember, the Chinese are not friends in the United States any longer.

When I say friends, We've been long-term economic partners and trading partners.

Our economies are linked more than ever before.

This administration, though, has been putting tariffs on them and is threatening even more tariffs.

It gives you an idea of how long negotiations go on for.

Was that all planned? Was it all planned? aim to achieve where it's achieved so far and fail, we perceive it as a failure just to force around to negotiate more? Or if it's an actual failure, which I think me and you believe it is from a strategic perspective, where did it go wrong?

Okay, so you asked a lot of things there.

I did, I did.

I've got a lot of questions.

So let me jump into a couple of them.

So one is the winner in this is Israel.

because Israel used American munitions to decrease the offensive capability of Iran against Israel.

And on the first question on where you think the biggest miscalculation was, what really made this such a spectacular failure, at least the way I see it, for the U.S.?

Your thoughts.

Just like you were explaining in your, in your opening monologue, this is very disturbing that the leader of the f- free world is essentially, um, speaking words that are identical to those of war criminals.

It's extremely disturbing, and, uh, I will tell you that I think the chances of anything happening at 8:00 PM tonight are close to zero.

Why do I say that? Because I think that the right people will stand up to him to say, "No, uh, these words of your threats against eliminating a civilization are not going to happen." I, I believe that.

Um, I think there'll be some way that he will figure out, uh, by one way or another not to go down that way.

Uh, I think even the closest people around him, except for the zealots, are starting to see that we have a, a president who is, quite frankly, um, perhaps not thinking clearly or straight and acting in the, on behalf of the United States and, and its Amer- and our people.

So I'm very, very concerned about this relative to our military, relative to the world.

W- what do those statements from deep inside Trump's highest profile members of his coalition, what do they mean to active duty members of the military?