Judging Freedom - COL Lawrence Wilkerson... Warns: An Israel–Iran War Would Be Catastrophic

Episode Date: January 15, 2026

COL Lawrence Wilkerson... Warns: An Israel–Iran War Would Be CatastrophicSee 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 the government? 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, January 15, 2006. Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson, our dear friend, joins us now. Colonel Lawrence, Colonel Larry, a pleasure, my dear friend. Thank you very much for your time. I want to pick your brain on the likely ramifications of an Israeli-U.S. war against Iran. But before we get there, some of the other incredibly dangerous and crazy things that happened

this weekend. The President of the United States has posted a photograph of himself on his own website under which he has proclaimed himself to be the acting president of Venezuela. Is this behavior one should expect of a president of the United States? No. One wonders what has been coordinated with the current regime in Venezuela. I doubt that they would have accepted that, but one never knows when you bring the ultimate power of the United States, economy-wise, really, to bear on them. Lula's backed off, for example, his very energetic approach within bricks to de-dollarize. They were making some fairly substantial progress. It was going to take a long time, but they were making progress. And already they're doing commodity trades and so forth

in Real and Rimmbi and other currencies in the dollar. He backed off of it. He backed off of it completely because we threatened him. So there's no telling what might be happening now in Caracas. This is a gangster presidency. Do as I say or I'll come into your bedroom in the middle of the night and steal you and your wife and put you in a jail cell in Brooklyn, New York. Trump.

Yeah, there is nothing. There is one thing, my own morality, my own mind. It's the only thing that can stop me. Well, that was going to be my next question. So is the Constitution, are U.S. treaties, commercial contracts of no value before you answer? Here's him saying those exact words, number two, Chris. Do you see any checks on your power on the world stage? Is there anything that could stop you if you wanted to?

Yeah, there's one thing. thing. My own morality, my own mind. It's the only thing that can stop. And that's very good. I don't need international law. I'm not looking to hurt people. Does he mean he's not looking to hurt people? He murdered over 200 people, 100 on the high seas, 40 asleep in their barracks, another 50 or 60 inside the presidential compound in order to seize President Maduro. So what standards do we? have if the president's first fidelity is to my own mind. And how about aiding and abetting the death of if Ralph Nader is right this morning, his release of Francesca Albanese's latest report,

somewhere between 100 and 500,000 Palestinians, and I don't think that's an exaggeration, having looked at what's happened over the past 750 days or so, and the murderous campaign. conducting, even the official count in Gaza, the official count from the Hamas Health Ministry, is 65,000 of which 75% are women and children. So Trump is a killing machine in that regard, and let's not forget what he's doing right now. What they've been doing, they being Mossad, principally, but CIA and MI6, all backed by Donald Trump and his money. What they've been doing in Iran is acting as if they were Iranian citizens and killing Iranians and burning and pillaging and plundering. It's 1953 against Mohammed Mossadegh, on steroids and on high technology provided mostly by the

United States and Israel. That's what this protest in Iran has been all about. There have been some genuine protests, no question about it. Inflation's high. Bread's not very. cheap. You can't hardly get along if you're an average Iranian. But their hour is not so much with their government as it is with the IRGC, stealing their money, and with the sanctions, which almost any Iranian on the street will tell you is the first reason they're having trouble. So what we did was send Kermit Roosevelt, the latest version thereof, into Iran, and he failed. And now we're looking at the results of that failure. And God only knows what's going to have happen now. Chris, Mike Pompeo's full screen, I only have to read the last line, well, I read the

first on the last line. The Iranian regime is in trouble bringing in mercenaries as its last best hope. I don't know what he's talking about mercenaries. But look at this last line, Colonel. Happy New Year to every Iranian in the streets, also to every Mossad agent walking beside them. Why the hell would he say that? We know that's... happening, but why does he acknowledge it? He's the former director of the CIA and the former Secretary of State of the United States. And that's the only line in that little series that's true. Absolutely true. The protests ended yesterday for all intensive purposes, and things are calming down pretty much, partly because they understand how imminent it might be that either Iran

preempts and destroys Israel or Iran is attacking. act and widens the attack quickly into Al UDade and Qatar and perhaps other places that the U.S. is located in the region. What I want to get back to the president's fidelity to his own mind over fidelity to the rule of law. So what do we do? Of what value is the Constitution? of what value are treaties, you understand the law, a treaty wants assented to by a president

