Judging Freedom - Ukraine Russia War - One Year in Col Doug Macgregor

Episode Date: February 21, 2023

Hi, everyone. Judge Andrew Napolitano here for Judging Freedom. Today is Tuesday, February 21, 2023. It's about four o'clock in the afternoon here on the east coast of the United States. Colonel McGregor joins us again. Colonel, thank you very much for joining us. A lot has happened in Ukraine since we were last together, not the least of which has been the president's surprise trip there and statements that he made after he left when he was in Poland, even statements he made while he was there, President Putin's speech and statements that were made to President Putin about President Biden's speech. I want to start with President Biden. As I understand it, and you have far better sources than most people, certainly than I do, some of the ultra-nationalists around

President Putin were furious that President Biden sort of big-footed Putin by showing up in Kiev the day before a pre-announced speech by President Putin. One of the, not in the government, but advisors to Putin said, Biden could have come, we are so weak, Biden could have come to the front line and shaken his fist at the Russian troops and got back in safety and we wouldn't have harmed a hair on his head. I'm paraphrasing, but I think I'm saying it correctly. Question, how influential or damaging to President Putin or how animating to him, do you think President Biden's surprise arrival in Kiev was? President Biden's trip was designed to pull NATO together to boost morale in the West,

because behind the scenes, NATO is deeply divided. We're fractured, fragmented, whatever you want to call it, because out of the 31, 32 members, very, very few people are interested in being dragged into war with Russia. And we continue to double down on policies that have thus far produced a lot of dead Ukrainians, have lost a lot of Ukrainian territory, but are certainly not going to win. And people are wondering how much longer we will continue this before NATO falls completely apart. So I think Biden went over there not just to bolster our friend Zelensky. It was really more for the NATO allies than anything else. And I don't think it

worked, but that's what he was there for. In terms of the way these things work, involving military, intelligence, civilian, White House, Zelensky's people, is it realistic to believe that the Russians were given a heads up just to make sure they didn't bomb Kiev while Joe Biden was there? Well, I'm sure they probably said something to the Russians and alerted them. And of course, the Russians are right. They wouldn't have taken any action against President Biden under any circumstances. You know, you saw the fake air raid that was staged. They turned on the air raid sirens when Biden walked out to go to the Wall of Remembrance. Again, this is Hollywood stuff. And perhaps it made Biden's handlers happy but it was stupid

and ultimately again I think the whole thing was staged for NATO. Keep in mind when you look at the speech and what Biden promised Zelensky this is pie in the sky stuff 700 tanks, 1000 artillery systems. When?

Next year? When is this stuff going to arrive? If it ever arrives at all, it's not going to make any difference to the outcome on the ground in Ukraine. And then $500 million. Well, given what we've already invested, that's a pittance. And where would it go? It would go through the same recycling machine in Washington for the most part, but then a lot of it would be lost in Ukraine. You know, the Ukrainian corruption machine. I think the whole thing was a bust. Here's President Biden addressing NATO leaders and employees, as well as Polish dignitaries, and here he is at, for him, his rhetorical flourish.

Brutality will never grind down the will of the free. And Ukraine, Ukraine will never be a victory for Russia. Never. Well, you know, what can we say? It's a it's something that I wouldn't have said had I been in his position. This demonstrates that no one in Washington is looking for an off-ramp, that Washington is quite willing to risk direct confrontation with Russia, which is something I see no evidence that anyone in the United States wants to support. And we're clearly not ready for a high-end conventional war with the Russians. But that's the signal. The last treaty that we signed with Russia, the START treaty, Strategic Arms Limitation, puts a cap on nuclear weapons and provides for inspections to make sure the cap is being honored. Here's an angry, but I thought articulate,

President Putin with a translator announcing Russia's withdrawal from the treaty. Take a listen. In the beginning of February this year, there was a statement from the North Atlantic Alliance factually demanding that Russia returns to the Strategic Arms Treaty as they call it, including allowing inspections of our nuclear defense facilities. I don't even know what to call it.

