The Ben Mulroney Show - A ceasefire in Iran? Trump says "enough!"

Episode Date: June 24, 2025

Guests and Topics: -Phil Gurski If you enjoyed the podcast, tell a friend! For more of the Ben Mulroney Show, subscribe to the podcast! https://link.chtbl.com/bms Also, on youtube -- https://www.youtube.com/@BenMulroneyShow Follow Ben on Twitter/X at https://x.com/BenMulroney Enjoy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

No Frills delivers. Get groceries delivered to your door from No Frills with PC Express. Shop online and get $15 in PC Optimum Points on your first five orders. Shop now at NoFriills.ca. Welcome to the Ben Mulroney Show on this Tuesday, June 24th. Thank you so much for joining us. You may be watching us on YouTube, in which case I wave at you and I say hello, or you may be finding us on a streaming app, on a podcast platform, or on the good old fashioned radio. The Iranian question, the Iranian situation is one that is dominating the headlines.

And we could go into the back and forth and the minutia of what's going on. But I think I want to look at this today through the lens of the Donald Trump of it all. Because it was very curious in the early days of Iran's offensive into, sorry, Israel's offensive into Iran, when they were decapitating the leadership, both of the military as well as the brain trust that was spearheading Iran's aggressive push to get themselves a nuclear weapon. In those early days,

Donald Trump was apprehensive, and he was not sitting on the sidelines, but he was definitely pleading for a diplomatic solution. But once he saw how effective Israel's offensive was, he sort of injected himself into the conversation, sort of, I won't say rewriting history, but highlighting his influence over the dynamic. So he made it sound like he was directing this thing to a certain extent and highlighting the military contribution that America had given Israel so that they could prosecute this offensive against their enemy.

And then once they got past a certain point, once they crossed the Rubicon, so to speak, that's when he decided to take pretty drastic measure, despite what he'd said in the past. And he authorized the bunker busting bombing of a number of their highly fortified military and nuclear installations. And this was much ballyhooed and celebrated by Donald Trump himself. And a lot of us believed that this was going to be a level set.

If you take it down to the individual level, it's sort of like two people fighting at a bar. And one guy just clocks the other guy, and he lands on the ground. And the guy standing above him says, all right, can we calm down now? Can we calm down? Do you realize that you're on the ground and it's over?

Can we stop the sniping and the chirping and the fighting? That's what a lot of us felt was going to happen or hoped was going to happen. And I think that's what Donald Trump hoped was going to happen because yesterday he posted on his Truth Social, congratulations to everyone in all caps. It has been fully agreed by and between Israel and Iran that there will be a complete and total ceasefire, all caps,

in approximately six hours from now when Israel and Iran have wound down and completed their in-progress final missions. For 12 hours at which point the war will be considered ended. Officially, Iran will start the ceasefire and upon the 12th hour, Israel will start the ceasefire and upon the 12th hour, Israel will start the ceasefire and upon the 24th hour, an official end to the 12 day war, Donald Trump named it that, will be saluted by the world. And he goes on, God bless everyone, God bless the world,

signed Donald J. Trump, president of the United States. And I don't think it will surprise a lot of people that was there a ceasefire? If there was, was it going to hold? I think a lot of us probably said, you know, if past is prologue, probably not. And sure enough, both sides have traded at least some significant missile volleys and some attacks to which Donald Trump was not happy. And he sort of this morning said,

Israel is not going to attack Iran. All planes will turn around and head home while doing a friendly plane wave to Iran. Nobody will be hurt. The ceasefire is in effect. Well, that's not necessarily the case. And Donald Trump is none too happy about it. Now, I'm going to play some audio for you,

but and he's mad as hell and he's not going to take it anymore. Donald Trump is none too happy about it. Now, I'm gonna play some audio for you, but, and he's mad as hell and he's not gonna take it anymore. He speaks in very unpresidential ways, maybe Donald Trump ways, but not ways we expect a president to speak. We're not gonna air the whole thing for you, but for context,

