Newest War Developments: Looming Nuclear War, Advice to Trump, and US Boots on the Ground in Iran

The host argues that the war in Iran is not a conventional conflict aimed at preventing nuclear proliferation or restoring international order. Instead, it is a 'pivot in history' designed to 'usher in a new age,' driven by either religious impulses (Christian Zionists and some religious Jews seeking Armageddon) or secular visions of technological rule (mass surveillance, transhumanism). This makes the war fundamentally theological and unlikely to be resolved quickly.

The host states, 'The point of this was not to preserve the status quo at all. It was to overturn the status quo, to usher in a new age. That's the point of this war.' He elaborates on religious and secular motivations.

Both governments (Gulf States, Israel, US) and social media platforms are actively censoring information about the war, making it difficult for the public to understand the full picture, including casualties and damage. This lack of transparency undermines public consent and accountability for the war's effects.

The host notes, 'The censorship of this war on social media and of course big mainstream outlets are censored always have been.' He mentions governments not wanting 'physical destruction of their countries broadcast to the world' and social media companies 'imposing censorship on the American people.'

The host and Colonel McGregor assert that this war is unique because Israel acts as a 'true partner' with 'decision-making authority' over U.S. military actions, unlike previous coalitions where allies lacked veto power. This arrangement suggests U.S. interests may be subservient to Israeli objectives.

The host states, 'Israel is a partner in this war. Probably the first war the United States has ever fought with a like a true partner with decision-making authority.' Colonel McGregor concurs, noting, 'No, I think the British had considerable influence over us during the Second World War. Not because we liked it. We didn't.'

The current conflict, rather than preventing nuclear proliferation, is creating a strong incentive for small but wealthy nations to acquire nuclear weapons. The lesson learned is that countries with nukes (like North Korea) are not subject to regime change, while those without are vulnerable.

The host explains, 'The effect of this will be to radically accelerate proliferation around the world because what's the lesson of what we're doing right now? You better have nukes or else you're going to get regime changed.'

The host emphasizes that for the U.S. to maintain its moral standing and public support for war, it must behave with honor. This includes transparently investigating civilian casualties (like the bombing of a girls' school) and ensuring diplomatic efforts were genuine, not a ruse for sneak attacks. Failure to do so, he argues, makes the U.S. no better than its enemies and undermines future diplomacy.

The host states, 'The United States needs to behave with honor' and questions the bombing of a girls' school, asking, 'If that's the case, no more autonomous weapons for us.' He also questions if diplomatic efforts were 'a ruse designed to distract and trap the Iranians.'

Colonel McGregor warns that the ongoing conflict, particularly the closure of the Straits of Hormuz and attacks on oil infrastructure, poses an existential threat to the global economy. He projects $300/barrel oil, a 60-80% stock market crash, and trillions in lost wealth, with long-term recovery taking years. This impact extends globally, affecting major U.S. allies in Asia who rely heavily on Gulf oil.

McGregor states, 'If we don't, we're going to hit $300 per barrel of oil. We're going to watch 60 to 80% of the stock value crash. People are going to lose trillions in wealth. It will be a disaster.' He notes, 'The Qatari government has said we're shutting down.'

Colonel McGregor dismisses the possibility of U.S. ground troops in Iran, stating the current army is a 'shadow' of its past self and unprepared for modern warfare. He highlights the vulnerability of large troop concentrations to persistent surveillance and hypersonic missile attacks, making such an endeavor a 'disaster waiting to happen.'

McGregor states, 'I think it's zero. I don't even know why they they maintain the pretense. First of all, the army today is a shadow of what it was 30 years ago.' He adds, 'We have persistent surveillance above. We can see everything everywhere all the time. We can target everything everywhere all the time.'