and confirmed by the Senate, like the Geneva Conventions of the UN Charter, is in the same category as the Constitution itself, as long as it doesn't purport to nullify or contradict the Constitution, contracts to buy and sell oil of what value are these things if Trump can just kidnap ahead of state, seize oil on the high seas, control the production of oil in the country,

sell it to his friends. I don't think he even understands this oil industry because it's as thick as tart. It doesn't come out by itself, and you can't sell it tomorrow. But you get the picture, Colonel. I think we're dealing with an individual who is fulfilling my worst nightmare

with regard to go back to 2002, when we produced our national security strategy in the first George W. Bush administration. And I kind of characterized it, this says we're gonna make the world a Hobbesian world and try to sit atop it. And I had no idea that we would have a president like Donald Trump, who would take that not only

as what his directions are, would put it in his own fertile brain to make it come about. That's what we're doing. We're creating a Hobbsian world and trying to sit atop it, trying to use the calamity and the crisis in that world to elevate ourselves to the top. And let me give you a really good example. And if I'm leaving from Quincy Institute has an article this morning about what we're doing, what the Europeans may be doing on the high seas. They are talking seriously about interdicting Russian ships,

the way we interdicted ships in the Caribbean. You start doing that, And Russia is in enough commitment right now, if you will, of both finances and men and women to this conflict in Ukraine and potential conflicts elsewhere that we are stirring up, that it's only a moment or two that it takes for a decision to say, I've had enough. And then we're at war with Moscow as a NATO alliance. That'll stop all the talk about Greenland and other things, at least momentarily. And then Putin's faced with the situation that he can't possibly win, and he has been very explicit about what he'll do in such a situation, and that is resort to nuclear weapons. He has made no bones about that. He has said, if I am existentially threatened, if Russia is existentially threatened, I will

use those weapons. And that's what the Europeans are talking about doing here. If they go to the high seas and start taking Russian ships the way we took the military Venezuela ships. Are they crazy enough to think that they could prevail or even survive a major confrontation with Russia? Anatol is very careful to point out that conventionally, they could probably not only survive, but give Russia a hard time and ultimately be the victor.

But that's not the point. Anatole's point is the right one. If that is true, if all of NATO came to give. and conventionally opposed Russia, he said what they would do. Wow. What will happen, in your view, if Israel and the U.S. attack Iran, whether it's tomorrow, next week, next month? It all depends on what the attack is, Judge. If the attack is feckless, like the last one, it won't do much except make them even angrier and, then what I would worry about is that they would say enough.

Enough is enough. We're going to go ahead with what is their plan, I think, right now. And that is to regionalize the war, call on Russia and China behind Russia, because China still gets much of its Iraq oil, which is a good complement of its oil, through the Strait of Hormuz. So I think China would be there for that purpose for protecting the Strait of Hormuz because they don't want their oil cut off. I think Russia would be there.

in a more substantive form because they have a signed defense treaty with Iran now. So Iran might take that chance and go ahead not preempt Israel in the United States, but use Article 51, for example, right to self-defense. They could do that because we've been in their country, Judge, killing their people. And they know it. They rounded up a lot of these people. They have them now, if they haven't killed them already, but they have them. They know who they are.

They know what they were doing, and they know who they were working for. They have the right to preempt if they wanted to. Has Iran arrested any Mossad, MI6, or CIA personnel? I'm told they have quite a few of them in jail. And they're going through very extensive interrogation. I can only imagine what that means. You emailed or texted me before the sun came. up this morning when it became apparent that the demonstrations had stopped and said, well,

B.B. must have, I think these are your words. B.B. must have called Donald and said, the plan for a 1953 style is not working. You're talking about when popularly elected President Muhammad Mossadegh was overthrown by MI6 and CIA in 1953, and the Shah was installed. under the pretext that he was the direct descendant of some Persian king or some other nonsense. And people forget, not Stephen Kinser and others who know it well, but Kermit Roosevelt failed the first time around. He failed. We paid off all manner of people just as we'd just done,

and they were killing Iranians left and right. But it failed. The military and others needed for it to succeed did not come out. Mossadegh was able to control them, or at least influence them. Then Kermit reported that back to Washington and I assume to London. And he got orders doubled down. And so more money flowed in, more killers were hired, more bullets flew, more fires were

started, more rage was created. And Mossadegh was the one who said, enough, I'm not going to watch my people be killed like this, think right now. I'm not going to watch that happen. and he stepped down. What happens if it's a, the Iranians believe it's a serious attack, they are responding heavily against Israel and they close the Straits of Hormuz? I'm not sure they'll do that because of China.