It's a theater of the absurd. Regarding this, I have to say that Russia suspends its participation in the New START treaty. Are inspections standard in these treaties? And why would he call it the theater of the absurd? Are each side inspecting the other side? Or is it just NATO inspecting Russia? Well, there are provisions for inspections. But I think what he's

drawing out as an implication is that somehow or another, the Russians have not honored the treaty. And therefore, we demand access to see all of these things because we don't believe anything you say. And he says that's unacceptable. Now, keep in mind that he suspended the treaty. That's very important. The word suspend suggests that at some future date and time, under the right circumstances, he would be willing to restore it. So we should regard that as positive, frankly. Because let's face it, at this point,

they have more nuclear warheads than we do. They may have more delivery systems. I don't know. We get caught up in all these numbers. We have enough explosive power between the United States and Russia to destroy the planet. End of discussion. So it's in our interest to restore the treaty at some point. And I think he's made that point, but he's not going to stand there and put up with these allegations and accusations from us that they are somehow or another dishonest. Look what's happened to him over the last several years. I mean, he's finally reached a conclusion. He's been lied to repeatedly. Russia has been betrayed by us, and he's got a record to prove it. Let me show you a full screen, which is a description of a talking to that the U.S. and their maintenance personnel, including American military personnel, are a legitimate target for strikes by Russian troops. The Russian foreign

ministry demanded that the United States take measures aimed at withdrawing U.S. and NATO troops from the territory of Ukraine. I'm going to repeat that phrase, Colonel, because you told us about this and it doesn't appear anywhere in the mainstream media, aimed at withdrawing U.S. and NATO troops from the territory of Ukraine, Western military equipment and stop activities hostile to Russia. Is it finally becoming apparent that everybody knows that NATO troops, whether in uniform or out, and American troops, whether in uniform or out, are physically there in Ukraine. Well, I think it's an open secret, Judge. But the real question is, why wasn't this note delivered

last year? They could have delivered this note in September. So my question to you is, why is this note being delivered now? In other words, why is the U.S. ambassador being told under no uncertain terms the consequences for leaving American and allied military personnel, whether they are there in Ukrainian uniform or nondescript uniform or civilian clothes, doesn't make any difference. Why is he saying this now and making it abundantly clear that they will be treated as legitimate targets? Before we attempt to answer that, I want to run the next full screen. I want everybody to making it abundantly clear that they will be treated as legitimate targets. Before we attempt to answer that, I want to run the next full screen. I want everybody to know that you sent me these full screens. These are from your sources, although I think they were open sources,

on President Putin and his red line. This one, in my view, is even more inflammatory. Putin gave a signal no longer for Ukraine, but for those countries that support it. This is a hint that in the event of an escalation that will threaten the Russian Federation, strikes will be carried out on the territories of the countries in which it is located. This is a direct signal, not even a red line, which suggests that in the event of a threat in the near future on the territory of Poland, the Baltic countries, Finland, their territory will be subject to retaliatory measures and attacks from the Russian Federation. American military personnel in Poland are directing HIMARS and other missiles, I'll just use that as the lay term, which are in Ukraine to attack Russians? Does this mean that Russia is

reserving the right to attack American military personnel in Poland? And if you answer yes, isn't that just what the Polish president wants so he can start World War III? I think the following is what he means. First of all, there are lots of people out there who've been saying, well, the Russians have assembled all these forces, but they're never going to attack. You know, we heard that before. We heard that in January last year. All these Russian troops are going to sit there. They're not going to attack. I was one of the few people who said they would go in. They went in. Now people are saying the same thing. I want to assure everyone that the Russian forces in and around Ukraine are not on a training mission. They are preparing to attack. Now,

that's the first thing. When this attack begins, they're making it very clear all the gloves are off, no more nonsense. If you have cells operating inside Ukraine, you Americans, British, whatever you are, we will target and destroy them. We have tolerated enough. We're not going to indulge or tolerate any more behavior from you inside Ukraine. So we're giving you fair warning, get out. The red line now is very clear. If you interfere with this operation, if you try to disrupt the operation, if you try to march into Western Ukraine and declare a safe zone with the so-called coalition of the willing, which reflects the fact that NATO is not united, well, we have news for you. We are going to strike back. And that means if we launch an invasion from Poland, if we launch missiles from Poland,

rockets from Poland, whatever from Poland, Poland will become part of the theater of war. The same thing holds for the Baltic states and Finland. Now, I don't see any evidence that anything is going to be launched by the Finns. Now, I don't see any evidence that anything is going to be launched by the Finns. Frankly, I don't see any evidence that anyone in the Baltic states would do anything. But clearly, Poland is the hub of U.S. military activity in the region. And by the way, he didn't go down and list everybody else in NATO. But quite frankly, it holds for everybody. And the message is clear.

You're going to be at war with Russia if you do these things. So the American troops that are unarmed and out of uniform are fair game. And he's basically saying it. And why shouldn't they be fair game? They're not even protected by the Geneva Convention because they don't have uniforms on. No, they're not. And I don't know about the unarmed part. I'd be very surprised if that were the case. But frankly, if a tactical ballistic missile with a thousand pound warhead falls on you, they're not going to discriminate between those with or without weapons, obviously.