there's a number of things he's angry about. He's angry that his ceasefire didn't hold and he looks a little foolish for having said it would. But he's also, I think, probably even more mad that the American press, specifically MSNBC and CNN, have been positing that the B2 bombing of the nuclear facilities that look devastating did not set the nuclear ambitions of Iran back as far as he had indicated. There is reporting that is skeptical of the results,

the effectiveness of the attack. And that I think is the thing that POs him the most. And I think that is bleeding into his lack of patience for Iran and Israel. So with that as background, let's listen to the president of the United States and how he sees the state of play. I think I violated it. I don't think I'm not sure they did it intentionally. They couldn't rein people back. I don't like the fact that Israel went out this morning at all. And I'm going to see if I can stop it. So as soon as I get away all. And I'm going to see if I can stop it. So as soon as I get away from you, I'm going to see if I can stop it. Okay. Iran

will never rebuild its nuclear from there. Absolutely not. That place is under rock. That place is demolished. We basically have two countries that have been fighting so long and so hard that they don't know what the f*** they're doing. Do you understand that? Yeah, look, I appreciate the emotion and I like it when people speak plainly often. If you go and listen to the entire recording,

you will absolutely, I think you'll fall in line with my thinking, which is that he's more upset about the press that he's getting. He was demanding an apology by CN MSNBC and CNN to apologize to the B two bombers, the pilots for the hard work and dedication that they demonstrated in their jobs. And I think that informed his anger in that moment. But there are some people are very happy with what he has to say,

including Marjorie Taylor Green, everybody's favorite advocate for Jewish space lasers, who reacted to that line and said, quote, inject this directly into my veins with fire emojis, because that is how congressmen and congresswomen speak in the United States. And not for nothing, but I found out what I don't think everybody knows that prior to becoming a congressperson, do you know what Marjorie Taylor Greene did? You know what her job was? She ran a CrossFit studio. That's what you know. Now they're wrong when people run CrossFit, and they are in a lot of cases alphas. But that's a heck of a leap to go from running a CrossFit gym to becoming a US member of Congress. So there you go. Marjorie Taylor Greene is here for that. Now, you heard what Donald Trump said, and Canada's voice in this is marginal at best. You know, we are a side until we

until we beef up our military, we're sort of just chirping from the cheap seats. That being said, going on record is important. And our Prime Minister, Mark Carney, is in Europe right now for the NATO summit. And he sat down with CNN's Christiane Amanpour, and he gave his assessment of the US bombing of Iran's nuclear facilities.

Let's have a listen. I would lean towards President Trump's interpretation of it. The military action was also a diplomatic move by Iran. It was I mean, we never welcome obviously hostilities and reactions, but it was proportionate. It was de-escalatory, it appears to have been previewed, which allowed in their Canadian soldiers at the Qatari base as well. Did you get them out of harm's way? They were out of harm's way, yes.

So it's par for the course really and it gives as far as you're concerned an opening for diplomacy? It gives an opening for diplomacy. I think that's the right way to put it. And the question is, does that diplomacy really get traction and move to ending this risk of nuclear proliferation? And does it lead as well to broader, well, a broader ceasefire in the Middle East, including in Gaza. I'm absolutely here for what our prime minister said. It was clear, it was concise, it had clarity to it.

It made my heart swell as a Canadian. I like hearing that tone from our prime minister and I wanna hear more of it. On the other side of the break, we are going to continue with this conversation, but're going to look specifically at the knock-on effects of this war with Iran. Could it lead to a destabilization as it relates to sort of the energy reserve, oil reserves across the world? What happens to the Strait of Hormuz where 20% of the world's oil reserves pass through? That's coming up next on the Ben Mulroney Show.

Welcome back to the Ben Mulroney Show. And there's an expression in history, which I'm sure I'm butchering, but those who forget their history are doomed to repeat it. And so let's look back to the 1970s, where there were two major crises as they related to energy. One was in 1973 and the other in 1979 that caused a massive spike in not only the cost of oil and gas, but a scarcity in some cases where there were lineups at gas stations. Both of those were triggered by events in the Middle East.

