Judging Freedom - COL. Douglas Macgregor : Does the US Have a Military Option in Iran?

Episode Date: June 4, 2026

COL. Douglas Macgregor : Does the US Have a Military Option in Iran?See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Undeclared wars are commonplace. Pragically, our government engages in preemptive war, otherwise known as aggression, with no complaints from the American people. Sadly, we have become accustomed to living with the illegitimate use of force by government. To develop a truly free society, the issue of initiating force must be understood and rejected. What if sometimes to love your country you had to alter or abolish a society? alter or abolish the government? What if Jefferson was right? What if that government is best, which governs least? What if it is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong? What if it is better to perish fighting for freedom than to live as a slave? What if freedom's greatest hour of

danger is now? Hi, everyone, Judge Andrew Napolitano here for judging freedom. Today is Thursday, June 4th, and 26, Colonel Douglas McGregor will be with us in just a moment. Does the United States have a military option in Iran? But first this. The bugout bag designed for elite survivalists, preparedness experts, and field-tested professionals is now available to the public, including multiple days' worth of food, a water bottle with built-in filtration. That's right, our friends at My Patriot Supply have announced

they're fully stocked go bag with everything you need to escape a crisis and survive on your own. Tools and gear for starting fires, making shelters and staying warm, catching fish, trapping small game, cooking off grid, and much more. It's everything you need, whether you're facing a natural disaster, power grid failure, or even civil unrest. And it all comes pre-stocked. in a tactical backpack, so rugged and durable, it's practically bulletproof. This kit was designed with elite survivalists in mind, and now it's available for you. And here's the best part.

When you go to Preparewiththejudge.com, you'll unlock a limited time $100 discount. Get your survival go bag today with $100 off at Preparewiththejudge.com. That's prepare with the judge.com. Gregor, welcome here, my dear friend. Do President Trump find his off ramp yet from the war in Iran? I don't think so. In fact, I have the impression he's probably searching for a bugout bag and getting into a rowboat with a motor on the end of it,

trying to steam away as fast as possible for the Persian Gulf. Oh, jeez. They catch fish in the purse and. Russian Gulf. Issue bug out bags to everybody and let's head out to see. No, I don't think he has. And I think he's, you know, he's caught in this terrible dilemma, judge. There is, there really is no military solution to the problem in the Persian Gulf.

And, you know, we knew about this. We talked about this for weeks, long time ago. I sat with Tucker two or three years ago on some of his shows. And I was asked, are we going to go to war with Iran? said, yes, what happens? And I said nothing good. We never really sat down and looked objectively at the problem. And it's caught up with us. So there is no military solution. So if there's no military solution, what do you do as president of the United States? And I think at the moment, he's kind of sitting in a dark room. There are some doors out of the room, but he can't see

them and he's stealing for them and hopefully he'll find one but he's not going to get what he wants which is i think unconditional surrender or uh you know readiness to essentially uh turn over the the straight or anything else to the international community it's not going to happen who who is suffering more and who has more of a capacity you're going to love this question because you're philosophical, to endure suffering the Persians or the Americans? Well, I think that's an easy question. Clearly, the Persians who are used to a lower standard of living and for whom this is an existential war. Remember, this is not existential for us, Judge. It never was. We have no real reason to attack Iran. That's the sad truth. Contrary to all of the

Israeli talking points that all the heads in Washington keep repeating over and over, over and over again. You know, the truth is, if anybody, we probably should remind ourselves of what we did to build up Saddam Hussein, the man whose government we ultimately removed. We built him up into a major power. We financed his military strength. And then we sent him into war against Iran, killing somewhere in the neighborhood of four to 500,000 Iranians. Did we give him chemical weapons? Well, effectively, we did because I think the chemical mixtures, as I recollect, came out of Germany from some German firms, but we facilitated it. We enabled it. Without us, without our money, without our advice, no, nothing would have happened. So, you know, you can't make this stuff up.

It's incredible. Anybody who looks at this 100 years from now is going to think they were completely insane, and they're probably right. Is there any military solution that is palatable to the Gulf states? I mean, if Trump were to resume bombing, Stephen Miller, Pete Hegeseth, General Kane, persuade him to act like Curtis LeMay. The Iranians will effectively destroy the Gulf states, won't they? Well, thus far, in contrast to us, the Iranians have done exactly what they. they said they would do.

And they have made it abundantly clear that everything on the west side of the Persian Gulf will be reduced to ruins. And I think they would do it. The other thing is we have to remember there are other forces at work here. There are a lot of people in the Muslim world, the Arab world, the Islamic world, whatever you want to call it, in the whole Middle Eastern region, did view these Emirates as the legacy of British imperialism. Right.

