Mohammad Marandi & Larry C. Johnson: U.S. & Iran on the Brink as Critical Negotiations Unfold LIVE

Professor Marandi and Larry Johnson detail Iran's robust military build-up, including extensive underground missile and drone bases, particularly in the Persian Gulf region. They emphasize Iran's improved offensive and defensive capabilities, noting significant technological cooperation with Russia and China (e.g., Chinese 3D radar systems, assumed Russian S-400s). This arsenal is designed to target US bases and regional assets, not just Israel, and has been tested and refined after the '12-day war'.

Marandi: 'Iran has all sorts of underground missile and drone bases alongside or near or directed towards the Persian Gulf and the Indian Ocean. Far there's a far greater amount of firepower directed at the Persian Gulf than towards the Israeli regime.' (10:20) Johnson: 'The Chinese have deployed a radar system to Iran that is they call it a 3D 3D system and it's capable of detecting incoming inbound objects out to 700 kilometers... it detects stealth aircraft.' (15:40)

Both guests argue that the US and Israel harbor 'delusional fantasies' about an easy victory or regime change in Iran. They cite historical precedents like the US experiences in Iraq (2003) and Afghanistan, and the recent inability to defeat the Houthis in the Red Sea, as evidence of the limitations of American military power. They assert that Iran, a country four times the size of Iraq with challenging terrain, cannot be subdued by air strikes alone and that a ground invasion is impractical and unsustainable.

Johnson: 'The notion that they're going to sit here and start dropping bombs on Iran and that that will fall cause the government to collapse is just it's it's ridiculous.' (05:42) Marandi: 'Any sane person I think would say that as Larry said this would be just a fantasy to to to seek a war and expect victory.' (13:32)

Following the '12-day war,' Iran's military doctrine shifted from defensive to offensive. This means that upon any US or Israeli attack, Iran will immediately launch widespread, devastating strikes beyond military targets. The primary objective will be to destroy regional oil and gas export capabilities, including tankers, ports, installations, and pipelines, thereby causing maximum global economic chaos and forcing a rapid end to the conflict.

Marandi: 'Iran's military posture has been shifted after the 12-day war from defensive to offensive... They're going to start destroying assets across the board... I think they're going to destroy the capability for oil exports. Not just by closing the straight of hormones. They can they can knock out tankers. They can knock out the ports. They can knock out the oil and gas installation.' (20:54)

A war with Iran is predicted to become a regional conflict, involving Iran's allies in Yemen (Houthis) and Iraq (resistance groups), who possess significant capabilities to target US assets. Professor Marandi suggests that the economic devastation and chaos caused by Iran's offensive actions would likely lead to the collapse of 'tiny Arab family dictatorships' in the Persian Gulf (e.g., Qatar, UAE, Kuwait, Bahrain), which are seen as fragile economies dependent on oil/gas exports and foreign labor.

Marandi: 'If push comes to shove, you will have multiple fronts and of people who are well trained and well prepared... And then these regimes are going to be overthrown. Why would Katar which has a population of 300 or so thousand people... Why should we imagine that it will remain in power or in Bahrain or in the Emirates or in Kuwait or any of these entities. They will they will be swept away most probably when there's no oil, no gas.' (52:40)

Both guests agree that a US attack would drastically alter Iran's nuclear doctrine. Despite the Supreme Leader's religious fatwa against nuclear weapons, public opinion in Iran has already shifted towards favoring a nuclear deterrent. A direct attack would likely strengthen this sentiment, potentially leading Iran to pursue nuclear weapons to ensure its long-term security and deter future aggression, effectively making the case for nuclear armament.

Johnson: 'The United States ends up indirectly making the case that Iran must have a nuclear weapon in order to be left alone.' (59:31) Marandi: 'The balance in Iran about nuclear weapons among the public has tilted towards having a nuclear weapon. Even though the state is opposed... the US behavior has pushed ordinary Iranians in a position where despite the state and the belief of the leader himself, the belief the leader now is in a in a minority view among ordinary Iranians.' (01:05:00)