Judging Freedom - COL. Lawrence Wilkerson: Can Israel Humble Iran?

Episode Date: October 17, 2024

COL. Lawrence Wilkerson: Can Israel Humble Iran?See 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 Thursday, October 17th, 2024. Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson joins us now. Colonel, always a pleasure. Thank you very much for your time. I have a lot of things that I want to talk to you about. I'm going to get right to the bottom line on what may be going through the brain of Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu as we speak. Is he be maniacal enough or insane enough or super self-confident slash arrogant enough to think that Israel alone can humble Iran? All of the above would be my normal answer.

But I think he's that way, all those things you just iterated, because he is absolutely confident the United States will have his back. drop bombs into and on Iran, or would just provide defensive shields for Israel to protect it from when Iran fights back? The latter, so long as the U.S. military establishment judges that that's all that's required, that Israel is not an extremist. But the moment Israel becomes an extremist, and Netanyahu's protestations to that are not sufficient. It'll have to be an evaluation by the military. And if they judge that Israel is an extremist and might take irreparable damage, then we're in. Three of this program's most experienced and highly regarded military personnel, former military personnel, you, Colonel McGregor and Scott Ritter, have all predicted that Israel, if Netanyahu continues on his path, will soon be in extremists. And the three of you have also predicted it may very well end Israel as we know it. Would the United States government actually wage war against a country that does not pose one iota of threat to it? Or am I being naive? Because we did the same thing with Iraq and Afghanistan.

I was going to say. Just put a look on your face like, yo, judge, where you been for the past 20 years? I think if you parsed it closely, Iran could possibly present a threat to us were they to want to do so. That would outweigh both of those countries combined, Afghanistan and Iraq and Syria too, for that matter. But I don't think Iran wants to. And that's what makes this whole situation so really tragic, is that neither Washington nor Tehran want a war between the two. And in fact, with the new president, I'm convinced that,

and I've got a couple of contacts that are telling me this, that I value from JCPOA days, both in Iran and in the United States, what they want is some relief from the sanctions and a new nuclear agreement with the United States, which they're perfectly willing to adhere to, so long as we adhere to our end and lower some of the sanctions. But that's their principal objective right now. And this is just fouling that up par excellence. What is the current relationship between Tehran and Moscow? I think it's a little bit tentative right now because Putin, of course, refused to finalize the defense agreement because he knew that the provision that's like Article 5 in the

NATO agreement, an attack on Iran is an attack on Russia, would have to be implemented or he would lose major face. So he didn't want to quite go all the way to signing the agreement because he has got his hands full in Ukraine to a certain extent, and he doesn't want another war that's involving the United States, which ultimately would be if Iran called upon him to implement that treaty. Is it a fact that he has provided substantial high-tech, state-of-the-art defensive weaponry to Iran and that Russian technicians are physically located there putting it into place? Yes, and I think that was exemplified by the rather dangerous sortie the Israelis took toward Taurus and the firing of munitions at Russian facilities there, because they were trying to stop, I think, the offloading

of both men and equipment for S-400s. And I think they were a day late and a dollar short. I think Iran is ready to bring down state-of-the-art fighters, indeed F-35s, whatever, with some alacrity because they not only have the Russian missiles to do it, I think the 400. I don't know that much about the 500 system, but I think the 400 system is probably the best in the world. And it'll take down any aircraft. So they have Russian crews probably also there, and they're going to do havoc with Israeli incoming aircraft if it starts. What do you think, it's a double question, what do you think President Putin would do if Israel unloaded a fusillade on Iran?

And what do you think President Putin would do if the Pentagon determined that Israel was an extremist and the United States attacked Iran? That's a different proposition altogether. I still think the caution and prudence and pragmatism Putin has exercised throughout the Ukraine conflict, and I think is doing here too, would still give him hesitation about entering the fray. And I say that for a number of reasons, but the primary reason I say that is I think Putin has the winning hand here. Even if he doesn't enter majorly, he's supplying them, of course, and that makes a big difference. But if he doesn't enter majorly the conflict, he's just going to watch the empire go down, down, down and down.