And here we are again in the Middle East with a flash point that could spell confusion and could sow discord and mayhem and the unknown, right? So could we be staring down the barrel of another energy crisis? Here to discuss this is Phil Gursky of Borealis Threat and Risk Consulting. Phil, thanks so much for being here. Hey Ben, how are you?

I'm good. So anytime Iran is involved, there is fear that it could spark some sort of change to the status quo in energy production, oil production, gas production. Are we at that point right now? I don't think so, Ben. I mean, obviously energy is not my specialty,

but I like to record the beginning and anyone who thinks that going into Iran I don't think so, Ben. I mean, obviously energy is not my specialty, but I like to record the beginning and anyone who thinks that going into Iran is gonna end quickly and well, as you said, doesn't know their history. So I would consider the move by both Israel and the United States to be ill-considered. And as an all Intel guy working for CSIS and TSC,

the fact the president ignored his own intelligence on Iran's program smacks to me of, well, I'm going to do it anyhow and to hell with the consequences. Well, let's look at the here and now. Like that has happened. So the world, we got to take the world as it is, Phil. And the world as it is has Iran in shambles, in crisis.

And they can do one of two things. They can either accept their fate and try to play by the rules or they can push back. And one of the ways they can push back is by tightening control over the Strait of Hormuz, where 20% of global oil and gas flow through it daily. There were 20.2 million barrels going through the Strait of Hormuz per day in 2023, and it connects the Persian Gulf to the Arabian Sea. What do you think when I bring that up, that scenario? Well, look, if you've just had your country struck

by multiple cruise missiles, you had your infrastructure attack, you've had, you know, various buildings hit, you've had civilian casualties, are you going to want to cooperate with the people who just targeted you? So it becomes a countless pen. I mean, you know, what is wrong? Get out of it? Obviously, there are different actors within Iran. Some will want to, you know, maybe, you know, maybe retreat a little bit. Others will want revenge or retribution, like the attacks against Israel.

So I wouldn't be surprised if Iran tries to pull something off. Can they do it? I don't know. I don't know what these talents of Iran's military is. But to raise a good point, we're talking about a very volatile part of the world. It's kind of like, you know, what's happening in the Red Sea, right? Very, very narrow straits. And as you said, lots of the oil goes through there. So Iran, even if it made a small move, could have a significant impact on world energy. Absolutely. So Phil, play something out for me, because yesterday on the show, we had

somebody who, you know, I put forth the idea that, you know, Iran is a very dangerous player because they value and highlight and promote and celebrate martyrdom. The idea of people dying for their cause is celebrated and therefore you're not dealing with somebody who exists on the same plane of existence as you. I mean, mutually assured destruction only works if you both value life. But what I was told was what just happened to Iran probably scared them to the point that they realized, you know what, let's put martyrdom in the backseat.

It's about survival of the regime at this point. And so if that's the case, if the knock-on effect of this attack was that they were shocked into at least a semblance or a temporary state of rational thought and self-preservation, then I wonder how much of the bluster and the saber rattling that we might view right now,

how much of it would be performative? Meaning the 14 missiles that were fired through Qatari airspace directed towards the US military installation there. Could they have possibly telegraphed that they were going to do that knowing full well that the missiles would get shot down so that they could then look to their people and say, you see how strong we are? You see how we're willing to do anything to defend Iran against the imperial aggression

of America. How much how much of it could be theater versus how much of it could be a real threat? Well, in fact, we do know Ben that they advise the Qataris in advance about the missiles coming, which means that they would have to try to provide the advise the Americans and is reporting that the planes were moved in fact in advance. You know, Ben, any situations, it's hard to say a lot of it is bluster. They're going to want to seek revenge at some point, they these situations it's hard to say, a lot of it is bluster,

they're going to want to seek revenge at some point, they'll keep launching missiles into Israel to get some kind of you know retribution of what happened in their country. Are the actors rational, are they irrational? It's probably a combination of both. You mentioned martyrdom, it's the same with jihadis, I mean there's a martyrdom culture there as well, but I think the bottom line for me is that I was in Iran for 20 years, not far to see language, I kind of understand as to a little bit, you're dealing with a very complicated situation with multiple actors with multiple goals. It's not just a one, you know, how many doesn't control

everything. Yeah, I think we're gonna have to wait and see in terms of who comes out on top. And whether as you said, it's regime preservation, or someone saying to hell with it, we're going to go in a blaze of glory. Yeah. Well, the the the potential impact of the closure of a Strait of Hormuz, I mean, I'm reading that the cost, the price of a barrel of oil could rise to 120 to $130 USD.

