The Duran Podcast - Iran war: Special Ops vs. Special Forces w/ Larry Johnson (Live)

Episode Date: April 3, 2026

Iran war: Special Ops vs. Special Forces w/ Larry Johnson (Live)

Okay, we are live with Alexander Mercuris and with us on the Duran. We have the one and only Larry Johnson. Larry, great to have you back on the Duran. Where can people follow your work, though I am sure everyone is following your work. But just in case there's one or two people out there. Sure, Sonar21.com or Larry C. Johnson and substack. I will have those as a link in the description box down. below as well as a pinned comment when the live stream concludes a quick shout out to everyone that

is watching us on odyssey on rumble youtube and our durand community the durand dot locals.com and a thank you to our moderators on youtube as well thank you for everything that you do Larry Alexander, let's talk about what is happening in Iran. The floor is yours. Well, indeed, and no one better to discuss it with. And Larry, can I just say that I think Larry has been doing an absolutely incredible job over these last difficult weeks since the conflict began. By the way, he was already doing a brilliant job preparing us for what would happen during the war

before it began to. I mean, many, many comments, much discussion on his invaluable blog, Sona 21, which I go to every day, all the time, as people who follow my channel, will be well aware. So, we are very privileged to have this discussion with Larry today. And I get to say in advance, I think things are turning up pretty much exactly, as Larry said they would. If the United States, if Trump was unwise enough to begin a war, expectations that the regime, as they call it, in Washington would collapse, would prove displaced. Expectations that Iran had no air defense system would prove rapidly wrong.

Expectations that Iran had exhausted its missile and drone arsenals would prove rapidly wrong. expectations that Hezbollah and the other militias in the Middle East had been exhausted or drained of resources would prove completely wrong. Larry said all of those things, and as of today, we can see he was right. So that puts us in a particularly privileged position because this person whose analysis, correct analysis, has proved consistently right about this. conflict is here with us today. So I just wanted to make those points because they're worth bearing mind. There's a huge amount of analysis out there, but not everybody who's making pronouncements has a good track record. Larry has the best. So where are we? I was listening to the president on Wednesday. As we spoke prior to, you know, starting this program, I was very depressed

listening to what he had to say. It seemed to me that there is no new thinking coming from him, no acceptance of the realities of the situation. He continues to brag and talk about the United States, having the mightiest military on Earth. He is now threatening attacks on Iran's civilian infrastructure without providing any explanation of what he thinks that's going to achieve in the war.

The Strait of Hormuz remains closed, at least closed to the shipping that Iran won't allow to pass through. Energy prices continue to rise. Where are we in this wall? We need to have Robert Preston from the music, man. We got trouble right here in River City. You know, it is not gone as the establishment expected. And listen, thanks for your very generous comments. I mean, you know, you guys are a daily must watch for me.

And, you know, you've had Jim Webb on and Alex, Reportify, very, very important information that comes out. This, you know, this is a mess. What did you guys think about Trump's demeanor when he spoke? Did it strike you as odd? It strike me as very tired. I thought he looked tired. I thought he was listless.

He read from a prepared text, which is not what he usually does. And it seemed to me that he was on the defensive. That was my own take of it, but not so far on defensive that he's prepared to change his approach, at least not up to now.

I'd be very interested because you've been watching Trump more closely in some ways than I have done. But perhaps you could tell us what you thought. Yeah, no, I thought he's locked into a course of action that I think we're likely to see him try to insert that he will have ordered or allowed the orders to go forward inserting U.S. ground troops somewhere into Iran this weekend. So, you know, Easter weekend when people should be celebrating the resurrection of Jesus. Christ, they'll be looking at a military disaster unfolding. The problem, excuse me, the problem we face is that there is no rational, sensible military option

that could be carried out with respect to ground troops. They keep talking about taking Karg Island. Okay, let's walk through that. Number one, how do you insert the troops? You've got only really three methods. Amphibious, you know, you all float them from a ship and, you know, like Iwo Jima or whatever, they go sailing up to the beach and rush the shore. You can't get those ships that would carry them through the Hormuz Strait.

So they'd be blown out of the water. So it's not likely to be amphibious, which leaves you with two aerial options, either paratroopers jumping out of planes with parachutes or being ferried by raptors, you know, those fixed-wing aircraft with the rotating propellers so you can do vertical takeoff and landing, but those only carry like 24 people and maybe a Black Hawk helicopter.

So, you know, and when you've got air assets like that going in, they can easily be shot down. So there's not a good option. And you land on CARG, what's the mission? It's not like, yes, it is true that CARG is the most, it is a large portion of Iranian oil, but that's just because it's easy to access. They've got four other terminals.

That's not the only terminal. All Iran has to do is say, okay, well, we'll turn the spigot off on that and divert it to someplace else. And then here are these troops that are on this island. They're going to be facing FPV drones, artillery shells, and missiles. And there's really no place to hide. And then when they deploy, they don't deploy with two weeks worth of food and ammunition. They've got like a day or two.

Then all of a sudden you've got a resupply problem. So just from a military standpoint, it doesn't make sense. Some have speculated that, you know, the Wall Street Journal wrote about inserting special operations troops to go in and seize some sort of, you know, nuclear material. And I actually was involved in scripting, working on an exercise like that 20 years ago.

And the lesson we learned out of that after going through it was, don't do it. There's too many losses. It's not, you know, it looks good on paper until you try to do it. It's too dangerous. So, but nonetheless, it looks like Trump is committed to going forward with this. And that's, and boy, that's just going to further increase the problems that he has politically. And with the chaos, it's unfolding right now within the administration.

What I mean by chaos, yesterday, Hexeth, five. hired three generals that what I'm hearing is that they were opposing the chief of staff of the army was saying no no no we shouldn't do this you know thank God someone's speaking up but you know they forced him out Pam Bondi she's gone and then the rumors I was on a couple of programs last week I jokingly said you know the first scapegoat's going to be Tulsi Gabbard and lo of behold, her name's at the top of the list of people that are being looked at to dump, getting rid of Tulsi, getting rid of Cash Patel. But the one that's really sort of concerning is Daniel Driscoll.

He is the secretary of the army, friends with J.D. Vance, and apparently he is really distraught over what he's seeing that is coming, that they're going to try to put troops on Iranian soil. and, you know, I think the odds are, if they do that, you're going to wind up with American POWs. Which would be an absolutely dramatic thing. Now, I've spoken in several programs that I've made about the battle that overshadowed my childhood. Everybody was always talking about it. I remember it in the 60s and 70s, which is Dien Bienfou.

This is when, you know, the French sent paratroopers. way behind Vietnamese lines in the early 50s, expecting that they'd be able to resupply them from the air. The whole thing simply fell apart almost immediately. And it resulted in exactly the kind of things that you just discussed. People being taken prisoner, hundreds of men being taken prisoner, hundreds of men being killed. It was an absolute disaster for France. And by the way, it triggered a massive political crisis for France and the collapse eventually of France's colonial empire. And ultimately France came back largely through the leadership of de Gaulle. But it was one of the huge events. And I have to say a lot of what has been talked about, even the attacks on

the islands, Khark Island, other islands, Kershon, the Strait of Cornwall, they all have something of that quality about them. I mean, what you said about you can't sustain the forces there for very long. But I mean, this plan that I've been hearing about sending troops deep inside Iran to try to remove nuclear material. I mean, to me, that looks, I mean, it looks, I mean, the only way it could succeed is that if Iran's military, its ground military, is completely in effect. which based on everything else we have seen, why assume that that is so? I mean, can it really be the case? This is my question, I suppose.

Can it really be the case that more than a month after this conflict started, there continue to be people in Washington, and by the way, in Israel too, who remain convinced that Iran is some kind of paper tiger and they can't fight back. Because that is the only way I can imagine that somebody would want to plan and execute on such a thing. Yeah, no reading of history. You go back to the U.S. encouraged and then backed invasion or attack on Iraq on Iran back in 1980. And that eight, nine-year war, you know, it lasted to 1988. The Iranians were ferocious in fighting and resisting.

And most people today don't appreciate that, you know, it started with Jimmy Carter and them encouraging Saddam, hey, you know, if you want to take some pressure off of us, put pressure on the Iranians, go ahead and invade. And then Ronald Reagan, you know, doubled down. We provided the precursor chemicals that were used to build chemical weapons, weapons of mass destruction that were used at least 20 times by the government of Iraq against the Iranians.

And what was really also the instructive about that is the nature of the Iranian regime. They did not, after being attacked with chemical weapons, they did not build chemical weapons. And they did not try to retaliate in kind. Why? Because of their religion. I can't emphasize that enough. They have a commitment to that religion where they, you know, other people say, oh, screw it, we're going to, you know, we're going to fight back in kind. They wouldn't do it.

And at the same time, the U.S. was providing intelligence support. Pat Lang, who was a good friend and mentor, who's now deceased, he was the one hand carrying the intelligence to him. And this was intelligence that was used to launch a. attacks against Iran. So, you know, Iran has a, they have a history that, but, you know, that event in the 1980s, they didn't have anything, you know, close to that until the 12-day war last June, and now the attacks on 28 February. That has galvanized a whole new generation into saying, hey, we're being attacked,

and we are going to fight to defend ourselves. and that's what the West doesn't appreciate. We persist in spreading the lies and the deception that Iran is just a terrorist state, that they've been killing Americans for no good reason, for 46 years. Trump repeated that lie the other night, and then added in,

he blamed the Iranians for the attack on the USS Cole. That was done by Al-Qaeda. You know, it had nothing to do with Iran. So when you've got the president of the United States spreading lies like that, that I'm sorry to say, a large number of Americans swallow whole and say, oh, yeah, that's right. There is, you've created a situation in which the Americans are just filled with a bloodlust towards Iran. So the Iranians are prepared.

Let me just say one other thing about this, trying to insert U.S. special operations. troops deep into the interior. That's not going to happen. If they hit anything, they're going to go after Bushier. If they're going to put Delta Force or Steel Team 6, both, from what I'm seeing, based on the movement of aircraft from certain bases in the United States, 63, take that back, 74 flights of C-17s would indicate that there are U.S. operations forces and we draw the distinction between special ops as opposed to

special forces and we can we can talk about that but they're likely going to hit Boucher I think well Boucher is of course an extremely sensitive political plate target because of course it's a nuclear reactor built by the Russians and the Russians have got technicians there and it's of course again administered or has been administered with the supervision of the IAEA, there is nothing about Boucher that suggests that it is anything other than an entirely civilian facility. Correct. There's nothing at all.

So if you do conduct an attack on Boucher, even assuming it is successful, you will infuriate the Russians. Presumably they don't care about that. You will do significant damage to Iran's infrastructure. you risk a nuclear accident, which is of course something we can't ever set aside, and you achieve nothing of any military value. There's nothing of any military value at all that I can say. Can I actually ask you, because it's something I myself do not understand,

what is the difference between a special of and special forces? Yeah. So special forces generally refer green berets primarily. They became, they started out of the office of the OSS during World War II, became consolidated as part of the Army in 1952. And then it was like 62, 63 under John F. Kennedy, they actually started wearing the green berets.

And their job was to go to be in, to go behind lines, to train foreign and insurgents, to live among the people, to speak their language, to eat their food. So it started off as, you know, in Europe to go against the Soviets, but then they expanded it as the Cold War grew. And they would do, you know, what's called FID for an intelligence, foreign, it was a foreign intelligence defense. But they would go behind lines and gather people up and train them.

So there is no top secret activity. Special operations, though, is different. Special operations with respect to the Army side, the pathways into that are either through Green Beret. They have a Green Beret tab or Army Rangers, but they're selected into something into Delta Force. On the Navy side, you have the SEAL teams, but the elite, what they call it, Tier 1 is SEAL Team.

six. So not all Navy SEALs are qualified or able to pass into SEAL team six. You also have the night flyers, night stalkers, task for the special operations aviation regiment, the helicopter guys. All of this used to be top secret. Now it's like it's it's all over Wikipedia. But the special operations forces are they are traditionally considered black, you know, secret. They don't interact with the natives. They stay away from the natives normally. So within this, there's a couple of X accounts. One's called OSI-N-Defender and the other is the Intel Frog.

and the Intel Frog put out about a week ago all these flights, these C-17 flights, and I'm looking at them. And so they're flying out of Hunter Army Airfield, Joint Base Lewis McCord, Pope Army Airfield, Oceania Naval Air Station, and Fort Campbell. Those were the five. And I went, huh, those are all special operations. I mean, Hunter Army Airfield contains the 75th Army. Ranger Regiment.