And he's watching right now, and I'm watching too. I attended an ASEAN Business Council sponsored event the other day, listening to people talk about the new Indonesian president who will be inaugurated very shortly here, Prabowo. And one of the ASEAN business council members said something that really, really registered with me, just went off. And, of course, this is the largest Muslim country in the world. And there's argument about whether India's Muslims outnumber Indonesia's. But, you know, they're up there 200 million plus. What did he go off about? Well, he went off about the Gaza war. Here we are in an

ASEAN business council webinar talking about economics and trade agreements in East Asia and Australia and Indonesia and China and all the inevitabilities of these trade agreements. And this person just started in on it and no one objected. Even the ASEAN business council member said, we need to stop shooting at people and start trading with people. Even he said that. Now, this is really condemnation coming from Indonesia and an expert on the security situation there of what's going on. That is happening across the globe, Judge. People are classifying America, the empire, as insane and looking for other options.

Perhaps a very emotional characterization of that came from a member of the Spanish parliament pointing her finger directly at the Spanish prime minister. Not sure if it was yesterday or earlier today, but it's quite a harangue. Chris, cut number 13. How does this differ from Nazi gas chambers? I address you all, ladies and gentlemen, including the president. No difference. As a nation, we are complicit in perpetrating this genocide. You travel globally discussing

an arms embargo that your government cannot enforce. Your government has been selling arms since after October 7. It has bought 1 billion euro worth of weapons. 1 billion euros, ladies and gentlemen, during this year of genocide, have allowed weapons to be transported through from our ports throughout this year. If you truly support the arms embargo, Mr. Sanchez, cease deceit and enact it immediately. So the heart of Europe, Spain, obviously, is our cracks beginning to show,

I'll play President Macron for you in a second. He's been out there. Our cracks beginning to show in the compliant, follow the U.S., whatever it says and does attitude of Europe on its support of Israel. Absolutely. I know those were members. I know how they set up their debates and their conversations. So I know those people around her were members of her own persuasion, politically speaking. But do you see their heads going up and down? I did. Yes, I did. And I also noticed that they all seem to be young people. Yes. Yes. And that's a factor that I'm learning from these things like the Indonesian ASEAN business council.

Forty and below are really turning off on us, really significantly declaring us insane and looking for other options, whether they're trade, economic, commerce in general, whatever it might be, and talking about different alignments and partnerships. We're doing irreparable damage to ourselves, Judge. I've said before, I said this during the torture program, the state-sponsored torture program, first time in the history of America. We've tortured before, but we never had a president of the United States sign a document authorizing it. George W. Bush did. I said a part of America's power, real power, is its reputation.

We have done bad damage to that reputation. Now I think we're doing irreparable damage to it. Here's President Macron after it had been established that the IDF attacked UNIFIL troops in Lebanon. Cut number two, Chris, and then the full screen. It is totally unacceptable for UNIFIL troops to be deliberately targeted by Israeli armed forces. We condemn it. We do not and will not tolerate it happening again. And then he said, not in front of the cameras, Mr. Netanyahu must not forget that his country

was created by a decision of the UN. Therefore this is not the time to disregard the decisions of the UN. These are decisions in which the United States participated because these are Security Council authorized troops. Right, Colonel? Yes, not Secretary General. This is a Security Council authorized operation, as all peacekeeping operations are. I think UNIFIL has been there about 15 years. Netanyahu explanation and protest about

their presence in inhibiting his troops' ability to go out for Hezbollah was just poppycock. Netanyahu has been trying to get rid of UNIFIL for a long time, ever since he's been in power. And he's been unsuccessful, partly because of what you just said. He knows it's a UN Security

Council resolution that did it. But now he's in for penny, in for pound, and it's all blood now that he's in for. Here he is saying to UNIFIL, get the hell out of here, cut number seven. The charge that Israel deliberately attacked UNIFIL personnel is completely false. It's exactly the opposite. Israel repeatedly asked UNIFIL to get out of harm's way. Israel is not fighting UNIFIL, it's not fighting the people of Lebanon. It is fighting Iran's proxy Hezbollah, which uses Lebanese territory to attack Israel. Hezbollah uses UNIFIL facilities and positions as cover while it attacks Israeli

cities and communities. We regret any harm done to UNIFIL personnel, and the IDF is doing its utmost to prevent such incidents. But the best way to ensure the safety of UNIFIL personnel is for UNIFIL to heed Israel's requests and to temporarily get out of harm's way. Is that credible, Colonel? Not at all. And I would say this. The man is just a bald-faced liar so often now that even people in the world that haven't paid a lot of attention to him on a recurring basis realize he's a liar.

