Judging Freedom - Col. Douglas Macgregor: Europe Crumbling, Middle East Exploding

Episode Date: March 12, 2024

Col. Douglas Macgregor: Europe Crumbling, Middle East ExplodingSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Thank you. Hi, everyone. Judge Andrew Napolitano here for Judging Freedom. Today is Tuesday, March 12, 2024. Colonel Douglas McGregor joins us now. Colonel, thank you for joining us. I know we were on together a week ago, but I've been in such another world in the Vatican, traveling back and forth there, of course. It seems like it was longer than that, and it seems like a lot happened. The president gave his State of the Union address. A number of people gave responses. You gave a response that was the best I saw, was over the top, and was absolutely spectacular. And unlike the Republican response, yours was filled with factual statements that could all be backed up and arguments that were articulately made. But a lot has happened, notwithstanding

the president's claims during the address. I want to start with Victoria Nuland, the architect of the, arguably, the architect of the 2014 coup in Ukraine and the champion of the disastrous American backing of the Ukrainians in the conflict with Russia. She's gone. In your opinion and from your sources, did she jump or was she pushed? Obviously, she was pushed. And what we might consider is that her departure signals the readiness of the administration to quietly, or at least as quietly as possible disengage from the disaster in Ukraine over the next several months. I mean, can they do that prior to Election Day without having to confront and justify an over-the-top foreign policy catastrophe created entirely by them when you take into account the agreement that the Russians and Ukrainians had negotiated two years ago this month in Turkey, which we and the British sabotaged?

Well, Victoria Nuland is the hideous face of all these bad attributes in the policy towards Ukraine and Russia. It doesn't fundamentally change the attitude in Washington, but it does signal the determination to ultimately disengage. And as I'd said before, when we leave, we will leave the way we did when we left Vietnam. We simply packed up and moved out. We left it pretty much the way we found it it fell into the hands of other people that we stopped talking about it I think the media will be very compliant in its readiness to stop talking about it and as far as the American people are concerned to answer your question all you have to do is look at look at the way we disengaged from Afghanistan that was disgracefully executed

we needed to get out no one one disputes that, but we went out in the first worst way possible at the worst time of year. And ultimately, how long did people talk about it? How many people demanded that the CENTCOM commander, General McKenzie, be brought to accountability for the misguided and corrupt departure? Did anyone raise any questions about Milley's advice to the president regarding leaving and how to do it? Did anyone want to hold anyone in the chain of command all the way down to the battalion brigade commanders that were involved for what happened? And the answer is no, nobody did. And I don't think most Americans cared because they didn't really want to be there anyway. And I think the same thing is true in Ukraine. I know you authored and delivered a terrific response to the president, but I want you to hear his words again. This is cut number four, Sonia, President Biden claiming we will not walk away from Ukraine.

I say this to Congress. We have to stand up to Putin. Send me a bipartisan national security bill. History is literally watching. History is watching. The United States walks away. it will put Ukraine at risk. Europe is at risk. The free world will be at risk, emboldening others to do what they wish to do us harm. My message to President Putin, who I've known for a long time, is simple. We will not walk away. You think he meant that?

I think this is in the great tradition of Democratic presidents. Go back to FDR. I will not send American boys to die on foreign soil. Right. You could go back to Woodrow Wilson on that one. Right. And go back to LBJ, 1965. I will not send American boys to die on foreign soil.

Listen, he is irrelevant to the operation. And whatever happens isn't going to bear any sort of resemblance to what he says. We are going to bail out. That's happening. What I thought was far more interesting, Judge, was the degree to which Mike Johnson, the Speaker of the House, routinely nodded in support of the President. Yeah. Especially when he talked about Putin, which is absurd, of course,

and the business about we won't walk away. We all know we're going to walk away. We have no choice. We don't have the military power to confront the Russians in eastern Ukraine. We never did. Russia is now the supreme military power in Europe, and there is no way we can take them on and win. So the only thing we can do is quietly withdraw and hope that most people don't notice it because it's going to be an embarrassment.

I want to talk to you about what will happen if Mike Johnson caves, which I predict he will. But here's another Mike Johnson nodding. But there's an interesting part besides Johnson, and it's number five, Sonia, is the president saying there, and I want you to challenge this if you can, there are no American soldiers who are in Ukraine. But here he is in the State of the Union with Mike Johnson and the vice president behind him. Cut number five. Ukraine can stop Putin if we stand with Ukraine and provide the weapons that needs to defend itself.

