Piers Morgan Uncensored - “Most Powerful Person EVER” Piers Morgan Debates American Empire With Historians

Episode Date: July 10, 2026

It’s a measure of the fevered polarization in US society that even its history has become a matter of furious debate. Long before the current presidency, competing missions to redefine America’s origins plunged the past into the heart of today’s culture wars. From the 1619 project’s attempt to reframe history around the arrival of slaves, to the 1776 commission's firm counter-narrative, the battle over what should be taught in schools and preserved in museums is intensifying. On Monday, the President launched a new front in this war, releasing a report detailing serious complaints about "divisive narratives" and "liberal ideology" inside the Smithsonian Institute. But beneath the partisan squabbling, the 250th anniversary of the nation raises a darker, existential question: Is this the revolutionary republic that defeated an empire, or is it now an empire in decline? Piers Morgan is joined by a panel of distinguished historians to debate the future of the American soul: Lord Andrew Roberts, Douglas Brinkley, Roy Casagranda and Barry Strauss. 00:00 Introduction 02:05 Panel discussion begins 11:21 How does history view the progressive wave? 14:07 Is the whole premise of America founded on a lie? 16:53 Dave King’s historical works 19:02 Is Trump the most powerful person that ever lived? 23:00 America’s foreign policy since WW2 28:45 How unreliable are America’s European allies? 29:44 Netanyahu’s influence over America in the Iran war 34:20 Would Churchill have helped America if he were involved in the Iran war? 36:10 Conspiracy theories in America - will we ever find out the truth? 39:20 Who has been the greatest American President and the greatest British Monarch? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

This spring, denim gets a softer, lighter update. Introducing Old Navy's drapey denim wide leg, a new fit that moves with you. It's everything you want denim to feel like for summer. Easy, breathable, and effortlessly cool. With a fit that creates natural movement and a wide leg that feels modern, not overwhelming. Plus, that signature, wait, for this price, moment. Old Navy's drapey denim wide leg. Is America the good guy?

Is it the global good guy? policeman or is it something else? The United States is a place that's pulled in two directions. I think the average American really wants the United States to stand for good. But the reality is, of course, is it doesn't live up to its own standards. Donald Trump is the biggest celebrity of our time with the biggest reach, but, you know, when you're 80 years old, you don't live forever. That's the thing about being human.

I wouldn't be surprised if the U.S. stops giving military aid to Israel. Many Israelis want the U.S. to stop giving it military aid. I think it's important when talking about the U.S. the Iran War to realize Israel is not happy with the way the war has turned out. Well, although Washington founded the nation and Lincoln saved the nation, in fact, it was FDR who saved the world. I think without any question I have assembled today the Mount Rushmore of historians. It's a measure of the fever of polarization in U.S. society that even its history is a matter

of furious debate. Even before Trump's second presidency, there were competing missions. to redefine America's origins which plunged the past into the present-day culture wars. The 1619 project sought to reframe the US history around the first arrival of slaves in response.

The 1776 Commission said, no thank you. We know exactly when all of this started and who did it. There are still arguments about whether the new United States committed to the genocide against Native Americans or whether it should be taught in schools. On Monday this week, the president launched a new front in his war on the Smithsonian Institute

releasing a report detailing his many about divisive narratives and liberal ideology in US museums. Overarching all of this, of course, and the year of its 250th anniversary, are some pretty big questions about what America is and what it should be. It's the Revolutionary Republic, which defeated an empire and then became one itself. But is it now in decline. Bianca Nobolo is a fascinating episode on the US at 250 over on History Uncensored. We'll link to it in our show notes.

And we've assembled our own panel of historical heavyweights to set the record straight. Lord Andrew Roberts, the acclaimed bestselling author, Professor of Bargrapher of The Last King of America, George III. Douglas Brinkley, renowned historian and acclaimed bestselling co-author of Witness to America. Roy Casagranda, the Golden Narrative Laureate Professor of Political Science at United Arab Emirates University

and History Podcasting Superstar. Barry Strauss, the professor at Cornell and senior fellow at the Hoover Institute. So I can't, I think, have amassed, probably in the history of the United States, a more highly qualified collection of experts. to pass judgment here. Let me start with you, Doug Brinkley.

Welcome to Unsented. I used to interview a lot when I was a CNN, so it's great to have you in my new incarnation. Douglas, you know, you've obviously poured over American history most of your adult life. Where is America right now? Where is it supposed to be right now? And where should it be?