I think it's the 2nd Battalion and also the 160th, the Special Operations Air Regiment. They fly the Delta Force and SEAL Team 6th joint base Lewis McCord.

That's the 75th Ranger Regiment 1st Battalion. So you got 1st and 2nd Battalion's and their job is always to support you know, back in the day when I was scripting the exercises for these groups. We always, you know, joked it. Whenever we did an exercise, we had to have an airfield seizure.

That's what, you know, that's what the Rangers would do. And, you know, they did fly in on like a C-130. That's a plane with propellers. And as they're land, they come down, the ramp in the backdrops and guys that come out on motorcycles, fully kidded up with all their, all the ninja gear. you know, a pretty impressive stuff. But you've got the tier two units support the tier one units.

And there are a number of others on what they call the tier one level. You know, Joe Kent, he was a member of one of those, which, you know, they call it Task Force Orange. But so when I saw all this movement, I thought, huh, the only thing is the only thing, time you see that kind of movement, you're either doing an exercise or you're going to do something real world. This isn't an exercise. So just seeing that movement of these forces. Now, people should understand a C-17, it's a large aircraft, but it can only carry 102, let's call them paratroopers or fully kidded out soldiers with combat gear. So when you say, okay, we've got 74.

That means if those helicopters, if those planes carried nothing but troops, that means you've got a little over 7,000 troops that have been deployed forward. Some keep talking about 50,000. I don't see that movement. It's a much smaller force. And there's the danger because, you know, I was fortunate when I started in government when I first worked at the State Department. we had a Navy seal that was part of the Office of Counterterrorism, a guy named Paul.

Paul was the commander of the Hercules barge in the Persian Gulf. Back in 1987-88, during the war between Iraq and Iran, Iran tried to shut down the flow of oil out of the Persian Gulf. And the United States responded with a military force that was Navy, seals on this floating barge that was off the coast of barang now and this shows you how the things have changed 40 years because back then we could put a navy seal contingent in there iran couldn't hit them with rockets and missiles um and they they were uh the iranians were laying mines and the navy seals were out capturing the ships trying to counter it well a whole different world now you know you can't can't can't do that you know that'd be

they'd be bombarded with drones, if nothing else. But it's just a reminder that this has been going on now for 46 years with the United States really as the aggressor and Iran trying to defend itself. But now we find Iran's in a position by closing the Persian Gulf, you know, with the Strait of Hormuz, that there is no easy military. solution. The military solution to try to, you know, they talk about, oh, we just launched military force and will open, we'll lift the blockade. As long as Iran can fire a drone or a missile, that will remain closed. No insurance company in the world is going to back a ship,

sailing through there. And so what you'd be looking at is you'd have to secure an area of about 100 miles from north to south. And okay, how many troops do you need for that? Well, probably about 2 million. And how do you get those 2 million troops there? And you're not just talking about securing the coastline. You're going to have to go into the interior. So none of it makes sense.

And I'm just wondering why some general has not stood up and said, no, we're not doing this. And if you insist on doing this, I'm resigning. I'm going to go out and tell the public that you guys are crazy. I mean, a number of points. I mean, one of the things, firstly, I mean, you've described, thank you for explaining about these forces. The thing that immediately struck me is forces that must exist in relatively few number, but probably are extremely expensive and not easy to replace. So in this kind of situation that we are looking at,

you're trying to achieve a lot of things with relatively few men. If you lose those men, it is a disaster for you. And you don't have enough to actually achieve what you're trying to do. I mean, it is a completely misconceived application of the actual force that these people provide you with. This is a surgical tool,

whereas what you need, you're talking about two million men, secure the coastline. You don't want a small surgical force that you can't really afford to lose. And it would be massively embarrassing. I mean, not just embarrassing. I mean, it's beyond embarrassing.

if you were to lose it. You need something on an entirely different scale, and that scale simply isn't there. I mean, that's the first thing. That is the first thing I want to say. The second is we come back to the other big question, which is intelligence. I mean, you've spoken about criticisms,

the thing that people like Tulsi Gav or the director of intelligence is in line for sacking and all of these things. But put that aside, how is it that the United States has got Iran so wrong? I mean, you are not any longer a direct member of the US intelligence community, but he worked for them, but you have provided a far more accurate information about Iran than it seems the president himself has been receiving. Is the president getting the right information for the intelligence community,

or is he getting information from some other source? Israel maybe? Rupert Murdoch, who knows? I mean, why does the United States get Iran so consistently wrong? The best way to describe it, It's like an ugly divorce that we're a couple that once were in a relationship have broken up and now hate each other to the point I want to see each other dead. Because let's recall, Iran, other than Cuba, I think, is the only country I can think of

where they've had a popular revolution that has overthrown a CIA implanted government. government. The CIA's operation that removed Mossadei from power in 1953 and installing the Shaw, the U.S. was basically in control of that country. And then these damn Iranians on their own rise up and toss out the shawl. And, you know, from the beginning, the U.S. attitude towards Iran was it was irrational. Yes, the Iranian students took over the embassy and held a U.S. diplomats, a number of them CIA officers hostage for over a year.

But that was, again, that was because of what the United States did in harboring and protecting the Shah. After that, it was the United States, you know, the way the narrative is presented here in the U.S. is that those Iranians were just attacking us. They were religious fanatics. But we ignore the fact, as I mentioned earlier,

that we basically encourage the start of the Iraq war that caused the deaths of 300,000 Iranians, and of those about 70,000 civilians. And then we said, they go, why do they chant death to America? Oh, I don't know. Maybe killing 300,000 Iranians might have something to do. with it. And then apart from that, the United States, the proven, it's not a matter of opinion

or speculation. The United States has been supporting funding the Mujahideen al-K, who is a terrorist organization. For God's sake, my own office at state, what was then called the Office of Counterterrorism, now it's the Bureau of Counterterrorism. They put them on the designated list as a foreign terrorist organization in 1997. But it was Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama took him off the list in 2012 because the CIA had been working with him for eight years at that point. And they were carrying out assassinations inside Iran. Despite all of this, the United States continues to falsely claim that Iran is the number one sponsor of terrorism. Simply not true. And it's not my opinion. all you have to go back is look at the annual report that's put out by the U.S. State Department's

Office and now Bureau of Counterterrorism. It used to be called Patterns of Counterterrorism. Now it's called Country Reports on Terrorism. They started that in 2003. And it shows that during, particularly since 2000, like 90% of the attacks that involve killing and wounding people are carried out by Sunnis that are not backed by or sponsored by or paid for by Iran. So despite all of that, the United States has convinced itself that Iran is this great,

terrible threat. And, you know, I think, if you will, within the bowels of the deep state, the issue now is that Iran in its critical role with respect to Russia and China is the future of bricks, they've got to try to destroy it. Because if Iran's allowed to survive, its critical role within this new economic structure that's going to emerge, represents an existential threat to the U.S. financial system. But, of course, that in itself ought to make one particularly careful, because assuming that argument is true.

And I think there is force to it, by the way, and I think Iran is an important part of the Bricks, or at least of developing bricks. I don't think it is quite as important as some people think, but I accept that it is important. But in that case, the Chinese and the Russians who have abundant resources are going to want to make sure that it survives. Right.

And at that point, it is no longer the United States, the great superpower, fighting Iran, which is a country with resources, and technologies, but of course it is not a great power itself. It is the United States fighting two other superpowers by proxy as well. And then the whole dynamic changes and the whole balance changes. Because at that moment, Iran has strategic depth, which if it were fighting by itself, it doesn't have.

Correct. So if Iran is that important. to the Greeks, I would have thought that that would be a reason for caution, not a reason, but blundering in, certainly not in the way that has been done. Or am I missing something? Yeah, no, the folks that think that this, like, particular with the intelligence agencies with CIA, that they sit down and they carefully think this through and weigh the pros and cons, I know secondhand, one of my dear friends who was, he was involved with the Iran Task Force back in 2006 at the CIA. And in the course of that, they were talking, they had all these elaborate plans how they were going to try to, you know, overthrow the government.

And as he told me, he said, I remember, he said, I asked, he said, okay, we do that. what next? And what he was told was, oh, don't worry about that. We don't work itself out. And he goes, okay. So what he did is he actually, he resigned. He got another job. He got out of there because he recognized this was going to be a disaster.

They hadn't thought it through. And we saw that again with respect to Iraq. I had actually some, you know, front row information on that. I was friends with L. Paul Bremer. A week before Jerry Bremer was named to be the, you know, the Poobaugh of Baghdad, we had lunch. And so when he was named, I called him up. I said, man, who did you piss off? He goes, no, no, when the president calls, you got to say yes.

And so I tried to connect him at that time with my friend Pat Lang, the one who had been hand-carrying intelligence to Iraq. The Pat had set up the Arabic, he was the, he established the Arabic language. program at West Point. He was the defense attach to both Yemen and Saudi Arabia. I mean, he was, and then later on, he was the chief of the Middle East Division at Defense Intelligence Agency. There was nobody better to deal with this. And Bremer was like, no, I don't need to talk to him. You know, I'm not making this up. It's astonishing that you get these people. And Jerry was a very, you know, he's a very smart, intelligent guy. He was a protege, a kid. He was a protege, a kid. Hissinger. But, you know, the arrogance, the hubris, like, I don't, you know, you can't teach me

anything. I know at all. That is what's infecting our policy right now, and it's been driven entirely by these ideological beliefs that are grounded in any kind of factual reality. Talking about factual reality, the president has been telling us for about two weeks that he's in contact with all sorts of people in Iran and is conducting negotiations. First question, true or false. Oh, yeah. My favorite meme is the one, the cartoon, you got Trump laid out on a psychiatrist couch,

and the doctor sitting there next to him and saying, now, Mr. President, those two Iranians that you're talking to, are they here in the room with us now? Yeah, no. It's just, it's complete nonsense. They're not talking to Iran. And, in fact, we've never talked to Iran.

We've always talked to an intermediary. It was the Omanis. Now it's the Pakistanis. And, you know, I understand why the Iranians are like, why should we even talk to the United States? They have, they've been duplicitous. They have attacked us twice. That's what I don't think my fellow countrymen are appreciating that, you know,

there's that, you know, the meme out of Charlie Brown cartoons where Charlie Brown would always try to kick the football, Lucy would say, hey, it's here, and then she'd pull it away. Well, the United States had become a malevolent Lucy, where we don't just pull the football away, we pull out a gun and shoot you. There is, as far as I can see, no diplomatic effort here at all.

There's no sign that the United States is negotiating with the Iranians in any form. either directly or by the way, even through intermediaries, what the United States is, all it's doing, as far as I can see, is making the same demands of Iran, which Iran has rejected, time and time again. It's just making them all over again, sending them through the intermediaries, and the Iranians simply say, no, we're not accepting these, and why should we? Will we eventually see negotiations? Because I'd been looking at what the Russians have been saying,

what the Chinese have been saying, the Chinese have been saying, this is our five-point ideas. It's not a plan, but we are ready to help. The Russians have been saying, Lavrov, as actually said, we're prepared to act as mediators. If anybody wants us to act as mediators, Are we eventually going to get there? Is this president capable of doing that?