And the very fact that he says what he says about unifil is prima facie evidence of that. He's been trying to get rid of unifil for 15 years, ever since it started. And listen to what he's saying. I didn't attack them, and I wouldn't attack them. And I'm killing civilians in Lebanon. I'm killing anything that moves in Lebanon or gets in my way or looks like it might be associated with Hezbollah or not. And oh, well, I'm doing what I should be doing. He constantly

reverses the situation and accuses others of doing what he's doing and denying that he's doing it. It's preposterous. His opening line is, listen to this, even though you just heard it, the charge that Israel deliberately attacked UNIFIL personnel is completely false. It's exactly the opposite. Well, if that's true, that means that UNIFIL deliberately attacked the IDF, for which there has been no evidence and not even an allegation other than this that he said. You're absolutely right. And listen to those words now.

How does he know that anyway? He wasn't on the ground. He doesn't know what his commanders did. He doesn't know what his troops did. He's taking the word, if he's even bothering to gather it, of those people on the ground. And I suspect that they would lie just as sure as he would. But they don't have to lie to him because they know he'll do the lying for them. Will any European countries, in your view,

be finally, finally outraged that the slaughter in Gaza and now in the incipient stages of a similar campaign in southern Lebanon react either militarily or economically toward Israel? I think you're going to see some actions, some sanctions. You're going to see arms transfers cut down. You're going to see them even trying to block the arm transfers that they just sort of turn a blind eye to that are going through their ports or whatever. But the bottom line of all of this, I'm sad to say, is they're frightened of the United States. They're frightened of what might happen to them in the aftermath of these kinds of actions. And so it's going to take a lot of unity amongst them.

It's going to take a lot of courage amongst them. And ultimately, it's going to take decisive political leaders and decisive political decisions. And I don't see a lot of that. I think that's one reason we've gotten to where we are in Ukraine and now where we are in Gaza. Could they develop? Could they either elect different politicians, and there are a lot of elections coming up, or should the ones now in power

develop some more courage and more unity, probably, so there's courage and unity, I think it could happen. Who or what can stop the Israeli slaughter, besides Joe Biden and a phone call, which doesn't seem to be in the cards, no matter what the Israelis do. If I were being honest, and I'll try to be, Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin combined could stop it in a heartbeat. But that means a potentially nuclear confrontation. So they're not going to do that. They're too pragmatic and they're sitting in the catbird seat right now.

Putin less so than Xi, but still, they're both in a certain way in a catbird seat. Putin's triumphant in Ukraine, and he's got all manner of things lining up in the world that are opposed to the empire, and the empire's doing most of the damage to itself. So why would he want that kind of confrontation unless it meant stopping something from being existential for his own country? Same with Xi Jinping. I would think Xi Jinping right now is really thinking hard about not just doing exercises around Taiwan,

but doing those exercises and suddenly launching a takeover out of those exercises and just presenting it to us as a fait accompli, it would be just that. We could do nothing except catastrophically defeat of ourselves. So, Colonel, there's 400 Chinese members of UNIFIL. Yeah. I didn't know there were any Chinese in that country. They started doing that. Yeah, here's their commander.

He's not angry, but it's clear what he's saying. Cut number one. At present, the conflict between Lebanon and Israel is intermittently escalating. Due to the ongoing combat, several camps of the United Nations interim force in Lebanon have suffered damage. Additionally, a portion of our peacekeeping comrades have been injured. We continue to make every effort to maintain peace and stability in the region. What will Xi Jinping do if some Chinese soldiers come back in body bags? Chinese are very good and expert at using the UN Security Council. That's where they would start.

And there would be denunciations of the entire process by the Chinese, a permanent member of the Security Council. That's where they always start. And I have to admire them for that because they, for their own reasons, many times, just as we do, really support the UN and believe most prominently in its categorization of the inviolability of borders. And anyone who crosses a border without provocation, without Article 51 potential, is a pariah, a world pariah, and should be sanctioned by the law. That, of course, works for them when it comes to the things that they don't want done to themselves, just as we use the U.N. But they're very honest about their use of the UN. I found them to be, amongst the permanent members, more honest than

any of the others. And when I was working with them closely in 2001 and 2002, I found them to be disarmingly honest about to participate in the invasion. This morning, Keeve claimed that some of the North Korean troops have defected from their Russian military bosses to the Ukrainian army and the Russians were pursuing them. Is any of this credible? Some parts of it are. One of the things I had as a portfolio as chief of staff, because I asked the secretary for it, was North Korea. And one of the things we monitored very, very closely, in addition to their counterfeiting of our $20 and $50 and $100 bills and counterfeiting our cigarettes too. We watched the North Koreans who were leaving across the Galoo and through other routes more circuitous and how they would get out of North Korea and