Well, you know, we just had our 250th birthday July 4th, the Declaration of Independence. It's still a momentous occasion, the signing in Old Philadelphia of all the people we consider our founders, and including some people that, you know, like John Hancock and Paul Revere, and these people that were taught in American schools to be heroes forever. And then you have the Constitution of 1789, the ratification, and those two foundational documents kind of blazed the trail of what the U.S.

United States is supposed to be. The idea, when you write a line like Jefferson did in the Declaration, all men are created equal when you find out that unless you're Native American, indigenous, or unless you're a woman or unless you're a person of color, then you don't get to vote. That eats up a lot of American history just to get to the 1860 election of Abraham Lincoln and the crucible of our country, the civil war, where hundreds of thousands of Americans die, Americans, killing Americans, North versus South,

only to get the emancipation proclamation from Abraham Lincoln freeing slaves in Confederate states. And from that point on, I think it's a new America. You have to look at the America where slavery was tolerated and was a boom business in some southern states. to the post, you know, Civil War era. And then it's the time of American greatness, particularly because of engineering can do-doism, innovation.

You can't skip what meant in World War II for industrial mobilization, the miracle of American factories, and then the Manhattan Project with the atomic bomb. But as of late, I always think of the moonshot, Neil Armstrong on the moon is kind of peering out of that, great era of the American spirit, canduism, innovation. And we've been trying to reboot,

really since then, and have had success in Silicon Valley, with AI, you know, with Google Apple and some companies, but there's a malaise over the land in the United States that the American dream, the idea that every generation gets better, that we're always welcoming of immigrants.

It's sort of, it's stalled right now. And that might be being too moderate saying that. It's got, it's been jerked backwards where kids aren't sure whether they're better days are yet to come or not. And that means, you know, it brings us to the age of Trump. And he's a divisive political figure. He's got 30 to 40% of the public that loves them and a lot of people who don't. But he plays the electoral college well. And right now he's trying to undo.

as you mentioned, Smithsonian Institute and historical displays that don't show a kind of triumphalist side of American history. He doesn't like what he considers politically correct or taking of Americans as not good guys. Yeah, I mean, Professor Cassie Grander, welcome back to Onsense. I guess one of the big debates about history and historians, Trump thinks that to be patriotic, You know, historians should sort of gloss over the negative stuff.

Hipe up the good stuff, you know. Stop focusing on bad things. You know, if you want to be a true patriot, then you should really as historians do your job, which is, you know, making everything out to be fantastic. Obviously, that's not the job of historians. But when you look at, I mean, how do you think history will judge where we are now with America?

Because obviously, there are two ways looking at it. everything that Douglas just said is true, and yet America remains the most powerful country in the world with the most powerful military, with the most successful economy and so on. There are still lots of big tics in the boxes, which many other countries would give their eye teeth to have. So it's flawed, obviously,

but it has many great qualities, America. I mean, I've lived and worked in America for over 20 years, and I can see it at first-hand. It's a remarkable place. You know, what do you feel about where America's got to? I mean, you're right that the United States is a remarkable place. I live there three quarters of my life, and I don't regret having spent that time there. The United States is a place that's pulled in two directions.

On the one hand, right, I think the average American really wants to do good and really wants the United States to stand for good. And that's been its rhetoric, especially in the post-war. World War II era. But the reality is, of course, is it doesn't live up to its own standards. You just look at it in the types of wars that it chooses to get involved in, right? These aren't wars that it was forced into. And when you look at that record, it's really hard to look at it and go, oh, that made a lot of sense. I'm so glad we killed three million Vietnamese for no reason, two million Iraqis for no reason. And so the United States has this strange tug of war that it's

involved in. And I think, at least for a while, there was this hope that it would get pulled in sort of a better direction. And I, right, the 60s and 70s, I'm sorry, the 50s and 60s certainly believed that. I think in the 70s people sort of tuned out and listened to disco and did a bunch of cocaine and forgot that there was a 50s and 60s. But there was a struggle that the United States went through where it tried to figure out what kind of a country it wanted to be going forward. And in the end, I think the election of Donald Trump showed that there was a portion of the population that thought, no, that was really the wrong direction. We didn't want racial equality and we didn't want gender equality. And we needed to roll the clock back.