And if not, if this war goes on for many, many more weeks and months, we have these disasters that we've just been talking about with these military operations. Where does that leave us? No war can go on forever. How does this one end? Yeah, listen, I think this one will come to an end as a result of economic collapse. lapse. I would encourage, you know, the folks watching are listening now. If they haven't watched your interview with Alex at Reportify from yesterday, please do so, because I think he's

exactly right about the, particularly when you get into the whole monstrous derivatives market, that the economic fallout from Iran blockading the Strait of Hormuz is so profound. that it's going to, it will be the, you know, I guess the onset of an economic depression, a global economic depression that will finally compel the United States, say, okay, we got to do something to get this back open. I don't think, you know, Iran really realized how much potential power they had in blockading the Strait of Hormuz. You know, they talked about it in the past.

and it's clear to me that I don't even think at CIA they actually ever sat down and did a full analysis to say okay let's let's look at this what would it and what would this entail what would be the implications I mean I was when that happened and then I started digging into it and said what what's the fallout here I was shocked I you know he said who would have thought that you know helium yeah all the The helium that's critical for making computer chips, that's a major source, a sulfuric acid. You know, we always think of oil. Yeah, oil is important. I never knew about the fertilizer.

You know, the fertilizer, when you're talking, you know, one-third of the world's fertilizer output comes from there. Then all of a sudden, you're going to look at, you know, the potential for famine and starvation a year from now because of the cutoff of that. So it's going to be that the economics of it are ultimately going to drive this. Because the United States, what is happening right now as we're watching is the death of the post-World War II Bretton Woods system, the death of the petro dollar, and the rise of this new system to bricks is setting up. And the Chinese are in the lead. And as both Alex noted, and it's been reported lately, that unlike in the past when you'd have a crisis,

people with money would say, oh, let's go to the U.S. treasuries, let's take our money to the United States. They're not doing that now. They're going to China. Hello, folks, wake up. We're in a new world. Absolutely. Can we actually talk about the Persian Gulf states

because behavior has been most strange? I mean, they were reported before the war to be opposing it, except there's now very good reason to think that they were on the contrary, encouraging the attack on Iran. Now, it's obviously very widely reported, but the Russian media are saying that they'd be trying to put together and get the Security Council to vote and pass a resolution authorizing military action to open the Strait of Hormuz. and the Russia, China and France, by the way, are all saying no. Yeah. What exactly do the Persian Gulf states think they're doing in this situation? Well, they're dying. Look, the United, I don't think, when this is all over,

I don't think the United Arab Emirates will actually exist. I think it will have passed into history. because right now roughly 85% of its economy is completely shut down. You know, they don't have any way to survive economically. It was, it was a, you know, a fake state. It was like it's sort of a Middle Eastern version of Disneyland combined with Las Vegas, okay? Because it was a majority of the people living there were foreigners. They weren't, there's not a native base.

It was a lot of financial activity. The largest or second largest free trade zone in the world, Jebel Ali, is there. It's shut down. I mean, there's nothing coming in and now. They've lost that. They've lost real estate. They've lost the financial side. You know, previously, Iran was making payments for oil, even with all the sanctions.

through UAE? Not anymore. They're doing it through China. And then here's, I think the ones that will be hurt the worst in terms of their ability to survive, UAE, Bahrain, and Kuwait. Kuwait, I think, is going to be adopted again by Iraq. And only this time the United States is not going to try to gin up an international coalition to go and take Kuwait back from the Iraqis. So Iraq will wind up with that. But the reality is there are only two states in that region that have democratic elections, Iraq and Iran.

Everybody else are these monarchies, not just family, tribal groups. They don't have a political foundation. They don't have, if you will, a clientele that, a sense of national identity. It's all artificially created. So they trusted and relied upon the United States, say, okay, yeah, we're the United States. We got your back.

Turns out that not so much. I mean, what I'm going to take a little bit of time because I think this is actually something that is important for people to understand. What I think we're seeing is the collapse of the Sykes-Picco system in the Middle East. And nearly everything that we are seeing in the Middle East, and I've become accustomed to in the Middle East, is, in fact, ultimately a construct of the British and of the French to some extent,

but mostly of the British. So Sykes-Picot was a deal done between Britain and France during the First World War when they divided the Ottoman Middle East between them. The French took Syria, which at that time included Lebanon, and they carved Lebanon out of Syria. And then the British took the rest, and the British parceled it out amongst various Arab families that they had strong relations with. So the Hashemites from the hijassas were put in charge of Iraq and Jordan. The Saudis who had a previous history going back all the way to the 18th century, but they were basically helped to take control of the Arabian Peninsula.

The British agent there was a man called Philby, who was, by the way, the father of King Kim Filby. And the British then did exactly the same thing that they did in India. In India, the British controlled all of India. But the actual areas under direct British control were relatively, you know, we're about half of India, but all the rest were various princely states. And they found various families that they put in charge. And they did exactly the same in the Persian Gulf. So they found the Althani's, all of these other places. They put the Althani's in Qatar, another family in charge of Oman, another family in charge of.

But these are ultimately, they're not actually. society, states, nations, with very deep histories. They are very much a product of colonial policy that the British had in the 1920s and 1930s. So it doesn't really go back that far back, as many people think. And I think because they are a product of this kind of imperial creation, that they have this psychology of dependence,

which is that they go from one great Western power to another, which is the United States. Sorry, that was a bit of an aside. No, no, no, that's incredibly. I think it's useful for people to know. You have to live in the imperial capital in London to be aware of all of these things and all of these backgrounds. So this leads up to the next point,

because if Iran comes out of this, winner, it is the end of Western influence in the Middle East. It's the beginning of the end of Western influence of the Middle East. I mean, all of these states, all these entities, they no longer have the master who will hold the strings of the puppets, which is what they are. And that is a geopolitical revolution. Yeah. Well, in fact, I would compliment the Iranians on their, their, uh, their, uh,

agility when it comes to dealing with propaganda and information warfare. The Russians is, you know, we've talked about this before. Russians are terrible at it. I mean, God, they don't really do a good job

of the information warfare. The Iranians are actually sort of brilliant at it. It's like, you know, within hours of Donald Trump talking about bombing him back to the Stone Age and Pete Hanks just saying the Stone Age, Arashi's out issuing this map said,

hey, that's a great idea, because here's the map of Persia back when the Stone Age, it's like reaches over to Egypt and Italy. It's like the entire Middle East. So, yeah, the Persians have, they talk about 6,000 years of history. Okay? They have that.

Oman, or the United Arab Emirates, they were created in 1971, 71, when Britain said, okay here you guys get together and you know this is your country now it's just an artificial creation so they have no organic basis and that uh i think iran ron i think is playing this very smart because you know they've they've now said okay we're going to treat we're going to treat the strait of hermos like the panamaal canal you want to come in great you're going to pay a fee and we're working with the Omanis.

Hey, you guys got that side of the street. We got this straight. You know, I don't know what the deal is. I don't know if Iran will say, let's do a 60-40 split, whatever. But it's going to be a legitimate source of income for Oman going forward where they don't have to just worry about exporting oil or something. So, and the Saudis, Qataris, and Kuwaitis,

and the Bahraini, they're going to have to make a choice. They're going to either agree that they're going to have to get along with Iran or they're going to cease to exist. Iran's not going to allow them to export anything. And this gets back to the military issue. I don't care. There is no military solution that people will be willing to bear the costs in terms of loss of life, length of time,

and just the destruction that would be required to carry that out. A diplomatic solution was much quicker, much easier to deal with. And that's where I think this ultimately wind up. One basically last question. A diplomatic solution was always there. Yeah. We had the JCPOA. We had negotiations, successful negotiations.

It was always within reach. We say we don't want an Iran with nuclear weapons. The Iranians say we don't want an Iran with nuclear weapons. Why has this been so much of a problem? What is this thing that people have with Iran? I mean, the British, by the way, we're obsessed with Iran. The Tsarist Russians were obsessed with Iran. Now, the United States is also obsessed with Iran too.

Iran is not a threat to the United States. What can it? Yeah. So what is this issue? I mean, is it connected to Israeli security? Well, how have the Israelis been made more secure? Their country is now suffering attacks by Iranian missiles. It doesn't seem to me as if they become more secure.

It seems to me that they're now less secure. It's just saying, Anyway, you're over to you. Well, you know, and you've made the point in some of your recent shows that reminding folks that after in the immediate aftermath of the 9-11 attacks, the Iranians were holding candlelight vigils. Iran has always been a target of these Sunni extremists. And I don't want to lump, you know, it's a Western prejudice that tries to try to. to tar all Muslims with this, you know, Sharia law, and they went to hate Christians, and they went to just, no, no. The, you know, the real irony is that within Islam, both Sunni and Shia,

Jesus is venerated as a prophet. They may not accept Jesus as the Messiah, but he's venerated as a prophet, and Mary is upheld as one of the holiest women. I mean, and that's in the Quran. So there should be actually a more natural affinity, an alliance between Islam and Christianity. Because the fact of the matter is within Judaism, Jesus is not venerated as a prophet, and Mary's not venerated as a holy woman. And in fact, we've seen that this last week with Netanyahu shutting down the Church of the Holy Sepulchre. for, you know, first time and since it was constructed. So this, I think part of the real animus directed at Iran,

it's been founded in the fact that it is a theocracy, and it is a genuine theocracy. It's not some artificial creation. And so the West hatred of that is, I think, a driving force. It was the combination of this was a popular revolution, revolution that threw out a CIA, previously CIA, controlled government and set up something that was independent of the West didn't control. And the colonial mentality that comes out of Europe coupled with the, you know, let's call it the new colonial mentality out of the United

States, we couldn't tolerate that. How dare they? You know, they told the line, be subservient. And the Iranians weren't. And to top it off. They're pretty damn intelligent. I mean, I think at one point, they probably had more PhDs and more advanced degrees than most other countries in the world. And so, as long as you're peppered with this propaganda, that it's a terrorist state, that they're intolerant. I had a conversation two weeks ago with Yaakov Ropkin. I don't know if you know who he is. He's a professor out of Canada, but he was born in Leningrad in 1946,

raised in a Jewish family that wasn't religious, converted to Judaism later, but he writes quite a bit on Zionism. And, you know, he repeats the phrase, he says, the true Zionists are those who say, there is no God, and God gave us this land. It's contradictory, but he described his journey to Tehran 10 years ago. And one of the oldest Jewish communities in the world is in Tehran. And, you know, you get between the folks in Ethiopia and the folks in Tehran, they argue which one's the actually oldest Jewish community.

But, and as he was talking to them, they described, hey, you know, the Islamic government here, that students have religious education at least one day a week. And he says, oh, so your kids are required to study Islam? And they go, no, no. The rabbi teach, you know, the kids are required to study Judaism. You know, this and this Islamic theocracy, they allowed the Jewish students to be taught in Judaism. And he said, he said, what was remarkable, he says,

these kids, this Jewish community, they were more grounded in Jewish. Jewish theology, culture than anybody he'd ever met in the West. So again, it just goes to show you that this myth that's carried out, that, you know, they're killing Jews right and left because they're anti-Semitic. No, not at all. So that's one of the things I see that I've been trying to do. Just get the information out there. It is a lie that Iran is the number one sponsor of terrorism.

It is a lie that, you know, there are a threat to other countries. they haven't invaded anybody in 46 years. They stayed at home and minded their own business until Bashar al-Assad asked them, hey, come help me fight off these radical Sunnis who are funded by the United States and Britain so we can try to have some peace in our society. So this animus towards Iran, it is irrational. And it has led us to make these kinds of decisions now. where we're caught in the West, the United States in particular is caught in a war, it cannot win.