I think China is an important wicket in this, if you will. And I don't think they'll close this trait. Now, others might. Who knows? I think what they'll do is what they actually have been fairly articulate in saying they will do. They will attack Al UDeed and other U.S. installations and facilities in the region, and they will be devastating attacks. We even started some non-combatant evacuation operations after hearing those threats.

And they will annihilate Israel. And I think they can do that. I really think they can do that. Well, that was going to be my next question. Can the Israeli Iron Dome, as they call it, it's obviously not a dome, that's just the image they want to create, effectively resist or repel the weapons that Iran has? No more so than the Golden Dome will be able to deflect the weapons

that the world will array against it should we build it. Simply not possible. adage that engineers use all the time about ever since aerial vehicles were created and ground instruments tried to bring them down we've never achieved more than a point two kill ratio it's just the physics of it and now the physics are much greater because look at missiles like the erascienic or like the one we're fielding right now with the army these are incredibly fast missiles it's not like hitting a speeding bullet with a speeding bullet. It's like hitting a light brigade with a bullet, just a regular old bullet. Something moving that fast. I mean, we're talking about 7,000, 8,000

miles per hour or in excess of that. What do you think the president will do to satiate his inexplicable desire to own Greenland? Judge, we had, by my count, and I looked at it last night closely, we had about 31 bases in Greenland. We did in Greenland, and they were accommodated, and we worked well there, and they worked well with us. And then came the end of the Cold War, and Colin Powell and H.W. Bush, and Dick Cheney sat down

and said, let's do a lot of things. to save some money. And one of the things we did was bring in some of these insulations that were more or less focused exclusively on the Cold War. That was one of them. We have one now, I think, at Thuley, which you probably know. Why are we doing this? The Greenlanders in Denmark would let us back in a heartbeat to do the 30 or 31 we had before,

whatever it is we want to do. Why are we doing this? and especially when are we in doing this to a NATO member. I know the alliance is growing increasingly moribun. It's not necessary anymore, except maybe for its nuclear component. And we need to adjust it majorly in accordance with new requirements, like maybe a security architecture in Europe that includes Russia. That's been postponed a lot by this Ukraine war,

but nonetheless, it should be a prospect. How can we do this if we are, going to invoke Article 5 amongst the NATO members because we're the attacker. And people will say, as one did to me last night, don't worry, we so cow them and they so desperately need us in Paris, Berlin, and London in particular, that they would never do that. I said, well, that's the end of NATO right there on the rock. You don't even have to go any further. That's the end of it, because you've just violated everything it stands for. So if one member nation, the largest, attacks another member nation the smallest, arguably, and NATO does nothing.

What good is it? Nothing. I fear, Judge, what they would do is they would all gang up on Denmark and say, you've got to take it, dude. Wow. Well, what are the chances of a preemptive strike by the Iranians? Do you believe this story in The Guardian yesterday, claiming that the Iranians and Israelis each assured the other through Russian mediators that neither would strike first?

I mean, if that is true, the Iranians would be out of their minds to trust Prime Minister Netanyahu. Took the words right out of my mouth. There's no way after that imbruglio that occurred before where we violated diplomacy and bomb the hell out of them. if they do that, they are truly not very smart people. And I don't do that for a minute. Yeah. I mean, it's almost deja vu all over again, to quote Yogi Berra,

where Trump is planning to meet with people from Iran and then on their way to them, to him, he cancels, and then all hell breaks loose. I don't know. How long would it take the Israelis to get ready to attack, or are they ready, how long would it take the Americans to get ready to attack, or do we have enough hardware in the region already? Not with Venezuela and the commitments there too, which roughly 27% of our capability at any given moment, and other things that we're looking at right now that are potential

problems and that Trump has talked about, not least of which is using military force in Mexico to some degree. I don't see how we could do it without a fairly noticeable buildup and moving forces that are elsewhere into that region. That doesn't mean we couldn't give them a bloody nose or try to give them a bloody nose, but that would be a tragic mistake because they're not going to give us a bloody nose. They're going to try to annihilate us. Wow.