And the facet, make America great again is really just make America 19th century again. And so the fascinating thing is that there's a portion of the public that didn't like this better, more inclusive United States, this United States. States that wasn't necessarily imperialist for the sake of being imperialist that, you know, we were trying to do good for the world. And I think that's a disappointment for the world. Like, historians looking back will probably judge the United States and go, what was with this reactionary backlash that put it back decades? Well, you know what I would say to that? It's interesting. I hear your argument. But what historians may look back and say is, well, one of the reasons why somebody like Trump,

not just won one term, but then was four years out of office and then one bigger the second time. And actually, it may well come down to some of the progressive moves that were made by the left. And I'm thinking particularly, look, I'm a more liberal than not kind of guy. But I certainly think history will look back, for example, at the issue of trans athletes in women's sport

as one of the catalysts for how trying to be, doing the right thing, trying to signal your virtue, trying to, you know, be inclusive, all these things, can sometimes lead a party, as it did with the Democrats, into a mindset of complete insanity. I mean, I really do think history will look back and go, wait a minute, you let biological males compete in women's sport. How do that go? And obviously, the answer is very badly until Trump stopped it. So, you know, let me bring in Barry Strauss. I mean, I think that there were lots of strides made. But when I think of that particular issue, I mean, Trump made a big deal of it, and it was obviously very popular. One of the most popular political ads in history was the one

that he ran in the last election campaign of Carmelah Harris supporting trans athletes in women's sport. And it was devastatingly effective for Republicans, that commercial. So I'd just think it'd be interesting how history views the progressive wave and whether it feels it was a force for good in the end or began to eat yourself alive? So, you know, I'm a Roman historian. I'm a historian of the classical world, so I tend to step back and take the big picture. And, you know, what I think I would say about the United States is that it's a remarkably regenerative society. He has this ability to remake itself over and over again. And one of the reasons is the successive immigration to the United

States. I mean, the American history is partly the history of these waves of immigration, and most recently since 1965. And the contributions of the immigrants to American society are fantastic, reshaping America. And yet what we learn from Rome is successful societies have an ability to keep what's good about the past and yet make changes that are necessary to adapt. to the future. And one of the paradoxes of the United States is that we have this written constitution, albeit with some amendments, that's supposed to stop the clock. But of course, it can't, and you can't stop the clock. And it only works if we have people interpreting it above all through the courts and above all through the Supreme Court. So I think that the future

will look back and say, yes, the United States has lots of bumps. There are lots of bumps on the road, but Americans' ability to remake themselves while having one foot in the past and yet looking towards the future. I think that's one of the things that's really going to mark us historically. Very interesting. Andrew, welcome back to Uncensored. Lord Roberts. You wrote a great book, The Last King of America, the Misunderstood reign of George III. The narrative, of course, has always been he went completely bonkers and it cost us the entire continent of America, which is why I never celebrate July the 4th. I obviously mourn it deeply

if things have been differently. In fact, I sent President Trump a text I can reveal on July the 4th saying, happy 250s, Mr President. I said, you know, do you think maybe that it might be time to bring back the British monarchy and perhaps even install King Pierce I?

He just replied, how cute. But he didn't reply. And it wasn't. necessarily a no. But Andrew, you actually said the sort of cartoon villain impression of George

the 3rd was wrong as being kind of mythologised. He was actually a wise, humane, quite entitled enlightened monarch. So therefore, I guess the obvious question Brit to Brit is, is the whole premise of America, therefore founded on a lie?

No, not a lie. They were ready by the 1770s to have their independence. They got a population of two and a half million. They got 5% year-on-year growth. There were more bookshops in Philadelphia than in any other city of the empire, apart from London. They were ready to have their independence.

And naturally, of course, it being a war, you needed propaganda on your side. And Thomas Jefferson penned the most brilliant propaganda, wartime declaration there's ever been penned. and the first third of it is incredibly uplifting, and it makes us all proud to be human. It's just the next two-thirds, the ad hominem attack on George III,

which doesn't hold water at all. Only two of the 28 clauses make any sense historically. But those two are enough, the one about taxation and representation, and the idea of self-government, those two are enough to justify their revolution. So although, yes, they did, and especially Thomas Payne, who called George III of Brute,

although they did have to, because of the exigencies of wartime, exaggerate their position, nonetheless, it was the right time for America to become. Here we go. Someone's already claiming this is our year. Someone else said that last year too. A round of Jameson, ginger and lime arrives at a table. Smooth enough for kickoff, smooth enough for extra time. New friends pulling up a stool. debates about whether that was a handball.