Larry Johnson, thank you very much. Always fascinating to talk to you, if I may say. If you could just say a little Alex, as I'm sure, a few questions from our viewers. And then, as I said, Alex and I will deal with all of the other questions afterwards. All right, let's start with Elza. Mr. Johnson, your proposal to station Russian nukes or Orosniks in Iran seems to be a long-term solution. Is there any chance that Iran agrees? Yeah, I had speculated that, you know, one of the things Iran's going to look for is, you know,

guaranteed security that they're not going to be attacked again. Well, one way to deal with that, it's, you know, call it out-of-the-box thinking, is for Russia to say, okay, we're going to deploy nuclear weapons. We're going to make Iran a de facto nuclear state, except those nukes will be under our control. But if Iran is attacked, you're going to face this kind of retaliation. I think that would potentially wave off both the United States and Israel from continue to go after them. Will Iran accept that? Well, Iran was offered a mutual defense agreement with Russia on the lines of

along the lines of what they have with North Korea. And Iran rejected it. And again, rejected it. Part of it comes out of the religious commitment. That they don't want to necessarily be committed to getting into a war or having to fight something where they're not directly at threat. But, you know, that might be one possible solution down the pike where they will get guarantees from Russia and China

that will give them enough confidence that they can accept a deal with the West. From S. Scooby says, should the USA decide to prolong their bombing of Iranian civilian and military infrastructure at a lower intensity, how does Iran maintain the logistics and production of arms to fight back? Yeah, Iran's just a big country. You know, we have this mythology in the West. that is a product of World War II. And it is specifically that because the United States

dropped the atomic bomb on Japan, that's why Japan surrendered. So that actually air power can ultimately prevail. Well, you know, the history of that shows otherwise. Despite an intense bombing campaign by the United States that started in March of 1945, and sort of commenced with the fire bombing of Tokyo, which killed over 100,000 people,

and they continued it through March, April, May, June, July, into the first week of August. That's not what brought Japan finally to the table to surrender. And I would refer everyone to Pascal Lataz. He is a Swiss citizen, but he lives in Japan. He wrote his dissertation on this.

And it was the entry of the Soviet Red Army into Manchuria in complying, fulfilling a promise he had made to Franklin Delano Roosevelt. That's what finally tipped the Japanese, okay, we give up, we surrender. So the notion that we can continue to conduct air operations and bomb Iran into the so-called Stone Age, it's just, you know, yes, Iran's going to suffer damage,

but it will not cripple the economy. And ultimately, the United States is not going to be able to sustain that. Because where this is headed is the United States will no longer be able to operate out of these bases. And, you know, right now they're a Prince Saud airbase. And that is, they've suffered major losses there. They've gone a little bit to the west, farther to the west, to King Faud airbase. But once the United States is forced out, and that's going to be one of the critical demands of Iran in order to end this. that the U.S. has got to vacate the Gulf states. No more military bases there. So I think

the ability of the United States to sustain and those kinds of air operations is actually limited. From Nicos, Iran chose to respond by striking the allies of the U.S. Twitter loves seeing stuff explode, but they don't consider the consequences. Is Iran winning. For all Iran's efforts, we don't see Israel, the U.S., all the Gulf countries stopping their escalation. The EU refrained because their goal is Ukraine. On the first day, we had the school incident. In one week, civilian casualties rose to 2000. Meanwhile, Israel is destroying Iran as a nation. Iran at best will end up as a failed, destroyed state before the U.S. administration changes back to the Democrats and they leave. I guess it's a win. So is Iran winning, Claire?

Yeah, no, actually not. Iran is winning. Israel isn't. You know, Israel's in a real pickle. And if you read, you know, Alistair Crook and his wife, Asling, they put out at least once a week a summary of the Hebrew press, the Hebrew language press, which, you know, really contains a whole different story. and, you know, one of their last reports was with the Israeli defense chief coming out and saying, hey, red lights flashing guys, we can't continue this. And, you know, I think we're starting to get an indication of how much pain the Israelis are now suffering.

One, when they went back into southern Lebanon and restarted, you know, it's deja vu all over again compared to 2006. losing 21 Marcava tanks in one day. That was about four or five days ago. Other days they lost eight. According to Alistair, the numbers are actually now up over 100 total. The Israelis are suffering losses that they can't replace. You know, they don't have some factory that's just cranking out Markovah tank after Markovah tank.

And the sort of one of the indicators that they are starting to, you know, that this has become a problem, is that Fox News was allowed to report the other night about the barrage of missiles that was hitting Israel. Because in the past, you know, in the previous four weeks, hardly a word was said, oh, no, no, those Iranians, they're not causing us any damage at all.

Now, they're starting to sing a different tune. It's clear that Iran has a more well-defined, offensive campaign, then does Israel. Iran methodically wiped out the U.S. radar systems, the 13 of them so far. And, you know, we're talking radar systems, several of them costs more than a billion dollars apiece. Some of them cost $500 million.

dollars. And, you know, we saw some news reports this last week about they destroyed an AWACS, the E3. The reason that AWACs is in theater is it's trying to compensate for the loss of those ground radars. And at the same time, what Iran has done is they have depleted the U.S. air defense systems. The THAAD and Patriot missile systems, they're depleted. They don't have. have any any kind of inventory left. So Iran has been pretty methodical in how it's gone about this, whereas the United States and Israel, they're just like they're killing for killing's sake. They decide to blow up the bridge yesterday. And Iran said, okay, we've identified all these other bridges in the Gulf states. We're going to take those out. They'll do tit for tat.

And at some point, the United States is going to realize it can't sustain this effort. from chunky monkey larry wouldn't it be easier and less complicated if the CIA did a regime change operation upon israel instead of upon ira there he goes thinking logically and rationally we can't have that yeah look this um the these uh i'll call him zionist extremists that have taken control of israel have just so damaged israel's reputation And because, you know, 10 years ago it wasn't this bad. But now Israel really has made itself into a pariah because of these extremists. And the CIA is really dependent, though, on Israel for intelligence in the Middle East. Because we don't have good independent sources. Um, Agu, how likely is it that the pro-Israel neocons are pushing for 10,000 Marines to attack Karg Island so that significant numbers would be killed given justification for a full-on ground war?

Yeah, it's just, how do they get there? You know, there will be five, there are two Mews, the Marine Expeditionary Unit, M-EU, that's Mew, the 31st and the 11th. each has about 2,500 Marines, but actual Marines who would be landing on the beach and firing back, it would be closer to a total of 1,600 between the two units. But how do you get them there? And it's really going to create, it goes back to what Alex talked about at the beginning. It could be sort of a new mixture of Dianm B.M. Poo or Gallipoli, you know, Pick your military disaster.

It's not going to go down in the annals of U.S. military history is, you know, they won't be singing songs. The Marine Corps hymn, you know, from the halls of Montezuma to the shores of Tripoli, they won't be adding in Carg Island to that song. J.J.H.W. says, as Larry has mentioned them before, perhaps he'd like to talk about ISA, aka the activity and what they get up to. Yeah, I'll avoid that. I mean, there are books out there. ISA was the initial, it's just consider it as sort of the military's version of the CIA for in terms of operations. I'll leave it at that. Okay. From Fior Wanderlian. Question for Larry. Does Russia take Odessa and the right bank of the Tadipa River before 2007 or 2008? Yes, yeah, yeah, they'll ultimately be in control of that.

They're not going to let go. They've already fully taken Lagans. They put the Ukrainians on notice. You know, leave Donetsk now, or we will have additional demands. And those additional demands include Odessa. And the, if you will, the west bank of the Nefer River, in Zaporizia, Heirsson. And I think they'll ultimately take also Kiev.

Trixler-For says, what's the objectives with U.S. soldiers dying in Iran now? They're going to trade in Yuan anyway. U.S.-bound Middle East, now biggest producer of oil LNG. Yeah, you saw Trump in his speech, the odd speech the other night, say that the United States produces more oil than China than Saudi Arabia and Russia,

combined? Huh? No, actually combined Saudi Arabia and Russia produce more oil than the United States. But this, I don't think we can give enough emphasis to the dramatic realignment of the international financial order that is underway. You know, people forget that, you know, the establishment of Bretton Woods, that took about three years for that institution to become accepted. What's happening with Russia and China right now is this growing realization that they don't need the West and that they can create alternatives. Particularly, you know, one thing China is doing right now is countries that have U.S. debt, they're taking that U.S. debt. they're taking that U.S. debt, converting it into rememble so the Chinese currency, they're buying actually Chinese debt, and the Chinese are offering much more favorable terms.

And so all of a sudden in the past, the United States, could use the debt relationship with a lot of countries to pressure, coerce, and control, which has now created this backlash, where countries are seeking to get out from under that kind of control of the United States, And very, you know, the Chinese are much, they're much friendlier to deal with on that front. Mama Alaska says, thank you, Alex, Alexander, and Larry for your tireless efforts.

Mr. Johnson, in your opinion, how likely would it be for my grandsons and U.S. men to be drafted? I don't think that it'll happen simply because it would be toxic politically. There was, you know, Trump, I don't know what they were thinking. At least George W. Bush, when he decided he wanted to invade Iraq, made a big public relations effort to convince the American people. Now, we've got to do this, you know. And there were lies convincing folks that Saddam Hussein was somehow involved with 9-11. The, you know, George H.W. Bush and going into Iraq back in 1990, again,

built up the public support. There was none of that this time. They didn't even take time to try to build some public consensus for it. So without that, there is still a strong backlash about people being compelled to enter the military for senseless wars. So, yeah, I don't think they may want to try to do the draft, but I don't think it politically would fly. Cancels 32 says, could Larry discuss the fired generals by Pete Hegeseth? Yeah, you know, this is, it's not just the general. So what I'm hearing is at least the chief of staff of the Army was opposed to putting any ground forces into Iran.

He was arguing that it was bad. What we're seeing and firing these three generals is what I call it further, politicization of the U.S. military. There's a difference when you create basically a Praetorian Guard, which is what I think Pete Hexeth is about, and describing it as a Praetorian Guard, is you turn the military into a political instrument of the current president, that they are there to support the president's political leanings,

not to uphold and defend the Constitution. Going back to Roman times, the legionnaires, they were there to fight for Rome, not for a particular Caesar. Whereas, and what we've seen, this didn't start with Donald Trump. I think it really started in earnest under Barack Obama, but we've now gotten to the place

where the military, instead of distancing itself from politics, is being, you know, remade into where it will become a political instrument for the current president. And what Trump's doing can be done by a Democrat. And so that's the real danger with this. What's unfortunate is we'll see what happens in the next day or two. I would hope that that chief of staff will come out and speak forcefully about, no, no, we can't afford invading and putting troops on the ground in Iran. to really force a debate.

Tulsi Gabbard, I made the prediction last week that I said Tulsi Gabbard would be a scapegoat for the war. And lo and behold, man, she's on the list for they're going to blame her. Yeah, we didn't get the right intelligence. She should have followed Joe Kent right out the door. That was her chance to speak up and say, no, that Iran is not an imminent threat. Instead, I was shocked when she claimed that it wasn't her job to talk about what is an imminent threat or not, that it was up for Donald Trump to decide.

Excuse me, that's why intelligence analysts exist. That's their only reason to exist to say, hey, the house is on fire. Let's call the fire department. Latushka also asks, hello, gentlemen, I'm curious, what does Larry think about the recent ousting of Army Chief Randy George? Yeah. Yeah, I think it's pure, pure politics at play. Yeah. Elliot ZP asks, is Boucher a strategic location to start taking control over Iran's oil and to go on and work with the Kurds and other forces to expand their hold?

No, Boucher would be just symbolic. It's on the nuclear front. It doesn't have anything to do with oil. And the reason I mentioned that, it's just Boucher is one that's close that the, that the U.S. Special Operations Forces could get to. One of the problems trying to go into the interior of Iran is that the helicopters don't have the legs to get there.

They've only got, you know, the CH-47, I think, has a combat radius of about 300 miles. And that's, you know, from where you start to where you've got to refuel at some point. And, you know, the younger folks who are, well, okay, if you're under 50, you don't remember this, I do. but the Operation Eagle Claw in 1980 that was designed to try to rescue the hostages in Tehran, they had created what are called FARPs, which was a forward fuel depot. The big bladders of aviation fuel had been landed there previously by fixed-wing aircraft. And it was in the attempts to refuel at that site that one of the C-130s ran into a, a helicopter, there was a big dust storm and killed eight people. You would need that kind of

site somewhere in Iran in order to refuel to carry out any kind of deep penetration operation. Well, Iran is much different now than it was 40 years ago. You know, they've acquired a lot of sophistication. And so that would be almost impossible. Arman Sarkov asks, where is Iran's air? defense, what happened to it? Well, it still appears to be working. There's some air defense. They just shot down an F-15 yesterday.