how they would almost do anything, anything, Judge, to get out of North Korea. And so, you know, I could see that they would send soldiers to Ukraine. I don't know that they have, but I could see they would do that. Then those soldiers to Ukraine. I don't know that they have, but I could see they would do that, and then those soldiers would go. That's getting them out of North Korea. But you know the brain of Vladimir Putin. Would he accept foreign soldiers? I doubt it. I really do doubt it. I know he's been talking lately again about South Korea, and South Korea not doing anything more to aid Ukraine and probably offering them some positive incentives not to do anything, maybe some

negative ones too. His whole movement with Pyongyang has been to punish South Korea for sending, I think it was 500,000 155 millimeter artillery rounds to Ukraine. We bent the president of South Korea's arm behind his back. Hell, we bent both of his arms behind his back to get him to do that because he didn't want anything to do with it. And so Putin paid him back. But I think that's as far as it goes. I don't think there are North Koreans in Ukraine. But if there are, look for them to be deserters really quickly. So in Washington, DC, I think this was earlier today or it may have been yesterday, there is a convention of arms manufacturers and someone with a camera and a microphone,

not unlike Max Blumenthal in Courage and In Your Face. It wasn't Max. Went around and taunted some of the arms manufacturers. Some of this is ridiculous because of his personality, the questioner, and his tone of voice and their reaction. Of course, what he's talking about is the most dreadfully serious thing on the planet, which is the IDF slaughtering babies. But watch this. Excuse me, is this where the baby killing technology is? This is the baby killing technology. We're trying to acquire a couple baby shredders.

This guy looks like he shreds babies. Sir, you shred babies or no? You're just a mean son of a gun. Drop down and give me 50, Johnson. Sir, we're looking for the baby shredding technology. Is this where they shred babies? He likes that one. Sir, do you know where the baby shredding technology is?

We're looking for something that shreds them to pieces. Do you have that? Does anybody have the baby shredding technology is? We're looking for something that shreds them to pieces. You have that? Does anybody have the baby shredding technology? We're looking for that good Israeli baby shredding tech. You know where to find it? This guy's a butch guy. Guys, the baby shredding tech, excuse me, you have the baby shredding

technology? Man, baby shredding tech? We're looking for the good baby shredding technology. We're trying to shred babies to pieces Anybody know where to point us? Well, he certainly made his point It's obvious that they're not going to take his bait And unfortunately, we know from eyewitnesses and from videos

That we can't show that this has happened. You know, I was just thinking if that were Medea Benjamin or some of her women, or if they were together, they would probably say, use some napalm. I mean, she has this way of getting people to show their true feelings. Right, right. This guy was almost comedic in his tone of voice, even though what he was discussing was so profound. Last series of questions, Colonel. How much longer can Ukraine last? And don't tell me just until November 6th, but how much longer can Ukraine last? I don't think that's an operative date with regard to their endurance,

but I do think it's an operative date with regard to meaningful U.S. support for what they're doing. And I think Zelensky knows that. And I think this, I've got this suspicion that the victory plan, such as it is, such as he's briefed it, is really his idea of a way to establish whatever negotiating leverage he possibly can. And then once the election's over and he realizes the truth, I think he already knows it probably, and Trump's not elected. Now, if Trump's elected, it could be a different dynamic.

He could do this much, much faster, depending on what Trump actually does, because one never knows what Donald Trump is going to do. But I think he'll move pretty rapidly into negotiation. First, a ceasefire, probably, declared universally, and then negotiation. And then, of course, we have the issue of whether the Russians would even negotiate with him, since he's not legally the head of state any longer. Yep. He may have to step down, at least appoint someone in his place, which I'm sure Putin would do. I don't think Putin will come to any peace negotiations.

I think at the highest level, it might be Sergei Lavrov, but no one. I can't see Putin coming to peace negotiations. Colonel, thanks very much. Thank you for your time and for your patience, my dear friend. We'll look forward to seeing you next week. Thanks for having me. Of course.

Coming up on the remainder of a busy afternoon at three o'clock, Professor John Mearsheimer at four o'clock, Aaron Maté at 5.30 from Midnight in Moscow, Pepe Escobar. Judge Napolitano for judging freedom. Thank you.