And kept on life support by us. they see these as Trojan horses for all sorts of bad influence, corruption, human trafficking, as well as Israeli power. So a lot of people would say, fine, get rid of them, be done with them. They're going to have a tough time as it is right now, surviving and coming back. But I think, you know, when you say who suffers the most in the short run, clearly the Iranians, but in the long run, if you look at the impact of this war right now,

I was talking this morning to some friends in Sweden, And we were going over these points that were in the built newspaper from Germany about U.S. plans to effectively pull out of NATO. And the publication built, you know it's very well known. They said that the United States was going to take out large numbers of RC 135 tankers or KC46s, the more modern version. They were going to reduce the numbers of F-16 fighters from 99 to 63, FE, or 15 Eagle Strike Eagle squadrons from 54 down to 36 aircraft, that is. All long-range reconnaissance drones are going to be withdrawn from NATO. Numbers of MQ9 attack drones will be almost halved,

removing two carrier battle groups that are currently committed to Europe in the event of any emergency, cutting the numbers of cruises and destroyers by almost half, on and on and on, reducing the bomber forces. In other words, we can't afford to play global hegemon anymore. The Europeans have figured it out. Secondly, we can't protect our so-called allies. That's what we've demonstrated in the Persian Gulf. This military technology called ISR strike in television,

surveillance, reconnaissance, linked to strike platforms on the ground or at sea or in the air, is now the defining feature of military power in the world. you know, if you do it right, if you know what you're doing, make the right investments of space-based surveillance, terrestrial surveillance, and strike platforms. Finland and Sweden can defend themselves against anybody forever. That's what people are figuring out. So then you ask, why do we want American bases on our soil, especially if they become magnets for the wrong kind of attention because the Americas decide to go to war with somebody that they

don't like? But the whole world is going to change. really all of what we're seeing in the Persian Gulf. Why do we have 50,000 ground troops in the Middle East? Well, that's a good question. We know that not all of those are ground troops in the sense of ground combat formations. They constitute approximately 15,000. The rest probably consist of advisors, crisis action teams, you know, local security,

headquarters, and all of that. That is designed to effectively prevent a state like Iran from doing what it's done. I mean, that's the whole point. They're sitting there and out of the original 27 bases, 11, as I understand, are completely destroyed. And we can't stop it. That's the problem. So I think that question is going to be answered by, not much. And so we're pulling them out.

I think we'll leave. You, in addition to being a student of military history or also a student of the economy, so how bad is oil today? Has the president and have his people nearly depleted the Strategic Oil Reserve? And once it's gone or close to gone, aren't the price is going to shoot up again? Yeah, funny you asked that because I was listening to Ray Dalio. Lou Ray is terrific. Yeah, Luke Groman, Jeffrey Goodlock,

a number of other people talking about exactly what you're discussing. Our strategic oil reserve is being reduced to the point of just about running out. That probably will happen mid-July, beginning of August. You know, what we need to remember is before the war began, and remember, we're now saying that we want, as a minimum, the Strait of Hormuz to be open to everyone, right? Right. And on the eve of the war, global oil flows through the strait averaged 106.9 million barrels per day.

Wow. Billion with a B? Yeah, million. 106.9 million barrels per day. Right. Okay. Now, that's being reduced to less than 10% of that. And even if the straight were open tomorrow morning, how long would it take for all of the ships

that are currently sitting there full to the brim to go and deliver their respective oil or gas or whatever and then come back empty and fill up again. How many of the oil fields, the drilling rigs, the extraction devices, how many of those have been shut down to the point where it would take six months to a year to reopen them?

How much of the oil storage is already full, complete capacity? So the answer to your question is we have been artificially suppressing the cost of a barrel of oil or a barrel of jet fuel or a barrel of any number of different things. We can't do that much longer because we don't have the excess that allows us to do it. Well, Trump was bragging yesterday that oil is $98 a barrel and he thought it would be up or feared it would be up around $200 or $300. He did not mention the artificial suppression, nor did he mention. how little time is left if anybody knows, Colonel, for the suppression to continue.

Yeah, well, that's why would he advertise that? He's going to tell you what he wants you to hear. Remember that his principal audience has always been Wall Street. And the sad truth of the matter is, most people on Wall Street, they don't know what they're listening to. Let me be honest about this kind of thing. They understand finance. That's not the issue. But now you're talking about resource constraints with which they're completely unfamiliar. Most of these people that are in the oil financial end have never been to a drilling rig. They've never been to a mine where uranium is dug out and extracted. They've never seen copper extracted at a refinery. In other words, they're remote from all these

things. They have no feel for the capital investment. They have no feel for the time involved, all the challenges that you have to extract and transport and move out. So that's not really surprising and what he's tried to do over and over and over again, and you've got to give the president credit for this because he is a marketing genius, he has managed to suppress the price because prices are not based on reality. They're based on emotion. And right now, your rational forces are saying, oh, the war is over. The war is over. There were no more fighting. It's just a matter of time now, a matter of time to what, until Israel gives us permission to disengagement. because that's what's going to have to happen until Israel says, all right, we understand you can't