Cheers rising like a roar around the room. Because match days are about the shared moments. How did Jameson to your match day lineup? Jameson, it's what you bring. Please enjoy our products responsibly. I mean, there's a kind of irony, because I've known Trump a long time, and there's no doubt if he could be king, I mean, he would make himself king tomorrow.

I mean, I think he would absolutely love the whole concept of monarchy. It's why he loves the British monarchy. His mother was a big fan of the Royals. He's had two state visits. I spoke to him again the morning after the last state visit when he'd been at Windsor Castle. He was at the castle. And he was absolutely just blown away by the pomp,

the pageantry, the ceremony, the history of the Royals. He loved the splendor of the castle. I mean, he really just couldn't have enough of it. So there is an irony there. You've got a president right now in America who is probably the nearest thing in his head to a king that America has had. Well, actually, he has greater powers than George III did.

In his setting tariffs, for example, which George III needed Parliament to support. He has all sorts of powers that, especially with regard to peace and war and so on, that he uses without reference yet to the War Powers Act in the case of Iran, for example, which George of third could only dream of. So it's sort of better than that, in a sense, for him. Let me bring Bing Douglas back in, because last week, President Trump shared a post attributed to presidential historian Dave King. Now, my first question would be, were you aware of Dave King's historical works? No, I was not.

It's not surprising because it turned out to be a long-time caddy and business associate for the South African professional golfer, Gary Player. But the significance of Dave King was that Trump cited. this presidential historian, stroke caddy, claiming that Trump is the most powerful person that has ever walked this planet. The post went on to say, this is the post by the historian stroke caddy, Dave King. Historically, powerful people were characterized

by brutal conquest and the fear that they instilled in the populations that came under their influence. Common names that would come to mind are Alexander the Great, the Caesars, Genghis Khan, and Tullah Khan, Tullah, Tumelain, Napoleon, and more recently, Hitler, Mao and Stalin. The overwhelming difference between each of the above and compare with President Trump is their lack of global reach.

Now, it's an interesting point because I've had this debate with a few people that I genuinely believe Donald Trump is the most famous person that's ever lived. And I base that purely on the fact he's the most famous person in the world at a time of social media. And social media means your reach as a celebrity is exponentially greater than it could point. possibly have been however good or bad you were in history. And if you, you know, so I just think logically, it was a survey, I think, in his first term, to never mind now, which said that he has more media attention Trump globally

than the next 1,000 celebrity-stroke public figures in the world combined. So there is an argument that Trump is, you know, certainly on that, in terms of global reach, the biggest star we've ever seen in the history of planet Earth. but he wants it to be slightly different. He would like it to be framed as the most powerful to ever walk the planet. Now, again, Douglas, from a historical point of view,

is the current president of the United States, whoever it is, actually, is there an argument that that person, Trump or otherwise, is the most powerful person that's ever lived? Well, look, I don't... It's sort of the Andy Warhol version of history that celebrity is what matters. If you add social media to the equation, then you can argue Donald Trump is the biggest celebrity of our time with the biggest reach.

But, you know, when you're 80 years old, you don't live forever. That's the thing about being human. That's what demagogues and authoritarians don't always understand. And is he going to hand his power down to his son? So it's the reign of Trump forever. Look, and you could put your name big on buildings. you know in chicago there's a building trump it'll be gone someday you know why they the biggest building in chicago was john hancock's building and they took john hancock the revolutionary war heroes

name off uh they end up on route 66 uh big trump letters on some roadside stand where people will pay to go eat you know cracker jacks and feed a goat um you know it's a fame fame and this this world comes and goes, ebbs and flows, the question is whether his leadership was great. Did he move the world in a proper new and smart direction? And you get a lot of zeros coming out of Donald Trump, an issue like climate change, or a whole July 4th ceremony here with 100 degrees, sweltering heat coming, you know, people dying in the East Coast, people dying in England from climate. and here's a president who's a denier of climate.

Nothing to do. We've got to stick to fossil fuels. Well, that might look good now. Well, that really look good 100 years from now. I'm just giving you an example. And, you know, he was going to end the war for day one in the Ukraine and ended in the Middle East. And these things continue to go on. So at the end of the day, when you leave office, there's a ledger.

What did you accomplish? What you didn't. Will he be always Donald Trump's name in gold? yes, in Las Vegas, Atlantic City. They'll be selling Trump T-shirts in Gatlinburg, Tennessee, and Tombstone, Arizona, but whether he deserves to be in a league of something like Abraham Lincoln in America or Franklin D. Roosevelt, I sincerely doubt it. I can't see how that could be the case.