That is all. That is all Ukraine is asking. They're not asking for American soldiers. In fact, there are no American soldiers in the war in Ukraine, and I'm determined to keep it that way. So you're right. He did nod. Now, this is entirely up to him. If he puts on the floor of the House the Senate pass bill for $61 billion, we know it will pass. If he doesn't put it on the floor,

it will die on the vine. There's no effective way to force him to put it on the floor. And you're right. He did nod. But I do want to ask you, and the president said this weirdly, there are no American soldiers of war who are in Ukraine. What does that mean? They're out of uniform? I think it probably means there are no American soldiers organized into fighting formations currently on the ground in ukraine we have plenty of people from the united states military primarily army but not exclusively that are in a variety of different settings helping and supporting the ukrainians whether it is sitting behind computers or advising them in the field or helping them to train up new troops whatever

there are plenty of people over there, and we know that they can't operate most of the sophisticated equipment and weapon systems that have been given to them without American, and I would add British, and other NATO officers and soldiers helping them. So that's a lie, but I'm sure technically he's talking in terms of fighting formations. And by the way, he's right on that. We're not going to send any fighting formations to Ukraine. And contrary to what our friend Macron has said and others in Europe, they're not going to send anything. We don't have anything to send. We have no developed infrastructure for logistics and sustainment. We have no effective command and control structure that can bring together a coalition and employ effectively against the Russians. The Russians are prepared. They have all of those things and they're ready missiles to Ukraine, claiming that the Minister of Defense, Mr. Pistorius, was in on this with them. it caused to Olaf Scholz, not known for having a backbone at all, the same Olaf Scholz that

practically invited Joe Biden to attack and destroy the Nord Stream pipeline, to go on national television and say, don't worry, we're not going to send anybody. Then you have Macron, who three times in the past eight days has mused aloud about sending troops. So big picture. Is Europe in a state of panic? European leadership, whether they are gutless or just ignorant? No, I think they are in a state of panic. But we're talking about the globalist elites that currently govern Western Europe. Yes. They are in a panic because they have followed us unquestioningly

down the stairs into hell. They suddenly realize that we're not going to go any further. In fact, they see a lot of evidence that we're looking upwards for a way to get out of the hell that we created for ourselves. They know that. There's no future in Ukraine for us. Ukraine is never going to be a member of NATO, and no one is going to go to war with the Russians. You know, a friend of mine in the French army, and he says this repeatedly to me, the only thing the French army is prepared to do is go on safari in Northern Africa. Well, he's right. And the rest of the armies in Europe are boutique forces. They're all designed for everything other than a serious war against a potentially professional and competent adversary like the Russians.

What happened with the Germans is very tragic because it suggests a number of different things. First of all, the level of professionalism in the German military has fallen off precipitously. And I don't know how this was acquired and leaked, but it shouldn't have been acquired at all. These kinds of conversations should not have been conducted on a communication system that could easily be hacked and monitored. Surely they know better than that. Then secondly, if you listen to the discussion, it's amateurish. It's almost high schoolish. There is no appreciation for the gravity of the situation. What happens if these Taurus missiles are given to the Ukrainians, which means put in the hands of probably U.S., German, British Allied officers, soldiers, technicians, and then launched against targets in Russia acquired by the CIA and provided to the Ukrainians. Well, we risk a serious war because we're now attacking Russian territory, Russian cities, Russian infrastructure, Russian soldiers

and civilians. You would think that someone would have said, wait a minute, this is not the sort of weapon system that we should be considering giving to anyone, lest similar systems be used against us. And I think it's very clear. You don't need to read between the lines. Putin has made it clear you do these things. Berlin could be on the receiving end of similar weapons. We have HIMARS, or the Ukrainians have HIMARS and Patriots on the ground. Haven't the Russians destroyed them? Don't the Russians know where they are? Of course, and they've destroyed most of them. Now I'm told there's efforts to make Patriot missiles surface-to-surface missiles. So instead of being employed for the reason they

were originally developed against incoming aerial targets, high-speed jet aircraft at high altitude, or cruise missiles, potentially, they're going to be used as service-to-service missiles. That's a new one. I hadn't expected that. That simply makes it that much more dangerous. But the Russians can find these things, and they can destroy them, and that's what they'll do. But my point is the Russians are reaching this stage where they're saying enough is enough. If you continue down this road and threaten us and then attack our territory and our people, we reserve the right to respond to you on your territory. And that's what people need to understand. This is a very dangerous red line to cross. Colonel, I came across a phrase the other day with which I was unfamiliar, and I wonder if you know what it is.