And in fact, there are, it looks like they've shot down two F-15s in the last two days. One out over the Persian Gulf, one in the interior of Iran. And there's video surfacing showing that U.S. Combat Search and Rescue, Cesar, is active trying to find the pilot that was in that F-15. So it's not, look, the air defense system clearly was inadequate against Tomahawk missiles. There's no denying that. But it does look like now they're able to at least continue to attack and take down some Western aircraft. So it's not completely destroyed. Winston Fahrenheit asks, number one, what is the situation in Iraq? And question two,

what is the situation with all these pentagon firings? Is there a collapse in the ranks? Yeah, well, it's not just, I think what's going on is the bad polling, the terrible situation that the Trump administration is in politically, is starting to penetrate the White House. Because it's not just the firing of the general, you know, getting rid of the generals is the furtherance of the politicization of the military. the reports are that Daniel Druskel, the chief of staff, the secretary of the army,

that he's going to be fired, and it may be either firing or resigning, because he's apparently very upset. You know, he is a combat veteran, and he's very disturbed with this potential for the Iran operation. But on top of that, you've also, you know, there's a broader change underway within the Trump administration. They got rid of Pam Bondi. They've gotten rid of Christy Gnome. Cash Patel, reportedly, is on the chopping block. Well, he should be.

This Secretary of Labor, a Hispanic lady, you know, a mutual friend of ours described her as she's chasing young. She's an alcoholic, chasing young guys around the office. So I think that Susie Wiles, the chief of staff, realizes that they're in trouble. and, you know, Time magazine reported yesterday, and I think it's an accurate report that in the past, Trump was shielded, you know, he was only being told all the good information, you know, basically being lied to. Now he's starting to get the ugly truth, and he's not a happy camper. So there's chaos. There's chaos in Trump land. Let's put it that way.

Jeff Bickford asks, would you please explain in simple terms what? actually motivates the powerful and who do what they will to execute the war and their hatred on Iran. Is it money, oil, bricks, Israel, Epstein? I don't think it's the Epstein. I mean, the Epstein may be a factor. But no, this is the long term is you've got to get somebody who's in charge of the government of Iran that's going to do what the United States wants in terms of controlling the oil and gas, as well as undermining Russia and China. China, the ultimate objective here is to take down China. And Russia, again, is seen as a key player in that regard.

Because I can't tell you, the number of people are very smart, educated people who keep telling me, I don't see how Russia can continue to hang out with China. I mean, they're going to have a collision. They're not ideologically disposed to get along with each other. I go, you know, stop it. It's just, you know, they ignore the fact that there's a history with Russia and China. You know, World War II, the then-Soviet Union, they were supplying the Komen Tang and the communists to fight the Japanese.

So, please, this. But again, it's always looked at it in that. context that Iran is a component you take a run take down Iran take down Russia then you go after China that that that persists within the bowels of the deep state Elza asks Larry any thoughts on the mission to the moon and will the moon be renamed trump moon you know I it'd be we've spent all this animus between the United States and Russia for so many years except during that entire period it was Russia that was carrying the United States to the international space station.

So, you know, it would be great if Russia, the United States, China, India, if we could all focus upon space adventures, you know, put money towards that instead of killing each other, you know, I can dream the impossible dream on that. That would be the best alternative. The Dark Truth AI asks, hi guys, Larry, do you know George W. Bush and real Joe Biden had ancestors from one country in the Balkan, or it's not true? I know nothing about that. From Peter Van der Vanden, question for Larry, because of the amount of classified information that DNI is privy to, it's not a job that you can just quit unless they let you. No, you know, the, I'll call it the myth of classified information.

I remember the first day at CIA, September of 1985, when we were finally introduced to classified information. And just the way my mind works, the song by Peggy Lee went off in my head. Is that all there is? Is that all there is? The, you know, it's really more, when you get into the classified information, it's more about how it's collected, you know, what the collection systems are. That's what was more important to protect. But in terms of, you know, a lot of the so-called classified information is just,

some of us just so, it's capped an obvious material. Natalie asks, Mr. Johnson, what are the best books to read to better understand the Iran War and how the CIA works? Thank you for your recommendations. I don't have a book offhand to recommend. In fact, I've been actually looking around for one that actually tells the truth because so much of it is written from the standpoint of portraying Iran as this terrorist state that is involved with, you know, killing people around the world, you know. And unfortunately, I don't think there's really been, what I'd call it, honest history of that relationship written. And I've been thinking about trying to do it. Garland Nixon says the Trump administration has effectively collapsed.

Well, we could hope. You know, it is, Trump, the trajectory he's on right now suggests that come fall, the Democrats will take both the House and the Senate. If that happens, then it will be up to the Democrats to figure out what the strategy is. Some anticipate that they will then immediately go to try to impeach Trump. Well, if you impeach Trump, you get J.D. Vance. Well, I think a lot of Republicans will be happy with that. Oh, thank God.

We finally got somebody who can think rationally. If the Democrats are smart, and I know that's a stretch, to assert that, and I'd say the same with respect to the Republicans, you'd want to keep Trump in place because the last thing you want is to have J.D. Vance come in and actually demonstrate some competence. It's better to have the chaos and the circus that Trump puts on to further reinforce the voters that we can't have any more of this.

Eli Karaki says, Hi, everyone. Appreciate your great work. Question for Larry. Do you see the end of Zionist control in the Middle East? I'm hopeful. This is, I think Israel has stretched itself to the breaking point and that there's no, their attitude that they could kill their way out of this. I think he's going to crumble.

You know, Trump put a lot of emphasis on this Board of Peace and he got four of the Gulf states that it each pointed up a billion dollars to contribute to that effort. And now those Gulf states, they're going to become, I don't think they've actually written the checks yet, and they probably will not be providing that billion dollars. They're going to need it to stay afloat, pay their own bills.

All right, a couple of more for Larry. From Bad Wolf TX, how can you say that, how can you say with such certainty that Iran is winning, the long-term economic and political things could play out a billion different ways, but nobody actually knows how it will all work out and anyone claiming to cannot know the unknowable.

In the short term, in just a few weeks, one side has lost a Navy, Air Force, most of its leadership, the other side still has 99% of its stuff and all of its leaders. To me, the side that has lost all of its stuff and leadership is not winning. Well, let's, you know, this is, I'll call that U.S. talking points. Oh, we destroyed their Navy.

Well, they didn't have a blue water navy, They had a coast guard. And the effective, if you want to call maritime force they have, is still largely untouched, which are these small boats that are high speed, that some of them are drones. In other words, they're remotely driven. Others are piloted with, but they've got missiles. So they can effectively shut down, they have shut down the Persian Gulf. And any attempt to try to take them all out is difficult.

So that and the Air Force Iran was never considered an air power. They rightly decided, you know, are we going to spend money on a bunch of combat jets that could get shot down or build these missile cities where we can fire missiles at will throughout the Middle East and the West can't stop us? That's what they've done.

So their actual army is intact. So this why I say they're winning They're controlling the world economy right now They've got the world economy and a chokehold And essentially their their approaches to the rest of the world is look We have been the victims of Western attacks on our economy That's they've starved our people They've tried to crush our economy

So if we're not going to put up with that anymore and if we're going to suffer you all are going to suffer and if you don't want to suffer then come with us and we're going to change the situation that's where they are and what can the west do about it the united states it can't send its aircraft carriers closer than 200 miles to the shore because it gets blown up so and just as happened with the huthies the huthies ran the united states navy out of the red sea iran is in a much more capable position land forces? Sorry, the world has changed. Twenty-three years ago, the United States had the luxury because Iraq did not have a ballistic missile force, did not have drones. The United States could

assemble 165,000 soldiers in Saudi Arabia to invade Iraq. We can't do that today. I mean, that's the one lesson that comes out of the war in Ukraine. Neither side is assembling large mass of soldiers in any one place because they get drone and missiles and bombed. So it's changed the face of warfare. So, yeah, I think Iran actually, yeah, they're taking some blows. There's no denying that. And they're suffering damage. But they still have, in my view, they have the strategic control of the situation.

And they're showing it. Every time they get hit, they hit back. Mr. Mike says, Larry, in your opinion, is it time for Americans to begin to pressure Trump's sons and daughters since it seems there is no one that can get through to this president? Yeah, I don't know what they're saying. I mean, Don Jr. and Eric, you know, if they had any sense about it, if they know how to read the room, for God's sake, they got to go get their dad and say, stop. You got to stop. and that may have started on April 1st. I mean, what we've seen this week, you know, for the first time ever, Donald Trump gave a speech where he stuck to the script. Now, it was a terrible speech, but the fact that he stuck to that script shows that they're,

you know, he's now actually taking some instruction to follow orders. you know, so will that, if he proceeds this weekend, which I think he will, with the ground attack in Iran, and when that turns into a debacle, I think that will be the final defining moment for him. You'll realize he's crossed, he has put himself into jeopardy. And, you know, that may finally force him to wake up and turn around and seeking all alternative path. Larry, thank you so much for answering all of those questions. Very much appreciated. Larry Johnson, thank you for joining us on the Duran. Where can people follow your work? Sonar21.com or on substack at Larry C. Johnson.

Absolutely indispensable sources to go to. Can I just say thank you very much for coming Larry. Fascinating and informative, as always. gentlemen it is always a great honor to be with you you guys are a must watch so i encourage folks to stay tuned to the duran the great larry johnson thank you so much larry all right guys have a great day you too take care and happy easter thank you let's uh let me rewind back all right let's uh let's start with nicos as brian berletic has agreed with me the west will do anything to preserve primacy and that's why you can't win against these people whatever you do. Oh no, that is obviously wrong. I mean, people can be determined to preserve privacy, but that doesn't mean they will be successful. I mean, that is stating things hugely.

In fact, I would argue that trying to maintain primacy, far from making the West stronger or more successful ultimately makes it weaker and less successful. Commander Crossfire says, we are going back to the moon just to fly by, but still counts. I thought it would be Russia or China, but the USA pulled it off again. Congrats. Well, good for them. And I would say this. I'm old enough to remember the first time it happened in 1968 with Apollo 8, I think it was.

And I remember how dramatic it was. It was incredibly exciting. And in my school, we were all talking about it. So, you know, congratulations indeed. Haruko, thank you for that super sticker. Nikos says Iran has the opportunity to not be newked because it's a vanity project of the Zionists. For the neocons, their hatred for Russia is greater than Iran. Out of this war, Iran becomes unlivable and Israel is damaged.

The U.S. remains intact because despite economic consequences, war isn't on their soil. Iran is not going to become unbelievable because that never happens. I mean, can I make a very quick point? I mean, yes, there's been a lot of damage and a lot of destruction met it out on Iran. But, and this is something I have studied exhaustively in the past, and it applies to Ukraine and it applies to every other war. Reconstruction after wars is very very,

rapid. It is a complete fallacy to think that because a place suffers damage, because factories are bombed, because bridges are destroyed, that they cannot be rebuilt and rebuilt quickly. In fact, destruction often leads to economic booms in the period after the war ends. So that's the first thing I want to say. If you're talking about this particular war, Iran is an enormous country, twice as big as Ukraine, bigger than any country in Europe, apart from Russia. It has a huge industrial base, a large population. It can absorb a huge amount of damage. Israel is a small country, far smaller, much denser territory. Its capacity to absorb damage is far less. Zareil says... Magnus, magnitude less. Yeah.

Zareel says two E3s and at least one KC135 destroyed and surely more will follow. And Eurasianist says Trump's real goal was never to defeat the deep state or drain the swamp, but to leave a stronger U.S. empire to the deep state. And he's more than willing to sacrifice the whole MAGA movement to this end. Do you know what I personally think? I think Trump has one policy, one day, one completely different policy, some other day. I don't think he's ever had a clear strategy. I'm sad to say at any point throughout his two presidencies.

Yes, at the moment, it is playing out like that. But I don't think it's going to end up strengthening the deep state. If there's a military debacle in the Middle East, the deep state ultimately is going to be weakened as well. Not that that's Trump's intention. That's not his plan. That's absolutely not his purpose. But it would be the effect of what he does.