destroy Iran, go home, until President Trump says, we're going to go bankrupt, I'm going to be thrown out of office, our economy is going to be destroyed. I'm sorry, I have to leave. I mean, what's the trigger for the end, Judge? I'm not sure. Wow. What are Russia and China doing while all this is happening? Well, the Chinese have cut their importation of oil, and that's actually helped a lot. They have the largest strategic petroleum reserve in the world, and I'm told they're good for another two or three months, but in the meantime, they have cut their importation of oil. That's helped others in Asia and others around the world.

I think the Russians are doing everything they can to make up the shortfalls, particularly for the Chinese, but also for the Koreans and the Japanese and others. I think both Russia and China, contrary to what people in this country think, want this to end as soon as possible. I listen to people all the time saying, oh, well, the Russians must be happy. The Chinese are delighted. This is hurting us. No, that's not true. They're both about the same thing, and that is getting back to normalcy, about ending all of these sanction regimes that do so much damage. and releasing all the frozen funds that we have.

And of course, that's a big issue for Donald Trump. He's very proud of the fact that he has control of all these funds that belong to Iran or Russia and others, and he's not going to release them until they do what he wants. What he's finding out is that people are not going to do what he wants. That's the problem. Colonel, I want to play a little clip from the president yesterday. He says he spoke to the Ayatollah, or to Hezbollah.

That's not the point of the club. The point of the clip is he defined his own understanding of a ceasefire. Chris cut number three. We actually spoke with Hezbollah for the first time ever. We didn't know they spoke. How do you define ceasefire? Pretty much you're aware. It's a different part of the world.

You know, I'd say in that part of the world, ceasefire is when you're shooting in a more moderate manner. Shooting in a more moderate manner. Well, Judge, listen, this is in a moment for celebration. How often do we talk to anybody? You know, I mean, most of the time, we refuse to speak to people. It was saying, well, that person is not a liberal Democrat. He was not democratically elected or whatever.

Or he's corrupt or he's this or that. Thank God we talk to somebody, and I'm glad we talked to somebody in Esmel. Now, did he clear this with Mr. Netanyahu? because this is not going to please Netanyahu in the least. Mr. Netanyahu is committed to the total destruction of Isbalah, and that's one of the reasons that they're bombing the living daylights out of Lebanon. So I don't know what it means, but you're right. As far as the ceasefire is concerned, I guess something that doesn't escalate dramatically

but continues at a low roar or a dull roar, as they say. It's a strange way to view the world. Yes. Colonel, do you think the Iranians have, a nuclear weapon? You know, I think I've said before that the ultimate outcome of this war will be that not only Iran, but many, many other mid-level powers will indeed invest in a nuclear deterrent. I think that's the principal outcome of President Trump's war.

The very thing he said he set out to suppress or eliminate is going to proliferate. So the proliferation regime that we all signed up for is increasingly irrelevant. Does it have it today? I don't know. Could it? Probably. They certainly have had the expertise to build a nuclear weapon for decades. The Shah wanted to field a nuclear weapon, and Richard Nixon told him to forget it.

It was more trouble than it was worth. It was a liability, not an asset. And ultimately, he convinced the Shah to forget it. So this is not new. I'm sure that they have the ability, and if they have one, I wouldn't be surprised. But having said that, I think it would be a serious mistake right now for Iran under any circumstances to demonstrate that they have it. I understand what I mean by that.

Detonate a nuclear weapon on their soil in one of their endless deserts in the south of the country, just to show everybody that they've got it. That's a mistake. Because if that were to happen, I would expect the Israelis to load up most of whatever they've got and dump it on top of Iran. To destroy what remains of the nuclear arsenal. If they can find it, yes, and perhaps to do as much damage as they can against Iran in the hopes that the country never really recovers. Yeah. Isn't Trump really created an insoluble?

dilemma, which will require him to abandon or restrain Netanyahu and at the same time, thereby, antagonize his Zionist supporters and those in the Congress. The Iranians will not enter into any kind of meaningful peace unless Israel is restrained in Gaza, Syria, the West Bank, and Lebanon. and Trump, I don't know. Can he restrain the Israelis? Does he have the backbone to do that? Thus far, he's demonstrated that he cannot. Whether or not he has the backbone is a different question.

I'm willing to at least give him the benefit of the doubt that he's tried. I hope I'm right. I mean, I have no way to prove that judge. But my supposition is that he has tried to tell them on more than one occasion and cease and desist, you're putting everything at risk. But does that have any effect? I don't see much evidence that it does. I think the last time I witnessed a president to actively intervened

and stopped something that the Israelis were doing was under George W. Bush. And this involved destroying some houses in Gaza. They sent in bulldozers and troops. and Bush got on the line and called Sharon and said, stop immediately. Get out. And he did. I don't think President Trump has that kind of authority right now. I don't think he can manage it.