Here's President Putin earlier today on who started the war. Kiev regime provided artillery and aviation and other weapons to attack Donbass back in 2014. In 2015, they attempted again to directly attack Donbass. They continued shelling terror in relation to citizens. All of this was completely against the documents that were accepted by the United Nations Security Council. I would like to repeat, they started the war and we used the force in order to stop it. The only thing he didn't say is that Victoria Nuland, Hillary Clinton, and Barack Obama started this when they fomented, with the use of CIA and other assets, the so-called revolution in 2014, which overthrew the popularly elected government, which was perceived as pro-Moscow. That's about the only thing he didn't say. The rest of what he said is arguably an accurate recitation of that part of the history of that area. No, it is. And keep in mind that the Minsk agreements were reached and signed by

Russia, Germany, France, in order to put an end to the attacks on the Donbass republics. These are Luhansk and Donetsk. These are the two, quote-unquote, breakaway republics. They're all Russians. 14,000 people have died in the fighting there long before the Russians intervened in Ukraine. And this was intolerable, and they finally moved in to stop it. He's exactly right. There's no question about that. We don't acknowledge it, but justice and truth are not on our side in this. You have told us for a couple of months now that the Russians are amassing large numbers of troops ready to enter the country. Those troops have either been recalled to active duty having served their time, or they were reservists who were trained, or they were conscripts who needed basic training, but it appears that is done. How many troops do you think are being amassed by the Russian military, and when do you think

they will enter the Ukraine? Well, the largest concentration of Russian combat troops is in the south and in the west of Russia. If you draw a line from, let us say, just south of Zaborizhia over to the Aksal River, everything south of that line is the war zone, and there are about 250,000 combat troops prepared to attack north and to attack west into eastern Ukraine. Now, when I say 250,000, I'm talking about the people that close with and destroy the enemy. There are hundreds of thousands manning rocket, artillery, tactical ballistic missiles, air defenses, and so forth. So a total would be, I think, probably close to 700,000. I've seen 720, but that's, again, that includes everything, logistical support, transport, everything. Well, that's going to be a tidal wave of Russian military humanity and materiel, almost the foot soldier equivalent of carpet bombing into Ukraine? How can they possibly resist that and expect to be successful militarily?

Well, I think the defenses in the South have largely crumbled. The Ukrainians are hanging on by their teeth in most cases. Morale in the Ukrainian military is at an all-time low. Casualties have gone through the roof. They were losing a battalion equivalent today. Now it's been up to a thousand. 60,000 artillery rounds, rockets, missiles, hard shell ammunition falling on you every day is pretty shattering experience. There are so many casualties we can't even begin to estimate anymore. So yes, I think that's fair. But on the other hand, I think you also need to understand something that the Russians are doing. If you look at that front, no one is entirely 100% sure where the main thrusts will be.

In other words, where are the main axes? And the axes are going to be very broad. And this is historically something the Russians have done very well. If you go all the way back to Marshal Suvorov in the days of Napoleon, one of their tactics was to put out large numbers of skirmishers in front. They would create a lot of smoke and fire. People couldn't peer through it. People didn't know where the main body of attacking Russian troops was. And when they did find out, it was too late. And the Russians were very good at doing something

that Napoleon did so well, which was to mass artillery fire. You're seeing something similar develop down in southern Ukraine. So when the hammer falls, it's going to be a tremendous blow. There's no question about it. But again, it will be methodical. They will move forward under this umbrella of ISR strike, and they will ensure that they take very few casualties and they will maximize the enemy's casualties. And they're still dealing with a huge area, so they don't expect to systematically root everything out. But before this is over, they will seize all of eastern Ukraine. That's the near-term intermediate objective, clear out eastern Ukraine. When do you expect this will start, Colonel? They've been ready for, in my judgment, for several weeks. Why they've waited this long,

I don't know. A friend with good sources who's a fluent Russian speaker told me that Armed Forces Day in Russia is on the 23rd of February. And he said he thinks that that's the most likely trigger point. But others are saying the anniversary of the 24th. I'm not sure that the Russians hold that anniversary in the same esteem as people do in the West. So my Russian speaker may be accurate. It may be the 23rd, but it could come tomorrow morning. Again, this is part of the Russian strategy and it works. Colonel McGregor, always a pleasure. Thank you for joining us. Okay. Thank you, Judge.

Judge Napolitano for judging freedom.