But to your argument, any American president now could be called the most powerful person ever because of the weapons we have. Yeah. AI. You know, so to that point, it's true. I mean, Joe Biden was just a couple years ago the most powerful person in the world. That's what I think.

I think the current occupier of the Oval Office actually probably is the most powerful person in history. So in a way, if all Trump said was, I'm the most famous person the planet's ever seen, probably true. And I'm the most powerful person as President of the United States the world has ever seen. That's probably true as well.

He doesn't actually have to over-hype this one. Let me bring him Professor Casagranda back. I'll quote you actually from Andrew Roberts here. It was among many of his talents, the most brilliant biographer of Winston Churchill. And he said that America was always considered the good guy by Churchill. He knew that America was key to defeating Hitler and the Nazis and taking on Soviet communism.

and so on. And I'll come to Andrew whether he still thinks that now. But what do you think? I mean, people talk about the special relationship, for example. Obviously, it's a lot of attention on that because of the 250th anniversary of America

breaking away from British rule. But, you know, has America been the good guy? When you look particularly at the foreign policy since World War II, you know, quite hard to find an example where America's taken military action pretty much anywhere, where it's turned out to be an unfettered success. It's normally ended up being quagmires and a lot of dead people,

a huge amount of money being spent, and no one's quite sure what victory looked like or was supposed to look like. And you look at the Iran now, the Iran War is a classic example of that. Is America the good guy? Is it the global good guy policeman, or is it something else? So I don't want to completely dismiss everything the United States has done that is positive. So let me just start with that. The security arrangement that the United States created for Europe post-World War II,

I think can be categorized as good. At the end of the day, Western and Central Europe were obviously worried about being sucked into the Eastern bloc. The Soviet Union definitely, it started off as more of a defensive thing, the Eastern Block, but as time went by, it definitely became more aggressive. And so I can see how you could see it that way. I think Prime Minister Carney of Canada kind of said it best recently, where he said, the United States misbehaved on a regular basis. I'm paraphrasing, I don't remember his exact quote, but it's something in effect of the United States misbehaved and we're willing to turn the other way because we thought at the end of the day,

the United States was providing the world with a good. And that good was enough that we could ignore Vietnam. We could ignore Iraq. We could ignore, you know, the debacle in Afghanistan. The problem is, is once you stack, you know, overthrowing Al-Qaatli in Syria in 1949, and then you throw in, overthrowing Mossadegh in 53, and you throw in overthrowing Arbenz in 54, and Salvador Aende in 73, and I forgot Patrice Lumumba. Like, if you just keep stacking all those democracies that the United States destroyed and train wrecked, and then throw in all the nasty wars that we did, and then all the proxy wars that we supported and were on the wrong side of, I feel like post-World War II, the United States had the opportunity to do so many good things

and then regularly chose to do the wrong thing. And that sort of deliberate misjudgment on the part of leadership, on the part of oligarchs, on the part of the political elite, I think will make it so the United States is judged poorly. One of the great tragedies is after the Soviet Union fell. The United States had this fantastic opportunity to say, look, we don't have a Cold War anymore. Let's start moving the world in the direction of more trade, more commerce, more peace. And instead, you had guys like Bill Clinton who are ramping up the defense budget and cutting the budget for the department. I'm having a secretary of state, department of state. I couldn't remember the word state.

You know, cutting the budget for the Department of State. And then George Bush Jr. comes in and he continues that train wreck. And so we end up with these two really awful leaders back to back who caused so much suffering and misery for no reason. And now we're trying to pick up the pieces. Only we now have Trump, and he's not exactly picking up the pieces. He's creating more. This Iran disaster was a debacle.

It looks like a waterloo. The United States is alienated its allies. It's damaged the global economy. There's a distinct possibility. We're going to see a recession or possibly even a depression from this if it doesn't get straightened out soon. And it was a war that served no purpose except to save the Islamic Republic. We're now going to give it over $300 billion. Oh, my God, I was hoping the thing was going to go away.

And instead, it's just been reinforced. And so, yeah, I don't think it'll be a good... Well, I guess, let's bring in Barry here, because Barry, you said recently, or you wrote recently, increasingly it seems Israel's a more reliable ally to the United States than some of America's old friends in Europe. Now, it's interesting because I was edited to the Daily Mirror newspaper in the UK, for example, when the Iraq war happened. And I campaigned before, during and after it, vociferously, front page after front page against that war. I felt that there was no argument that had been put forward that justified Tony Blair committing British forces. My own brother ended up fighting on the front line in it.