Sticky Marx says, could U.S. troops be bound for Israel to give security guarantees to Tel Aviv on multiple fronts in Lebanon, Syria, and facing shortages of men and ordinance has for them become existential? Yeah, I see the trouble is Israel already has security guarantees. I mean, the United States, as long as I can remember, has been saying this is official policy, that the United States will not allow Israel to fail. And of course, Israel also has nuclear weapons, which as of this time, no other country in the Middle East does. So adding, I don't know what guarantees, military guarantees, the United States can give to Israel above those that it all.

already has. The reality of this war, and by the way, the war that proceeded in June, is that Israel is being attacked in ways that it has not been at any point since its creation in the 1940s. This war is not making Israel more secure. It is making Israel less secure. And that is a fact that I think people do need to understand. Matthew says, will there be totally economic collapse in the UK? I hope not. But if there is, I won't be surprised. I don't want to predict an outcome like that about my own country,

that the economic situation in Britain is very bad, and it's getting worse every day. Mark Hewitt asks, is Putin angry with MBS over the Iran war? You know, that's an excellent question. The two have quarreled. I remember back in 20, I think in 2020, they're, had a huge row, a huge public row about oil and oil policy. I think privately Putin is very angry. I think he knows perfectly well that on the one hand, NBS, even as he was saying that he was against a war in the Middle East, was quietly urging Trump to press forward with it. And I think

Putin is very, very angry with that. But Putin is one of the most disciplined in leaders. in the world today. He's just had a telephone call with MBS. He said to MBS, we must have an immediate cessation of hostilities. He said to MBS that we must agree that there should be a final settlement of the conflict in which everybody's legitimate interests,

everybody, of course, includes Iran, everybody's legitimate interests, are recognized and secured. And, well, he's said to NBS implicitly that Russia's prepared to exercise mediation. Saudi Arabia needs to support that. And there was a clear hint that in return, Russia will not take advantage of Saudi Arabia's problems with oil supplies at this time. There's a fascinating readout, and I discussed it in my previous video. So typical Putin, if he is angry, and I suspect that deep down he probably is,

he cloaks his anger and looks towards how he can still use MBS and pressure MBS to come onside towards a diplomatic solution. Very different approach to the one that you get from the Americans. From Nikos, now I'll criticize Russia. It pains me to say, but Putin has been bluffing his way with the SMO, thinking he can contain the war in Ukraine only. The Western leaders are insane and willing to fight Russia in a World War III nuclear war type scenario. So they called his bluff, and that's why Russia lost. Putin has given up. The only way to stop the West from striking Russia is nuclear weapons.

And he didn't understand this when he began the SMO. Ukraine and the West managed to win by showing they can hit everywhere. They can do anything and destroy Putin's image and trust in the government. United Russia will lose the elections and Putin will end up a lame duck president. And people are hyping up medvedev. But all he does is statements. Well, can I just say, I mean, I think that is entirely wrong. And I think you've been reading far too much of the Western media.

I know there's a narrative out there, that there's war weariness in Russia. I've just been looking at the opinion polls. And by the way, just to anticipate, we've done a long discussion with the Russian expert, Gordon Haar, looking at all of this. And the clear conclusion is that Putin's position domestically inside Russia remains completely stable, that there is no internal crisis. popularity, his overall popularity is not effective. Yes, there is considerable criticism. Yes, there is criticism of some of the policies that the central bank in particular has been following.

There is always debate and discussion about Russia, but there is no internal debate. And as for Russia losing and Ukraine and the West winning, where do you see? this. I mean, there are, admittedly, drone attacks, but those drone attacks that the Ukrainians are conducting are, I mean, I can say this actually quite definitely ineffectual. If you read everything else that everybody is saying, and it's true, Russia is now in a stronger position, then it has been for many years. Oil prices are rising. The Russians are going to benefit from that. They are in pole position in terms of global relations and armed supplies and funding to Ukraine are dwindling away.

I mean, the Russians as of today look in a much stronger position than they did even a month ago. So where you could see the Ukrainians and the West winning, I am completely unable. to understand. Just saying. Nikos says, we also must admit that Russia is losing on the ground. The air defense depleted due to the strikes. 40% of the Russian oil exports are offline. Yerazimov and the Russian MOD are bullshitting us.

We see Ukraine strike ships in Viborg and Turkey. They used NATO territory to strike refineries. Russia will enact force major. Meanwhile, their strikes on Ukraine do nothing. Ukraine has electricity and their people don't stop fighting Russia. With Britain, joining Sweden and France in seizing ships, they have blockaded Russia. The only way to stop that is war with Europe and its consequences. Well, again, I think this has an equality of panic about it. Now, about the suggestion that these attacks on the two ports have stopped 40% of Russian oil exports. You will not find a single report

or comment anywhere in the Russian media. At least I haven't seen one. That confirms that. That figure comes from Reuters, British News Agency. Reuters is the same British news agency that reported back in the summer that the drone attacks on the Russian oil refineries had knocked out 30% of Russia's refining capacity. At the time I said that was nonsense. And so it proved. And I'm going to tell you something, the claim that 40% of Russia's oil export capacity has been lost is even greater nonsense. I know a little bit about these things, as I said, I've been in shipping. And it is also going to be proved to be completely false. As for seizures of ships, this is an act of complete and absurd folly.

First of all, it is not going to impact significantly on Russian oil exports. A few ships here and there flying the flags of other countries. They've not dared to seize ships flying Russian flags. we've seen the Americans did not dare to seize or stop a Russian tanker flying a Russian flag sailing to Cuba, for example. A few seizures of dodgy ships, I say that, I'm sorry, buying dodgy flags in a few places around the sea. That is not going to stop Russian oil exports. It's going to disrupt global trade in energy that will push oil and energy prices even higher. And the Russians as oil exporters will benefit from the still higher price. And the Europeans, and by the way,

the Ukrainians, as importers, they will suffer even more from that higher price. It is a completely counterproductive, I would say frankly stupid policy. Now, as for the difference between energy attacks, there is no comparison. Russian attacks, drone and missile attacks on the Ukrainian energy complex have been far more devastating. If you're talking about Russia as a whole, energy supply, electricity supply, has been barely infected. says invite dimitri lascaris he just returned from iran he's a fellow greek journalist and a lawyer it's certainly it's certainly a very good idea uh we've been in contact with demetri's before actually so yes maybe we should have and from

sec it's all out of order not surprised i mean what was you looking i mean just the other thing again about you know going back to what nicholas was saying i don't know where the r the ukrainians are gaining ground by the way either. I mean, I've just been looking at all the latest information, both from Ukraine and Russia. And it seems, again, it's the opposite. And the big story in Ukraine at the moment is massive recriminations over a disastrous counterattack close to Pachrovsk, which ended in, well, it ended appallingly. So, I mean, again, I just make these points. Nikos, you must not let yourself be influenced by some of the things that you read in the Western media, where I suspect you're taking

many of these stories from. Niko says there's war fatigue in Russia. Russian correspondents say that casualties have increased due to Starlink and grinding down Ukraine doesn't work. Keep saying this is the generation of TikTok. You can't have wars for 20 years without understanding the consequences they demand to nuke Europe. The Russian economy is terrible. Jobs and businesses are being lost and volunteering is dying. I see more will in Ukraine than Russia. Let's admit it. This is the West's great weapon, making nations hate their enemies and willing to follow the U.S. everywhere. We see this in Ukraine and the Gulf. There is no evidence of substantial war fatigue in Russia. So the opinion polls

tell a completely different story. We did a program about the Russian economy a few, about a week ago, and we discussed the situation with interest rates. There's been more commentary about that since people are saying interest rates will have to be brought down fast. I'm sure they will be. Again, I simply don't recognize this picture that you are describing. And yes, there are some commentators on various social media platforms in Russia who like to be very critical. of the Russian government and of the Russian military. But they are not representative of general opinion at all.

Again, we've done a program with Gordon Hahn, who has his finger on the pulse, both in Ukraine, by the way, and in Russia. I would suggest you watch it, and you'll get a completely different impression of the actual situation. Chunky Monkey says a question for Alex C, what does the Duranche? Duran mean? Good question.

The excellent question. It's a question I've often wondered myself one day maybe, one day maybe Alex would devolve in. Maybe soon. Nico says, in conclusion, to my long point, if you aren't willing to cause nuclear war like the West is, you can't win against these people. The hatred for Russia is insane, and either they'll submit or fall. and Duran, if you still believe these people won't cause nuclear war, remember that a genocide happened on live TV and no one stopped them.

Well, can I just say something? I mean, I think we should be very, very careful before urging any country, Russia included, to threaten or begin nuclear war. My own personal view, and again, I would suggest that you watch this program by Gordon Hahn, which we did with Gordon Hahn. I think that the balance in this war has been steadily moving further and further towards the Russians since 2023 when the Ukrainian counter-offensive failed.

And I think going into this summer campaigning season, the Russians have never been stronger. The Ukrainians have never been weaker. And I don't see this war exor. Orcena or anything like that that you're speaking about. Matthew says, what do you think about Simon Dixon's thesis that this is prearranged, leaders controlled by a financial complex that is rerouting energy contracts in a multipolar world and stripping Western assets?

It is too complicated. If you're talking in this, first of all, I am not sure what the connection between the political leaders and the financial people actually is. But secondly, I don't see this crisis playing out in the end that way. I far prefer to go to Alex of Reportify, who we spoke with yesterday, who's worked in the markets and knows them well. And he says that far from this being beneficial, it is potentially catastrophic. Yes, some people benefit. but ultimately this is not playing out well for the markets,

and we shouldn't imagine that they're controlling this. The analytical failure says war powers resolution runs out on April 29th. Will Congress pass an AUMF before then, or will a ground up get the U.S. stuck, so we stay in without an AU.S. I'm afraid the second. Alexander says 100% Iran is winning. around never had this much leverage this century. There's no way to frame this as a successful operation by the USA. Well, I have to say I agree. I mean, I understand the arguments. I mean,

about the fact that the Iranians lost most of their leaders. I think that in a sense, that demonstrates not Iranian weakness. It reflects certain failures of imagination. preparation on the part of Iran, but the fact that they were able to replace all their leaders and continue the war and bringing the war to the other side in the way that they have done. To me, that looks more like a strength than a weakness, if I have to be honest. And I think this point that's just been made, it's the key one. Iran has demonstrated power that no one up to now imagined it had. It has this chokehold over the global economy. And there doesn't seem to be any answer to it. And that is, that is proving decisive. And that is why it seems to me that one is

justified at this time in saying that Iran is winning. Wade says, how many planes are we going to lose? You tell me, I don't know. I don't want to speculate about these things. Doing so, by the way, always makes me very uncomfortable. And that implies, applies to every side in every war. One, Kyle M says, welcome to the Duran, our daily source, familiar with these matters. So, legend, thank you for that. Akraman, thank you for that super sticker. Trixler 4 says, what's the objectives with U.S. soldiers dying in Iran now?

They are going to trade one. Larry answered that. I said that. Absolutely. They answered that. Elza says, Trump is just claiming victim. too much? Absolutely.

I think that's extremely unwise. I think he should stop doing it. I don't think he will. I don't think he can. Temperamentally, it's impossible for him. Michael in Taiwan says, my friends here in Taiwan is immune from an energy crisis because allies will supply energy to keep semiconductor production flowing. Your thoughts? No, I don't think it's true.

I think that there are critical shortages of materials, like helium perhaps is one. is one. And I think that as these shortages intensify, what we're going to inevitably see as a general scramble for some of these materials, because countries, governments have no alternative to do that in order to keep any part of their economy functioning. Taiwan is perhaps in a slightly better positioned than some other Asian countries. But I was seeing that the president of South Korea, another critically important country, and another country, by the way, which makes very high-end semiconductors, he is now talking about rationing, calling on people to use energy as little as possible. South Korea looks like it has been very badly hit at the moment. And Japan, the Japanese Prime Minister

Takayishi tried to call Putin to get help with oil. She was asked by the officials in the Kremlin. You mean oil at market prices or oil applying the energy, the oil price cap? Takayishi said oil at the level of the oil price cap. The Russian said, well, in that case, Mr Putin is otherwise engaged. And the call never went through. And the, you know, Japanese again are trying once more. They're trying to send a delegation to Moscow. And the Russians again are saying that. So, you know, there's going to be a cascade effect.