Glide bombs that the Russians are using. Are these smart bombs or are they something different? Well, you could call them smart because they've been altered with kits that allow them to be precise. And the way they're used is that aircraft fly up towards the target array, whatever is being chosen, and from some distance, it can be anywhere from several kilometers to 100 kilometers or more, and they launch these bombs on a trajectory. The bombs have fins and they have a precision guided system attached to them, and they find their way to the target. So these glide bombs are enormously destructive of 500

pounds and above. And, you know, when we launch similar weapon systems, as we've seen in Gaza, they find their targets and are devastating. and those are being used against Ukrainians. They've been used for some time, which is why the fixed fortifications, as much of an irritant as they are, are not an answer to the Russian operation, which is what the Ukrainians have done. They've defended these fortifications to the best of their ability, but they're fixed. And anything that is a fixed target can be targeted by these weapons and utterly destroyed, and that's what's happened. Do we have these? Does doesn't mean we couldn't do the same thing. But we do have precision guided systems attached to them. Normally, we use smaller weapon systems like the small diameter bomb. But nevertheless, yes. And this is another reminder, and I'm glad you brought it up. There is nothing in our inventory which the Russians don't also have. That's what

we need to understand. The days of the monopoly on precision strike that we enjoyed for so many years are over. Colonel, is NATO finished as a serious military force? They're celebrating the Swedish and Finnish membership. I don't know what the carrot or stick they used on Viktor Orban to get them to, or Erdogan to get them to consent to this, but maybe that's just speculation. But from a military perspective, is Russia afraid of NATO?

No, not anymore. I don't see any evidence for it, although they do respect American military capabilities, particularly when it comes to precision strike. And they do worry about the possibility that we might use a nuclear weapon. They've made it very clear they will not use a nuclear weapon unless we attack them. And I think Biden has tried to backtrack and say something similar about not using a weapon against the Russians. But nevertheless, I think everyone is on edge about it. My great fear has always been that in some way or another, we would be forced into

ignominious withdrawal. And to cover this, we would threaten the use of nuclear weapons. I hope we don't do that. The New York Times came out with a puff piece about the CIA, which indicated there are 12 CIA bases in Ukraine, and they've been there since 2014. I mean, I can't imagine why the CIA would even want that out there, unless, as you said at the outset of this conversation, Colonel, they're getting ready to leave. Obviously, if they are there and they're telling the New York Times they're there, the Russians know they're there and the Russians know everything that's going on there. Well, we're the only ones that haven't known because our government doesn't want to tell us these things. But the Russians have known from the beginning. They knew about the bio labs as well, where there were very sinister experiments underway to try and find, I'm told, bio weapons that would attack Slavs,

Slavic people in Eastern Europe. Kind of incomprehensible to me and frightening for all the obvious reasons, but I'm told that went on. The Russians know, so why bother trying to hide it any longer? And as you say, yes, we're getting ready to disengage. We are simply going to pull out. It'll be quiet. There'll be no announcements. We will simply leave. Europeans know that. That's why they're afraid. That's why they're scared. They're going to look ridiculous to their electorates that have stupidly elected these people. And I think they fear a giant red wave of right-wing nationalist organizations taking over. And I think they

will because at last people are standing up and saying, we have to be concerned about the future of Germany, of France, of Great Britain. We can't harness ourselves permanently to this country called the United States, which is dangerous. I mean, I remember back in the 1970s, we were looking at Helmut Schmidt as the Chancellor of Germany. And he routinely expressed his discomfort with the things we wanted to do because he thought we were, quote unquote, cowboys. Well, if you go back and look at us in those days, we were remarkably stable and balanced. Right now, it's amateur hour, and I think everybody's figured it out. Switching gears, Colonel, is there, in your view, a breach between Joe Biden and Prime Minister Netanyahu? And even if there is, is it going to change American policy one whit toward Israel?