So I had a personal engagement with this war. But I think I was vindicated, sadly, by what happened next. But you do wonder about, from a historical point of view, does anyone really look back that far and remember what happened? Trump used to be really anti-the Iraq war, said he was, and said he was anti-meddling in Middle Eastern wars and so on. And yet here he is then plunging in to potentially the biggest imaginable Middle East or war against Iran. It seems at Israel's behest.

And yes, a lot of European countries, including mine, the UK, held back because they had memories of what happened with Iraq. And they weren't convinced by the argument put up, which appears to have come from the Israelis and Benjamin Netanyahu in particular, persuading Trump, this was the moment, and if he did it, all these things would happen, and almost none of it happened. So to sort of come back at you about your statement there, how reliable an ally is it if an ally puts pressure on America to do something,

which then turns into seemingly a bit of a fiasco, and how unreliable are your friends in Europe, if they were the ones that went, this is not a good idea. Great question. So first of all, the subject of reliability or unreliability of European allies is not just a matter of the Iran war. It's the larger issue of defense spending, defense preparation, the degree to which

Europeans are willing to defend themselves and contribute to defense of the continent against Russia. To me, the shocking degree to which they're dependent on the United States. States. They have no one to blame but themselves on that. And that does make them less reliable allies for the United States. As far as Israel, I think it's incorrect to say that the Israelis somehow pressured Trump, pressured the United States into the war in Iran. They made their case, but I don't think Donald Trump is a kind of person that gets pressured by anyone. I think he makes his own decisions. I would say persuaded. I mean, the word I would use, you know, when I read all the

by the New York Times in particular on this. I would say that Netanyahu persuaded Trump that if he took this moment to join the Israelis and attacking Iran, that the Ayatollah was there for the taking, and he clearly was, they took him out and took out a lot of his top people, that the IRGC would then collapse from within, that the people would rise up,

they'd all be too distracted to worry about the Strait of Hormuz. It's the rest of it. I mean, in fact, even the top bit, the Ayatollah simply got replaced by his more radical son, and then all the others bumped up anyway. So the regime remains completely tight and in charge. You can see that from the scenes of the dead Ayatollah's funeral this week.

No public uprisings whatsoever. Clearly, the IRGC has gone nowhere. The enriched uranium remained buried away, and the Iranians have full control. And they waged this highly effective asymmetric war using Mastradal-Formuz to hold the world's energy over a barrel and firing off missiles and rockets at the neighboring Gulf states as well,

which had a hugely detrimental effect to their business models. You put it all together. It's just been a complete mess. And I would say, you know, you now have people like Rahm Emanuel who's got aspirations to be president, democratic, Jewish,

and he's coming out saying, it's time America ended its support relationship with Israel. Israel can fund itself. It's got plenty of money, plenty of weapons, and America should stop being its bank. And I thought that was a really interesting moment in this ongoing debate. Historically, could well be, this could be the period where you see the United States, perhaps, severing that relationship with Israel. I don't think the United States is going to sever its relationship with Israel.

I wouldn't be surprised if the U.S. stops giving military aid to Israel. Many Israelis want the U.S. to stop giving it military aid. I think it's important when talking about the Iran War to realize Israel is not happy with the way the war has turned out. Israel is not happy with the policies or many Israelis, I shouldn't say Israel. Many Israelis are unhappy with the way the policy has turned out with the way that the United States has waged the war with its decision to end the blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, for instance. I think that if Israelis had had their druthers, the war would have continued and gone in different directions. So this is a case of the United States looking after its own interests as it perceives them, whether they're right or wrong is another question.

It's certainly not a matter of the United States following the dictates of another country. I think it's quite independent. We'll have to see how it goes. The war is very problematic in its current state with that question. It did achieve some real tactical successes against the Iranian regime. And let's not forget, the Iranian regime is very good at propaganda and very good at making its case, making the world think it's a lot stronger than it is.

It's really suffering in many ways. But certain things, I mean, honestly, you know, certain things are just indisputable because we could see it with our own eyes. I mean, if there had been a dismantling of the IRGC, the people would have risen up. None of that's happened. And the Australia of Fulmoose turned out to be a hugely, hugely powerful weapon.

because 20% of the world's energy goes through there. I didn't know that before we started. And it turned out that oil, gas, fertilizer, all these crucial things that make the world go around, that they could just hold them up. And the blockade just clearly wasn't working. If it was working, they'd have carried it on. But Trump realized, I think,

and history will doubtless tell us. Maybe you guys will be able to inform us in years to come. But I think that Trump just calculated that this was going to get a hell of a lot worse if he wasn't very careful. because it was clearly not going to be as easy as Netanyahu had told him it would be. Now, again, I don't think that Trump got bullied into it. He's not that kind of character.