But sooner or later, everybody's going to be affected. Taiwan will follow where Japan and South Korea already are. Jungle Jin says Israeli Zionist fallback contingency. If Israel falls seems to be Uganda, the major influx of Israelis to its new best friend in Africa. I'm not going to comment. I know nothing about that, to be honest. Tuo Mokonin says, as a Finn, it pains my heart to see our nation disgrace herself by becoming

a vassal to the G.A.E. praying for peace and prosperity in Iran and Ukraine. I agree. I completely agree. You know, it's people talk about the old Finland, the Finland of all. And they talk about Finlandization and all of that. The reality is, as I well remember, that that Finland had a very, very high reputation

in international relations. How's why all the conferences used to happen to tell Sinki? From Nikos, now that I ran it a lot, I want to tell you not to expect the same amount of support for a while, I got fired. But hey, tell me your thoughts on my list. Oh my goodness, you got, you got,

I am very, very sorry to hear that, because gosh. Wow. That is very, very bad news. That has upset me a great deal, if I could say. Alexander says Israel's greater objective is the weakening of the Arab Gulf states so they can move the borders. Trump thought this would be a simple three-day operation.

Well, I agree. I absolutely agree about the second. And I think you might be right about some Israelis in relation. relations to the first. But then again, if that is the thinking, it is incredibly short-sighted. Because one of the reasons why the Arab states have never been able to unite against Israel over the last 50, 60, 70 years is because Israel has had private friendships and alliances with several of these conservative Persian Gulf states. So I would have thought that weakening them is ultimately depriving Israel of de facto allies.

And I just don't see the sense of that. Flight of Arras says willingly or not, sweet isolationism is upon us. Bootstrap time. Well, let's not call it isolationism. Let's call it United States looking after itself and focusing on itself. And I've discussed this so many times in. so many places, it would turn out for the best for the United States in the not very long term and probably for the rest of the world too.

Zadhan Marinovich says, did you watch Professor Yang's vid Trump's World Order, an amazing video and I think it explains the situation much better than Trump's stupid AF. It ain't about Trump, it's about deep state actors and they ain't stupid no matter what we think. someone knows what they're doing and they're doing it on purpose. Well, I wish I could see this plan, but at the moment I'm not seeing it. And again, going back to what Larry Johnson was telling us about generals being sacked and about the secretary of the army being unhappy and all of that, it seems to me that what we're looking at is not somebody executing some great plan.

it's more a sign of dissonance and disquiet and unease and unhappiness precisely because there isn't a plan and that that plan isn't working and that in the absence of a plan things are not going well. Now, I haven't seen Professor Yang's programme. To be frank, there is so much news coming out. There are, I'm trying to follow the Russian media, the Chinese media, the Iranian media, the American media, so is Alex. We're trying to keep on top of all of this.

There just aren't enough hours in the day to follow every single program in that way. Elsa says, how come the Western politicians are in Kiev almost daily, but they haven't been to Israel or the region during the last month? I thought Putin was the greatest threat. Well, some of them obviously think so. By the way, again, going back to some of the earlier comments,

I mean, there is deep gloom. I know this for a fact, in London, about the situation in Europe and in Ukraine at the moment. I don't personally believe that NATO is about to fall apart or the United States is about to walk out. I don't see how that can be done. But certainly there is deep gloom that the Americans have got themselves into a situation in the Middle East, which takes them away from the focus, the overriding focus. focus on Russia and that the situation in Ukraine is deteriorating fast again. And I think that is the general sentiment here.

My M2X says as we take the exit onto the on ramp to World War III, it's good to have folks like Larry and others to give us rational analysis. Absolutely hear him. Hiro.2i says, Duran finally going to call out strikes on Iranian civilians as war crimes. Well, we just have. We did a whole program two days ago in which we extensively discussed the issue of war crimes. And Alex asked me questions about some of the things that Trump is saying. And I went into the legal weeds, if you like, and discussed the legalities of this and pointed out that, yes, these do look like war crimes.

And over the course of that program, we both wondered why American General. and American officials faced by these situations, trained as they are not to obey orders that involve committing war crimes, are not standing up and talking and pushing back against them. And, well, perhaps, and this is maybe a good sign since we made that program, we now see that there is argument and dissension

or signs of it within the military. And perhaps it is related to this very thing. Celestius says in Washington, Trump is less criticized for launching another stupid war than for being unable to sell it. So there will be many concerns about his fitness to be president. You know, there are many comments. You're not far wrong on this. There is criticism about starting the war from some quarters. Some of this criticism, by the way, is not made in good faith.

it's made by people who have actually been campaigning for this very war that has been going wrong. But overall, you're absolutely right. And I have to say this, that does seem to be more disquiet that he isn't selling the war properly than that he's conducting it at all. Vincent says before the Duran, have either of you considered just not following the news entirely? Ignorance truly is bliss, at least temporarily. Sometimes it is. in the evenings after I put my children to bed

my wife and I put our children to bed I give myself an hour listening to music reading ancient history which is my favorite thing and I'm trying to think of other things than this Iraq of Norway says

US crushing the world economy to survive USDA death well there is actually there's actually a comment that's been made by, I think it was actually Lavrov, that, you know, because everything is falling apart in terms of Western leadership, Western Higemone, there is a kind of attitude that bring down everything else as well, bring down the entire structure of the world down to conceal the fact that you are falling.

It was Lavrov, actually. I discussed it today in my program, which hasn't yet gone out, which will later. But I mean, I don't know how strong that kind of nihilism really is amongst Western leaders. I hope not. Alexander says with the straight, Iran will not be sanctioned again. You could argue that they're imposing their own counter sanctions now. And they're moving a lot more effective. OG Wall says, good day, gents, great guest. Thank you. Natalie, welcome to the Drandt community. Elliot's EP says, weren't they talking to Kamal Karazai, pronounced Karazai.

I'm not sure who this person is. The former foreign minister of Iran. That was that they tried to assassinate who was speaking with Vance, was about to speak with Vance. Well, there you go, yeah. Okay. I mean, there's so many people, allegedly.

I have to say that for the moment at least, I don't see any real sign of negotiations. And yes, there are some people who seem to be completely opposed to negotiations on the American and Israeli side and who are conducting these assassinations to prevent them. And it is terrible that they're not being called out more strongly for doing it. Klaus Cleminson says Sweden is detaining a ship right now. Does freedom of navigation only apply at Artemus? indeed

Lavrov has made that very point by the way the hockey goalie says are you surprised Iran hasn't targeted the Knesset while in session given the ongoing assassinations I am not actually surprised I think that the best policy when you are in a war is not to actually strike

out everywhere at once and hit all the prime targets you want to give yourself some scope for future escalation. And I think that's probably what the Iranians are doing. Jerry Coogan says somebody mentioned that Trump's second term started off reasonably well until Kushner reappeared. Since then, it's been disastrous thoughts. Well, that may be true.

The key month was May 2025. It seems to me that things began to go very, very badly wrong from that point onwards. I think it was about then that he lost Elon Musk, by the way. Just saying. Stero Nutrino says Dune was inspired by Imam

Shamil's rebellion in the caucuses in 1836, recounted by Leslie Blanche in 1960, but now I can destroy the spice for real. Oh, goodness. I didn't know that, by the way. I didn't know that there was that connection. Okay. Between the book,

the science fiction novels and the the the chamele rebellions well insurgencies may be better than rebellions resistance in the Caucasus. The literature

by the way those wars in the Caucasus produced are astonishing from people like Lermontov and Tolstoy himself by the way who fought in those wars and they're a textbook of how

after a war reconciliation can be actually achieved, just to say. Madeline Takam says the USA is losing Iraq by all evidence so far. I've heard the same that the Americans are gradually pulling out of Iraq and that it's becoming very dangerous for them. Elena Diaz says Russia and China want peace, but how can it be peace with Israel expanding now in Lebanon? Peace would require Iran to betray Lebanon and Palestinians, wouldn't it? Well, always bear something in mind for the Russians and the Chinese.

Ultimately, what they always pursue is their own interests. So they see what Israel is doing. They may disapproval of it, but they're not going to put themselves at massive jeopardy simply on the strength of disapproval. what they are mostly concerned about is a stable situation in the Middle East because always these two countries, but perhaps especially the Russians in the Middle East, seek long-term stability.

And I think they're increasingly coming round to the conclusion that policies, Israeli policies and of course American policies, far from security stability in that region, are creating disruption and chaos instead. So there is a shift in Russian Chinese policy, but you have to understand the original premises upon which that policy is based. Elsa says Elensky to News Nation,

we stand ready to help to open the Strait of Hormuz, but so far no one has made such a request if you sent them and Estonia, the oil price would go down. immediately. Of course. I mean, Zelensky on the job. How can he fail? Nicholas Byrne says U.S. regime enforced sanctions across the world. Responsible 30 million deaths worldwide. From the 70s, U.S. regime is destroying West. Iran, Palestine, mid-east. No surprise, the U.S. regime referred to has been satanic.

Well, indeed. Many people say that, yeah. Elliot TZP on Boucher, we answered that. taking a book share. John, thank you for that super chat. Michael Herbert, in his speech, Trump had a very sad tone, just like if he was doing a funeral eulogy here, appeared to me more forced,

obligated than delusional or misinformed. He is going to be the perfect scapegoat. You know, I agree. I thought he looked very, very tired and very depressed. That was my sense of it. very listless. It was not the usual Trump. And the whole format, him reading from a prepared text and not deviating from it was very, very unusual. It reinforced a sense, I would say of crisis, but certainly of a sense that things are not going well.

Elsa says Trump knows about Stone Age from the Flintstones. Nitzvich says, I hope this will not be too much of a bother, several chats for one question. The Russian army are still going very slow. I hear all the arguments and believe them to be true. Yeah. I hear all the arguments. The Russian army is going slow to be true. I hear it's true.

Well, I mean, the Russians have been fighting a war of attrition. I do think it's actually that slow. by the way. Again, I think people misunderstand a lot of the geography. Nitzwitch also says saving manpower, attrition more important than gaining territory. But one point for you, gents, that I heard made me think. Something Yerazimov said that everything was going according to a certain plan. That makes me think, maybe the war will go for eight years on the whole, because the Russians had to wait eight years for the Europeans to not act on Minsk,

one and two. Well, I don't know what the Russian long-term plans are. They do have a plan and they've discussed it many times and I noticed that whenever military officers report to Geracem if it's been out regularly see, they all refer to the fact that they're executing the plan. The plan clearly is the focus of the plan at the moment is clearly to clear Donbass and I think they will achieve that this sum. That's my own personal view.

given what a complex battle that has been, that is not, I think, taken such a huge amount of time. Bad Wolf TX says respectfully, that was an angry non-answer. The fact that Iran has resorted to closing the strait and blackmailing the world by cutting off energy is not Iran winning. The Islamic Republic may hang on. Maybe not. Who knows? Maybe a claim could be made that the Islamic Republic is being pounded, but is not currently losing. could be made from a certain perspective, see Ukraine, but winning?

Well, winning war is about achieving your political objective. For Iran, survival is the most important objective. I mean, we say this, or rather for the political system in Iran, survival is the most important objective. We said that before the war. For the moment, they survived. that is already from their perspective a way towards winning. But if they can impose unbearable pressure on the other side

to the point where the other side is eventually forced to make concessions, that is victory too. And if the Strait of Whomuz, closing the Strait of Whomers, closing the Strait of is their root to that. I can't see how one can argue against that being a way of winning. War is not a game that's played fairly. There's a thing we need to understand. I mean, I don't know what fair is in war anyway.