I don't know how one can talk sense into Donald Trump. He seems on this issue. he seems so beholden to the Zionists that he will listen to whatever Netanyahu tells him that the name escaping me, the head of the CIA will listen to whatever the Mossad tells him. Tulsi Gabbard, John Ratcliffe, Tulsi Gabbard seems to be out of the picture and not even in the public scene anymore. J.D. Vance is starting to sound more and more like his boss and less and less like the independent thinker. We all thought he was and hoped he would remain. I agree with all those points. And I would add that look at the hypocrisy. I know hypocrisy is a product of the empire these days, but look at it

when you talk about, for example, the criticism of what was happening and the statements, bellicose statements about what was happening in Iran, while they knew, that they were the major perpetrator of it. And the lackadaisical attitude, the forgiving attitude, the go-along attitude, the blessing attitude, about at least 65,000, 75% are whom women and children being killed, have been killed in Gaza. And add the West Bank, at East Jerusalem, at Syria. I think Ralph Nader's right. He put out a report this morning, quoting Francesca Albanese, as I said, And they think it's somewhere around half a million. Wow.

Francesca Albanese is another person like Jacques Bo. She's been sanctioned because she tells the truth. Yep. Yep. Wow. We take these truth tellers. And really, the other aspect of this judge, which I think you appreciate and will profoundly, is that this Hobbesian world is lawless.

we're negating not only international law every day a little bit more. Think about law of the sea. It's a joke. It's a joke. But we are also, this talk about the Insurrection Act and thus what that means, ultimately, is negating our law and will negate it even further. I find it passing strange sometimes that Thomas Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence and then turned around as president in 1807 and signed the Instruction Act.

But it proves Powell's point about where you stand depends on where you sit. Right. Donald Trump's sitting in a very powerful place right now domestically, and I have no doubt that he would probably call for it. And what it does is it gives him the power to bring out the active military, federalize the National Guards, and go after Minnesota, for example. It also proves Lord Acton's point about power corrupts and absolute power corrupts. Absolutely.

And in that regard, I recommend Thomas Edsel's editorial. You may have seen it. I think it was in the New York Times. The title was something like, yeah, here it is. The title was, if power corrupts, what do we have here? And it goes into exactly what you were talking about. Right, right. Colonel, thank you very much.

Thank you for your time. You manage with your sense of humor to bring just a glimmer of hope in these dark days. I love our friendship, and I adore our professional collaboration. So look forward to seeing you again next week, my dear friend. Surely. I might be up there. I'll try to help Chris. Oh, please give us some notice when you're going to be up here.

Dinner at your favorite restaurant is on me. Now, don't go overboard, but it's on me. I might take you up on that. Thank you. You got it. All the best. You too. So coming up next is our special feature also presented by our friends at Zero Hedge,

a debate between the conservative Trumpian Dinesh DeSuzza and the hilarious and gifted libertarian Dave Smith. I will be moderating. I know both of these gentlemen for a long time, even though I'm 100% in Dave's camp, I'll be wearing my neutral judicial hat. That'll go on for about an hour. They'll each have five minutes to speak.

They'll have another few minutes to respond. And then I'm going to grill them with questions as aggressively as I can. At 3.30 today, Professor John Mearsheimer. Before I sign off, a word about our dear friend, Scott Ritter, who's alive and well, but yesterday learned that he had been debanked, meaning his bank had shut down his bank accounts and his credit cards and had seized the contents of his bank

accounts without any notice, without any due process, without any reason given. Scott and those of us that have looked at this are convinced the federal government is behind it, But this is the type of thing that should never happen in America under the Fifth Amendment. If the government wants life, liberty, or property from you and your right to use your funds in your bank, your bank account is a property right. It can only do so via due process, charge it with some wrong and prove it. Scott has not been charged with any wrong, so nothing's been proven and no explanation is given. Chris, if you'll put that full screen up again. these are the people to whom you can complain about the intellectual, honesty, brilliance,

and personal courage of Scott Ritter. Paul Tonko, who had nothing to do with this as far as we know, is Scott's member of Congress. Cash Patel, of course, is the director of the FBI. Scott is convinced that an old grievance by a still active FBI agent with whom Scott had a confrontation a number of years ago is behind this. And Bruce Van Sond is the chair. and CEO of Citizens Bank, which is the bank that shut him down. Can you imagine the bank says, we now own what you put in your bank account. And by the way, all those automatic transfers,

your mortgage, your utility bill, your car payment, they're stopped. We're not paying them for you. That's what Scott learned yesterday. We believe that his funds will be returned to him in about two weeks, but this shouldn't happen in America. Chris put the screen up again. Let these people know that they are violating the Constitution of the United States when they permit this to happen. Okay, we'll see you at 2 o'clock for the debate and at 3.30 for the great John Mearsheimer, Judge Napolitano for Judging Freedom.