Now, is that what is that a function of? Is that a function of political forces here at home? Or is it a function of the Epstein files? I leave that to the audience to figure out. Colonel, yesterday the Republican-controlled House of Representatives voted to invoke the War Powers Act, and the President referred to it as a meaningless vote. The House voted for bad Republicans and all of the Democrats to limit my war powers right in the middle of my final negotiations to end the war with the Islamic Republic of Japan, of Iran, excuse me, who would do such an unpatriotic thing? I'm not going to keep reading it.

I don't know if this will pass the Senate. It's certainly not going to restrain him, but it's telling on the international stage if Congress of the United States by majority vote, however is close in both houses, said, stop Mr. President. Why are they saying stop, Mr. President? Because they go home on weekends and hear about this from the people who are paying $6 a gallon for gas.

It's evidence of the ground shifting under his feet. he's in the tank in terms of popularity. He's headed into, I would say, 1974 Nixonian territory. I think he knows that. It sounded to me more along the lines that he's trying to develop an excuse for why he wasn't able to negotiate an acceptable agreement. That may not be all bad. I mean, quite frankly, I don't think we're going to see an agreement of any kind, Judge. First of all, why would the Iranians trust anything we say?

Secondly, we can't deliver on the Israelis. We just can't. And then third, what are we doing? If we're not going to attack Iran militarily, this blockade is a joke. There are ships getting through every day. Many, many ships. I mean, if this is a blockade, it's one of the weakest I've seen. And he knows that if he tries to clamp down and make it that much more difficult,

he's hurting the world. So yeah, I mean, there it is, approved 35%. Wow. He's still a little bit above Richard Nixon. Yeah, no, you were not exaggerated when you said Nixonian. I think, and man, I don't want to put words in your mouth. When you say Nixon at 74, you're also talking about, and stop me if you think I'm wrong, I'm extrapolating your words, the premature end of a presidential term. Yes, that's right. You're right. And I think he has to face that distinct possibility. And you know, the Israeli lobby and the people that back that the billionaires are not a nice group of people.

If they decide he's now more of a liability than an asset, you know what that means. He's not around for very long. They'll replace him with the next one in line. The new puppet. And I suspect that would be J.D. Vance. Maybe that's one of the reasons that Vance's team is trying so hard to convince everybody that he's being this heroic holdout against the war. Right.

Which, you know, I can't confirm through the sources I have at all. In fact, quite the opposite. You know, that's probably where we're headed. Now, the longer he stays, the worse the situation gets around the world. And when I say stays, I'm talking about maintains these forces in a posture ready to attack Iran. But if he leads, he admits defeat. And it's back to what I said. weeks ago, he faces humiliation abroad, humiliation at home. What's the right way for him to

behave? And again, and I've said this so many times, and people look at me like I'm nuts and they're probably right. But I keep saying that he could tell everybody that on humanitarian grounds, it makes no sense to continue this war. This hurts the whole world. We did not set out when we began this war to harm the world. And the quickest way to help the world is to suspend all further military operations at this time against Iran. But he's got a lot of irons in the fire right now. And again, I don't know how much control he exerts. Certainly he has control over Admiral Cooper, but the intelligence agencies are heavily engaged in all of this. They're involved all over the region working on various proxies that they want to prop up and then hurl

at Iran. And then here's the other part. Nobody's paying much attention to this. There are two giant states that are very interested in what's going on right now. And it's becoming very clear that they're very close to stepping over the line of from observer to participate. One of course are the Turks. And the Turks are the 600 pound gorilla in the region. They're a larger and more powerful force than what you have in Iran, quite frankly. And they have always had access to a nuclear weapon through Pakistan. They've always known that if they needed one to deter the Israelis, it would come to them from Pakistan. And then there's Egypt.

Egypt has the largest force and is the largest Muslim Arab state. And the population there is absolutely boiling with anger and hatred and wants to go after the Israelis. And I think General C.C. is hanging by a thread. Those things continue. And one wonders if we pull out and we leave this alone, what happens to Israel at that point? Colonel, thank you very much. Great analysis, as always. I especially appreciate all the economic analysis from you. Appreciate your time, my dear friend. We'll look forward to seeing you again soon.

Okay. Thank you, Judge. Thank you so much. Coming up tomorrow, take a look at the schedule. We may have a surprise for you at 8 in the morning, but we will certainly have at the end of the day, the end of the week, our intelligence community round. table with Ray McGovern and Larry Johnson. Judge Napolitano for judging freedom.