But for Iran to simply fight a conventional war against the United States and not use tools like closing the strait of Hormuz, moves would be for Iran to accept a position of disadvantage, which in war one never does. Winston Ferret, yeah, carry on. Winston Farad Heights says Modi ridiculed in India following the fatherland, motherland idiocy, India facing acute LPG crisis for Israeli fatherland delusions. Well, I completely agree. I'm not following events in India very closely.

But I read an eviscerating discussion of Modi's policies in an article in unheard by an Indian scholar. I don't know how representative this is, but what it said is that he's becoming increasingly isolated and increasingly criticized and that his position is deteriorating. And this article also said that one of the What one of the side effects of Modi's over-close alignment with the Israelis is that it's making Israel very unpopular in India. Just saying.

Real Landco. Thank you for that. Super chat. From Salustias, if the United States lost its entire current political class, would it be a fatal loss for this country? some would say the opposite. Many would say the opposite. Well, I mean, you must remember when you're talking about the political class of the United States, you are talking about many, many people.

I mean, it is huge. The country is big. The political class is also very, very big. They're not going to all go away. Knitswich says, even so I think Putin and the Russian leadership tried to abstain from revenge in such regards. I am sure trying to teach a lesson to the Europeans is very likely in my opinion. I think that the Russians are strong believers in the French maxim that revenge is a dish to be eaten cold.

Mirjana Gabrilovich, thank you for that super sticker. Achraman, thank you for those gifted Duran memberships. Elliot Z.P. One of two. As a conclusion, isn't it more realistic for Iran to demand U.S. abstention in UNSC to place enforceable reparations requirements on Israel instead of asking the U.S. to pay reparations? They have a simple argument for the world. Israel dragged the U.S. into this, and now the U.S. is walking away. Israel has to pay a cost or it won't stop. I think that there will have to be at some point, some kind of negotiated resolution to this. And I'm going to say, I think that the American Israeli demands on Iran have been excessive,

but I think that the Iranians are matching those excessive American Israeli demands by making excessive demands of their own. I have come around to the view that given the devastation of the American bases at the Persian Gulf and the fact that these bases have proved a strategic liability, I've come to the view that the Iranian demand

that the United States withdraw from these bases might actually be attainable in a negotiation. I think the Iranians should focus on that, focus on getting strong security guarantees from their allies and also getting a commitment to lift sanctions. I think these are much more realistic objectives than demanding for things like reparations. I'm not saying that in a perfect well, Iran should not ask for reparations or should not, you know, want reparations.

But realistically, they're never going to be paid. and making demands of that kind are not going to bring about the end of the war they're going to extend and prolong the war and as various people pointed out over this course of this program Iran is suffering damage people are dying in Iran I don't think one should hold out for something that is obviously unachievable Of course, the boy says, Alexander, how likely is it that the lights will go out in Ukraine in the coming weeks? I don't know. I mean, to be honest, because of so much time now being given to Iran, I'm not, I can't follow the situation.

I haven't been following the situation in Ukraine as closely. I know that the Russians have maintained their pressure on the energy system, and they conducted another big missile strike using his Kandah missile. last night. It is, however, spring, summer. I think what the Russians, the Russian calculation, is that they're not going to completely switch off all electric power to the cities, but they're going to do enough to disrupt Ukrainian logistics and resupplies in advance of the spring offensive that is coming. And the objectives of that spring offensive are fairly spring summer offensive, absolutely clear.

First and foremost, to take Donbass. I think that is the main objective. And secondly, to reach Zaporosia City and the NEPA. Those are the proximate objectives of the Russians at this time. From Brian T1, Alexander, how far does Lindsay Graham's foreign policy extend through Trump's administration? Everywhere. I think one of the most disastrous things, is the revelation of the incredible influence

that this man, this disastrous man, has had on the formation of policy on the United States. Last year, Alex was starting to say that the real president of the United States is not Donald J. Trump, but it's Lindsey Graham. Lindsay Graham goes around the world. Lindsay Graham makes policy. He makes announcements.

He meets with diplomats, of foreign countries. He behaves as if he was the Secretary of State or he was the President. And incredibly, instead of the President tell him to stop

and reminding him that it is the administration, the President and his officials who conduct foreign policy. They simply follow in Lindsay Graham's wake. And here we are. Nico says, last thing, since there is a trial

for the Tempe Train accident, it in Greece. The fact that there were no losses out of the 415 people of the Russian train that derailed is a miracle and I don't believe in God. Well, there you go. Nicholas, you're right about that. Can I again say that I am very upset, extremely upset to hear that you've lost your job? And all the best to you, our good friend, and may all, you know, may everything turn out well for you over the last next few weeks. And please remain strong and cheerful and you will come through. Fyodor van der Leyen says, Alexander, is there any way back from the 1984 style censorship being instituted in the UK, France, Germany and Brussels? Well, that's an excellent question. Well, I get to say

this. Maybe in time, yes, but in the short term, no, it's going to get worse. Elza says, what about Trump's speeches during his election campaign, there seemed to be a strategy and some coherence. I don't think anymore there was honesty. Well, I'm afraid that clearly wasn't honesty, because Trump is doing the opposite of what he said he would do. And he's provided no explanation. So if he came along and said, look, I changed my mind, I decided that what I said during the election, the election campaign is no longer sustainable. And these are the reasons.

Well, I might disagree with those reasons. I might say that he's lying. I might still say that he's lying. But he's not even, he's not even taken the trouble to do that. The cynicism is terrible. Emmanuel King, thank you for that awesome super sticker. A. Z. Mary says allegedly Trump said photos of U.S. military bases damaged R.A.I. Yes, I know. He didn't allegedly say. He did say. At least people in the administration said it. They said the same. And I read an article in the Financial Times about the attack on the radar stations, that there was one particular attack on one of the particular radar stations and the satellite photos were AI, except that they weren't. They were real. And we've seen in the US media that they are real. And I have no doubt that this damage is indeed.

AMO4-809 says U.S. imports like crude but processes heavy crude. It's not self-sufficient with oil. Alexander McKay did a great breakdown of this yesterday. I know. That is absolutely correct. And it's a massive subject and we should discuss this at some point. Jimmy Dean says hubris. Yes, absolutely.

Yes. Jimmy Dean says hubris, U.S. West Indec Crisis shifting budgets to the MIC. Cost curve limits war. Western Israel rely on USGD. Iran and Russia do not. China waits. Yes. All correct. Nikos says,

everything I said was from Russian commentators. No, I know, and I know, I have a shrewd guess which ones, by the way. Only, only they're not the ones I would personally treat as reliable. Ladoshka says, Nikos, instead of reading commentators, where I wonder from,

pack and go visit Russia and talk to people there. Quite true. Joanne Lunske says, thanks for the live stream and happy Easter. Happy Easter, thank you for that. C.J.U. says, are you guys aware of Miles Copeland and his work in the Middle East? His book, The Game Player, is an interesting read. It is a very interesting read, and I have. And my memory of him is that he was heavily involved with the intelligence community somewhere.

So, I mean, they're certainly interesting, yes. Like coin FAMM says 5D If it's to destroy the regions Then withdraw They all sold oil Outside the petrodollars system Iran invades

U.S. will see Saudi royal money too Again This is too This is too Complicated For the real world Again I've done a lot of History

I've never known Plans like that to be executed successfully. Just so. Claudia Biladu says, always great. Merci. Thank you.

Zaran Marinovich says, we follow you and appreciate you particularly for following all those different media. However, this vid of Professor Yang is an absolute must. It's different and makes very important points. Well, all right. I will try.

What Yang said is a little bit similar to what Lavrov said. said, please watch it. Okay, I will watch it. I'll take a look at it. Look, I promise after, I will watch it later. Nico says, did you get my list, Duran? What do you think?

Also, don't worry about me, Alexander. I am fine. You aren't getting rid of my columns yet. Give me time. Well, that's great to hear, Nikos, because there's few things I enjoy more on live streams than having debating you. The lists. We saw the first lists, but I don't think we saw.

any updated lists no i think i think if you said if you post them after the stream to my telegram i'll i'll get them but i remember seeing like the first four lists three three three four lists that you had uh harry c smith says alexander i thought you should know someone called actus hyatt with over 10 000 subscribers is impersonating you i've reported to yt yes we've reported. So have we. Yes, we have. Lightcoid, yeah. Lightcoid fam says Trump lies since the nuclear dust he talks about is more dangerous than clearly exploding by a nuke. So destroying the region's oil is the real reason. I, again, I understand this. I listen to all of this. I just watch Trump. Is he really

capable of coming up or with a plan like that? I mean, it was the man. we saw on Wednesday really working to that kind of plan? Is the entire US government really working to a plan of that kind? I can just say something if they are, if they actually are working to that plan, then they are collectively insane because it will fail. It will fail disastrously for them, not for the United States even,

but specifically for them. because what they would be doing will ultimately undermine the entire basis of their own power, their own power in the United States as well. Brulaham says, looking forward to see Nemat Parvini on the show. So do we. Absolutely. Hito D6T says, Why did Russia target a 17th century Ukrainian church in broad daylight like the U.S. and Israel leave historical sites alone.

Well, absolutely. I mean, I haven't heard about this. I'm not saying it didn't happen. But absolutely, historical sites should be left alone. John Villain says the octopus has many arms. The onion has many layers. True enough. Sherry, thank you for joining the Duran community. Zaran Mairenovich says, ha ha, managed to convince Alexander, do it two times speed. Probably you'll think it's far too complicated, unrealistic, but it's interesting. Also, don't think Trump is doing it, but the deep state actors are doing it. No, I'm not saying people within the deep state do come up with incredibly convoluted ideas. I remember reading, and I've discussed it many times, Aaron West Mitchell's article back in August 2021 about fomenting war in Ukraine and defeating Russia there. And we all know how that turned out.

And I read other pieces that West Mitchell and other of these people write. And they are unbelievably convoluted and complicated. And they never turn out right. So, yes, I accept there is plotting and intriguing. What kinds of strange ideas go on. But in the end, one, they don't succeed. And I think some of these ideas that have been presented about this conflict in the Middle East

are just too complicated even for these people. Brian T. says thank you for your time, Alex Alexander, and thank you for having Larry on the Duran. Thank you for that. And from Iranian-Kito, I keep getting video recommendations

of AI version of Alexander with slightly more pronounced posh West London accent. Absolutely. Nobody quite gets my accents. accent right you can tell that and you can also there's all these staring eyes that come out come at you I wish in some ways I could keep my I mean I've got eye issues as everybody knows but anyway if you look at these if people who know me and follow me properly I

think it quite quickly make out which is the AI representation which is not but anyway it's just just just report it if you if you report it that's all that's all we can do Iranian kiddo, it's good to hear for you, by the way. And if you've got any family in Iran, well, know that we are concerned about this. I have a very good Iranian friend, and I was in contact with him last night about his family in Tabriz. And, well, I discuss it in my program today, what he said, and it was very obsessive. John Matthews says, why Russia doesn't conduct the SMO like Iran, NATO material, comes from known places still Russia allows weapons, allows old old

allows old Russia attacks can't understand. Well, well, well, there is a fundamental difference, which is that Iran has been directly and openly attacked by Israel and by the United States. And it is in a much, in a kind of way, in a much weaker position, it is not a nuclear power. So, of course, it's been obliged in that kind of scenario to respond in a very aggressive work. If the United States and the Western powers conducted an open attack against Russia,

the US Air Force trying to bomb St. Petersburg, well, we would be in a completely different scenario. Absolutely. And I would say that the war in with Iran knows why that hasn't happened. There was been lots of talk about the US Air Force conducting no-fly zones, for example, over Ukraine. We now see how difficult that would be, how difficult it would be for the United States to achieve that kind of military dominance. All right. I think that is everything.

Well, that was a... Thank you to Larry Johnson for joining us. Thank you to everyone that sent all the excellent questions and everyone that watched us on Rumble and Odyssey, YouTube, and our locals community, the durand.com. A prodigious live stream. Thank you, everybody. Thank you, everyone. Thank you to our moderators as well. Take care. Take care.