But I think he bought into the series of events that Netanyahu painted for him, and it just didn't happen. And from a historical point of view, what's interesting to me is there are so many examples of America getting into wars in the Middle East, and it's just coming unstuck when they had no real endgame or plans. which made much sense, and then, of course, it ended the way everyone predicted, which is badly.

Andrew, let me bring you in here, because I'm going to come to your thing about good guide Churchill. But on this Iran war, for example, had Churchill been the British Prime Minister and Roosevelt had rung him and said, we're going to attack Iran and are you in or not?

And if you're not in terms of the fighting, can we use your bases? What would his response have been? His response would have been, yes, and we know that because, of course, the British were involved in the overthrow of Mossadegh, which was mentioned earlier in Iran. He believed in the special relationship, and he'd have definitely given them the use of Diego Garcia and so on.

But another thing he would have done, which is, I think, very important to all of this, is he wouldn't have encouraged President, Trump to say that America was locked and loaded two weeks before it actually was, thereby encouraging that popular uprising that you mentioned, which led to the death of over 30,000 people who were, of course, that basically the people that were needed in order to overthrow the IRGC. So it was the timing of that that went so badly wrong for Trump. And this can't be blamed on Bibby Netanyahu. This was Trump's timing. I want to wrap things up by coming back to you, Doug, as you started so you'll finish. President Trump's also played around with

the idea there are lots of hidden files, whether it's JFK, UFOs, Epstein and so on. As a historian, I mean, you must be absolutely itching to get your hands on anything that's categorized as a hidden file. Do you think that there are genuinely massive bombshells there? Do you think that one day we'll find out what really happened with JFK, for example, man landing on the moon and all these things which have blown up so many conspiracy theories? Or do you think they are ultimately just conspiracy theories and there's probably not much more to it? Well, one of the things to keep in mind is we have a Freedom of Information Act. So a historian like myself might want to look at documents about the Trump administration. I'm going to have to wait 25 years to be able to get out those secret documents.

And then if I'm vigilant and they get them out there, you can look at them and often they're redacted, big hunks redacted. Well, it seemed fair 25 years sit and wait. However, in those 25 years, if somebody wants to cleanse files, meaning a government agency in the U.S. wants to do such a thing, that gives them 25 years to do it. So when these big batches of documents come out, they tend to be disappointing. Are there puzzle pieces to the Kennedy assassination

with each batch of release? Yeah, you find this piece, that piece. But there's never the smoking gun, or at least hasn't been in that regard. And so it's going to be meaning continued books, conspiracy theories on JFK. On something like UFOs, there's kind of a public clamor. Let's see this stuff for the sake of humanity. And again, you know, it's really led to not much.

You know, some grainy video here, citing of something odd looking there. It's the Loch Ness Monster Syndrome in outer space. You know, it's, and so we just sit and wait, but history always is full of surprises. And everybody who's a real historian working in the modern era has to keep saying, I want to see more documents, more, more, more, more, and at various times things surprise you what comes out. And those documents can change the way you look at an entire presidency. We thought Dwight D. Eisenhower in the 50s was just golfing and had heart attacks. asleep at the wheel was a hands-off president. And lo and behold, when his papers open, he's involved with everything.

He's almost close to being a micromanager of his administration. So you can do a 180 on thinking. And it's premature now on the war in Iran. We don't know. We're in the middle of it. Who knows what's going to, Trump's the president for two more years. How will it all look? I think it'll get connected to the Eupris that Trump got and the out of Venetian.