No. I mean, again, the key assumption for Israeli operations is that whatever they do, we will support them, period. And he sees no evidence that that key assumption has been invalidated. It hasn't. It's true. And right now we are prepared to do whatever they ask us to do. And he knows that he wields infinitely more power and influence over decisions on Capitol Hill and in the White House, frankly, than President Biden. Biden has already said, you know, whatever I don't like about the Israelis and what they're doing, I will continue to support them with whatever they want. There's the evidence for Mr. Netanyahu's correctness in his thinking. Isn't it absurd? I'm trying to think of the right word. So self-defeating that we should be funding this war and at the same time bemoaning its

over-aggressive techniques and trying to get aid to the poor souls that managed to survive it. I guess you're telling me there is zero chance that Joe Biden will pick up the phone and say to Netanyahu, stop the slaughter tomorrow or all the spare parts and all the ammunition and all the weapons will stop coming to you. That simply will not happen. That's right. It's not going to happen under any circumstances.

And I think Biden and others know that the American people, frankly, aren't terribly interested, but those who are have been systematically conditioned to view Arabs and Muslims very negatively. I mean, look, we've spent over 20 years in the region, and most people come back from the region with a negative view of the people that live there. That's not surprising, given the hostilities that we created in those regions. But the point is, most Americans either don't care or they assume that the people that are on the receiving end are probably worthy of it. I don't see it that way. And I think there

are large numbers of us that don't, but we don't matter. We're not in power. If you're not in power in Washington, you're irrelevant. You have no say. I think that's something the American people are figuring out that they're simply not represented, but it's not going to change this reality. I think the larger question is not for us at this stage, because we're going to do what we're going to do. I think the larger question is for the people that live in the region. You know, what are the governments in the region going to do? And I think that after Ramadan, we'll begin to see a new viewpoint emerge. And I think the coalition of powers that are willing to finally do something, but not until

after Ramadan ends. And I think Ramadan ends about the 9th or the 10th of April. Colonel, what do you mean by a coalition of powers that are willing to do something? Do you mean state actors that might restrain the IDF slaughter? Yes. I think you're going to see something that we haven't seen in the region for a long time. We've always been accustomed to dealing with non-state actors, and we will continue to see them play a role. And given the fact that Mr. Netanyahu will escalate, he will go into Rafah, there's no question about it. He sees

that as unavoidably necessary to eradicate the population once and for all. And then secondly, he's going to go up against Hezbollah. And he wants to do that while he has control of us. Because if he gets into a fight with Hezbollah, he's going to need support from us. Hezbollah is no pushover. It's no Hamas by any stretch of the imagination. He knows that. As these things develop and occur, you're going to see a change in the Peninsular Arabs, a change among the Turks, and I think the Iranians who really desperately want to stay out of this will feel compelled to act in some sort of alignment with Hezbollah.

They're not going to stand by and watch it destroyed. Then you have the problems in Egypt and Jordan. The question that Mr. Erdogan has to deal with is his population is enraged. They want to become involved. They want to stop the slaughter. What are they going to do when things fall apart in Egypt and Jordan, which they will? I can't say with absolute certainty, but I see these things as coalescing into some sort of arrangement that will be directed against the Israelis. The question at that point is, what do we do?

We are the stalwart allies and supporters of Israel. Do we allow ourselves to be dragged into this? And you have a lot of people with their itchy trigger fingers when it comes to Iran. And there are increasingly many who would be equally aggressive towards the Turks. So I think the opportunity for a wider regional war is quite real. Just to sort of break the ice a little bit from the seriousness of our conversation, here's President Biden over the weekend on MSNBC with an absurd interview about does he have a red line with Prime Minister Netanyahu or doesn't he?

Cut number six, Sonia. What is your red line with Prime Minister Netanyahu? Do you have a red line? For instance, would invasion of Rafah, which you have urged him not to do, would that be a red line? It is a red line, but I'm never going to leave Israel. The defense of Israel is still critical. So there's no red line I It is a red line, but I'm never going to leave Israel. The defense of Israel is still critical. So there's no red line. I'm going to cut off all weapons so they don't have the Iron Dome to protect them. They don't have. But there's red lines that if it crosses and they cannot have 30,000 more Palestinians dead. I guess it's hard to figure out what he's talking about. Can Bibi go up to another 25,000?