What are some of the implications of that spike in the cost of oil? What could happen for the everyday Canadian? Well, again, I'm not an energy expert, but I mean, it has an implication for everything, right? From plastics, from the gas and the car, to plastic production. I'll tell you Ben, I'm glad I own an EV right now.

Yeah, God, if only we could exploit the oil that we have here in Canada to the benefit of Canadians. If only we had a way of getting that oil out of the ground. My goodness. Why didn't someone think of that sooner? My goodness. So where do we go from here? I mean, like there are people like myself,

I like you, I'm certainly not an expert in a lot of these fields, you know a lot more than I, but Donald Trump was quite taken by the effectiveness of Israel's initial attack on Iran to the point that he sort of injected himself into the scenario. He was on the sidelines and then made it out as if he was somehow part of the planning and part of the success. Now it seems like he's walking it back because he didn't get the ceasefire he wanted. Where do we go from here?

Well, the problem is, as you know, it's all died to plan. We have a president who is completely unpredictable and we don't know for one moment next what he's gonna do. I think he had a formal moment, to be honest with Israel. He's angry at Israel, he's angry at Iran. In normal days, we would have a president

a little more mature whose views you could trust. This one we cannot trust because he changes his mind all the time. I'm just hoping for a standout on both sides, but I'll be honest with you Ben, I don't trust the Netanyahu government either on this one because they seem to want to go the entire complete destruction and regime change in Iran. Netanyahu has wanted this for 20 years now. He thinks he can do it, but as you said at the beginning, if you think you understand now. He thinks he can do it. But as you said at the beginning, if you think you understand the Middle East and you can figure it out,

then you're just fooling yourself. It's a very, very complex area of the world. I've worked in that for 30 years. And it bothers me, people don't have these simplistic solutions to very complex problems. But some of the people who are pushing back on sort of the simplistic notion of, oh, a regime change, let's just go for it. They're being simplistic in their own way

by suggesting that this situation in Iran is completely analogous to say an Afghani situation where what was taken out was replaced by something worse. Where, because Iran is not like those countries, it's different, and therefore we don't know what's to come, but one of the possible outcomes is a return to a secular government that we had prior to 1979. And people seem to be equating it to other regime changes

in the region that we have seen. I don't know if they necessarily apply. You did, yeah, you've made a good point. And so there are several actors at play. They just say, I was an Iranian analyst for 20 years. So you could get the monarchists come back. You could get a second government. You could get a good point, and so there are several actors at play. Like you say, I was an Iranian analyst for 20 years, so you could get the monarchists come back. You could get a second government.

You could get a Marxist government. You could get another religious government. You can get almost anything right now. And you're right, it's important not to draw parallels with other parts of the world, like Afghanistan and Iraq, et cetera, et cetera. But the bottom line is that when you create that vacuum, anything can fill it. And you can't predict in advance who's going to fill it, which is a good reason why you don't go for regime change

in the first place, unless you have a really good sense of what's gonna happen. What would happen in Iraq 2003, Ben? America's promised us a wonderful democracy, and what happened? We had a hellhole for 20 years, and Iraq is still a problematic place. So I think, again, my background at Intel tells me,

look at this carefully, consider it carefully before you take action, and I'm not convinced that was done in this case. Phil Gursky, I want to thank you very much. We're going to be paying very, very close attention. I hope we can rely on you for your insights in the future. Thank you, Kai next time. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye.

Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye.

Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. so I have a little bit of work to do. Design expert Paige Turner joins David as they ask homeowners the all-important question.

Are you gonna love it? Or are you going to list it? You wanna tell them? Love it or list it. All new Sunday at nine. On Home Network, stream on STAC TV and the Global TV app.