Venezuela when he went in and was pulled off that mission so clearly. And he had previously done a strike in Iran and it worked. Then you get Netanyahu persuading him, we can do this too. And that's led to where we're at right now in the Straits of Moose. Final question, Douglas. I will put this to the others as well, just quickly. As it's the 250th anniversary, who has been the greatest American president

and the greatest British monarch in your estimation. Oh, God. The greatest monarch, you know, I honestly have to leave that. I could say the greatest president is Abraham Lincoln, without doubt. Lincoln's always ranked number one by the American people and scholars, because no matter how bad other presidents had it, Lincoln had it worse. I mean, he came into Washington, D.C., with a Virginia, Virginia were getting ready to secede, Maryland, the hotbed of secession, would be assassins

lurking everywhere. And if you look at the first year of the Civil War, I mean, Lincoln was losing. I mean, he had to fire his own General McClellan, and finally he got saved by finding Ulysses S. Grant out west. The point being, Lincoln persevered. And our country ran an election in a middle of the Civil War in 1864, and Lincoln won. Lincoln stands supreme, and if we are celebrating America 250, all of our founding documents, Lincoln gave us the first inaugural,

second inaugural, Gettysburg Address, Mancipation Proclamation, and his death still is the ultimate tragedy in America. Give me one monarch, come on. I really don't know who I would call the best, because I'm not a great student of the monarchy, and I have a feeling I know you are. So y'all let you pick that, you know. Well, let me come to the others.

So, Professor Cassigranda, come on. Best president, best British monarch. So the best president is easy and it's painfully obvious. And it's Abraham Lincoln. Like, I just, I don't even know where anybody could go otherwise. Elizabeth I was amazing. She was truly brilliant. I think hands down, she's number one.

Okay. Barry Strauss. So I stand second to no one in my admirable. for Lincoln, but I have to put in a word for Washington. I mean, the United States wouldn't exist without George Washington, both as a general and as a president and as, what can I say, giving weight to the argument for the Constitution. He was absolutely essential.

So there's a strong case to be made for George Washington as number one, though we'd never want to deny the greatness of Lincoln. I agree with Professor Casigrante, Elizabeth First, It's just terrific. She's the patron saint of pragmatists. I mean, her saying, I don't want to open windows into men's souls. That's just one of the great things. And her incredible speech to the troops before the Spanish Armada,

just fabulous, fabulous speech. So I'm on board with Elizabeth I first. Okay, Lord Roberts, greatest U.S. president and greatest British monarch. Well, although Washington, quite rightly, as Barry said, founded the nation and Lincoln saved the nation. In fact, it was FDR who saved the world. Without Franklin Roosevelt, we wouldn't have had the grand strategy that managed to defeat Hitler and Nazism, which is the greatest threat that we've ever had to the world. So it's FDR who wins the best president. And as far as the best monarch is concerned, both of you have beaten me

to it. Of course it was Elizabeth the first, the most formidable stateswoman that we have had in British history and she beats all the statesmen as well. So when you see the way in which she saved the country, saved the throne and managed to found an empire, she was an extraordinary woman. Well, I mean, far be it from me to try and correct a historian of your eminence, Lord Roberts.

I was actually going to suggest FDR as the president, actually. So I think that's a very good shout, although the others were too. But I'm going to say, I genuinely believe, and I wrote this when she died, I think Quinn is the second was the greatest ever monarch, because she had to reign from the age of mid-20s, plunged into it by the sudden death of her father, had to be through the most tumultuous periods of history. you could argue that her reign covered some of the most extraordinary periods in history.

And barely put a foot wrong, was the longest reigning monarch ever. And I think brought this nation together in ways that I don't think any other monarch has probably ever done with the simplest of gestures, the wave of a hand, a balcony appearance. You only made about four speeches ever, but I can remember all of them. And they were, they were all magnificent moments in British history. for her ability, whether it was after the death of Diana, whether it was the pandemic, whatever it was, pandemic in particular, her ability to calm the nation

was like nothing I've ever seen. And so I'm going to say, Quillard of the Second. However, on a positive note, I think without any question, I have assembled today, the Mount Rushmore of historians. So thank you all very much indeed. So thank you.

That was a fascinating conversation. Great, great to talk to all. Thank you very much. Pierce Morgan Unsensored is proudly independent. The only boss around here is me. If you enjoy our show, we ask only one simple thing. Hit subscribe on YouTube and follow Pierce Morgan Unsensored on Spotify and Apple Podcast. And in return, we will continue our mission to inform, irritate and entertain.

And we'll do it all for free. Independent Unsensored Media has never been more critical, and we couldn't do it without you. If you want a $3,000 a month payday for life, what would you feel free to do? Maybe take a long weekend, every weekend, or try a bunch of new hobbies? Would you feel free to upgrade and listen ad-free? Don't worry, we get it. Every $20 ticket could win you $3,000 a month for life and supports life-saving cancer research at the Princess Margaret. Feel free to buy your payday for life ticket today.

Raffle number 155-214. Please play responsibly.