I don't want to sound sarcastic or supercilious. We're talking about innocent human lives here. I don't know if the president even knows what he means by a red line. A red line is usually a trigger. You go over that trigger and there's some serious pushback. No, he's in Mr. Netanyahu's pocket. So he's not going to do anything. He said, I'm not going to abandon Israel. I will always help Israel to defend itself. Well, I think most of us agree with that. I always have. But a campaign

of mass murder and expulsion that relies on everything from starvation and disease to smart bombs to be successful is hardly an exercise in defense. And attack on Hezbollah would be equally offensive and not defensive at this stage. So, you know, I just don't think he's thinking any of it through, and I don't think anybody's going to help him do so. And here he is, I think you saw this, but I'll play it anyway, walking out of the House of Representative chamber after that State of the Union. I don't know if he knew the microphone was on him or not. These hot mic incidents, I sometimes sometimes think are setups, but whatever. He uses the phrase, come to Jesus, and he's going to have a come to Jesus with Netanyahu. You can't make this up. And then one of his aides comes by and says, sir, you got a microphone on. Anyway, we'll watch

this one. It's also somewhat amusing. It's not easy to hear. He appears to be talking to Senator Michael Bennett of Colorado and Secretary of State Blinken. Sonia, cut number two. This is one of the great speeches. I was telling your secretary, you know, I was in Jordan and Israel last weekend. And we just, you know, we've got to keep pushing what you're doing on the humanitarian stuff and all this stuff. So... I told him.

Maybe he won't get this. Maybe he won't get college. Sir, just... I'm not my kid, but... That was good. That was good. That was ridiculous. Well, obviously, Mr. Netanyahu is never going to come to Jesus under any circumstances. However you mean that.

Yeah, and feels nothing but contempt for that. But I don't know what Mr. Biden thought he was doing. I mean, this business of bombing in the morning and passing out sandwiches and coffee in the afternoon is not a new development in the history of the United States. We have a bad habit of killing large numbers of people and then apologizing for it privately later, never publicly, and trying to compensate. This is part of the larger sort of incompetence and amateurishness that characterizes the leadership of our country. Perhaps they think Americans are all stupid. They're wrong. Americans are not stupid. And they do understand exactly what he's trying to do. He's trying to conceal reality by making,

you know, statements designed to mollify the audience. It's not going to happen. And the sad part is that within another two weeks, there will be thousands of people in Gaza who are dead. And once they go into Rafah, there will be still more thousands dead. That is completely consistent with what the Israelis want. They've decided that's the only solution that works for them. We are the ones that are, what's the right word, Judge? Facilitating it? Enabling it? I guess that's the way it is. Again, it goes back to my earlier point. It doesn't really make any difference anymore.

What President Biden says, this administration is not really in his hands. These decisions are not in his hands. There are other powerful actors behind the scenes, backed with billions of dollars who are making this happen. And they control finance. They control the media. They control the levers of power in Washington. They want this to happen.

So it's going to happen. Do you see any circumstances under which American troops are involved in the defense of Israel or in the offensive endeavors against Hezbollah? If we, you know, I think if the Israelis go after Hezbollah, which I think they will, we will have strike packages from the Air Force and the Navy flying in support of the Israelis against Hezbollah. Wow. And God only knows where that will lead if an American pilot is shot down. Well, I think the point is that you're going to see this widen in the region. Right.

And then you're going to end up with what ultimately a lot of people in Washington have been working for for years. Just listen to Bolton, listen to Pompeo, listen to all these people. They want desperately for us to be in a state of war with Iran. And if that happens, all bets are off. Anything is possible then. Right. Colonel McGregor, thank you very much, my dear friend. Thank you for your time and your analysis as always.

I hope we can see you again soon. Now that you've visited with the Pope and he gave you a ring, do I have to kiss the ring now? He refused. He didn't give me a ring. Oh, I thought he gifted you a ring. Well, then I would be dressed in red as a cardinal if he gave me a ring. He's not going to do that. Not this Catholic.

All right. Thank you, Colonel. God bless you. All the best. Bye-bye. Bye. Coming up at 1 o'clock, Zachary Yost, academic and journalist, just wrote a great piece called The Consequences of Good Intentions.

At two o'clock, our friend and Tuesday regular, Matt Ho. At three o'clock, our friend and Tuesday regular, Colonel Karen Kutkowski. Thanks for watching. The Colonel is over the top as he always is. We'll see you soon judge napolitano for judging freedom I'm