Larry C. Johnson & Col. Larry Wilkerson: Iran-US Talks on the Edge, War Could Break Out ANY MOMENT!
Quick Read
Summary
Takeaways
- ❖US diplomatic efforts with Iran are a 'charade' preceding an imminent US attack.
- ❖US embassies evacuating personnel from Baghdad and Kazakhstan/Britain shutting embassies in Iran signal impending conflict.
- ❖Russia and China possess formidable submarine fleets capable of devastating US naval assets in the Northern Arabian Sea, which offers unique hiding conditions.
- ❖US air assets deployed near Iran (F-35s, F-22s) face severe operational limitations due to range, refueling requirements, and advanced Iranian/Russian air defenses.
- ❖The USS Gerald Ford aircraft carrier suffers from critical sewage system failures and extremely low morale among crew, compromising its operational effectiveness.
- ❖Iran has likely learned from past attacks and significantly upgraded its counterintelligence and air defense capabilities, making infiltration difficult.
- ❖US politicians are using false narratives about Iran being the 'number one sponsor of terrorism' to garner public support for war, similar to the lead-up to the Iraq War.
- ❖Iran's missile and drone capabilities are vastly underestimated by Western intelligence, posing a significant threat to US and Israeli assets.
- ❖The US military's recent experience is primarily against 'tribesmen,' not peer adversaries, contrasting sharply with Russia's combat-tested military in Ukraine.
- ❖US military production capacity for critical munitions like Patriot missiles is insufficient to sustain a high-intensity conflict for more than a few days.
Insights
1US Military Readiness and Logistical Failures
The US military's operational capacity is severely hampered. The USS Gerald Ford, a capital ship, has been at sea for 241 days, extended twice, with its sewage system failing and crew morale at Vietnam-era lows. This indicates systemic issues that undermine the ability to conduct sustained, complex operations. The US Navy is also 40% short in reserves and 10-15% in active forces. Furthermore, US air assets like F-35s and F-22s deployed in the region have limited combat ranges (600 miles for F-35C, 700+ miles to Iran's border for F-35A) requiring frequent, vulnerable refueling, which is impractical over hostile Iranian airspace.
USS Gerald Ford's 241-day deployment, failing sewage, crew wanting to quit (); Navy recruiting 40% short in reserves, 10-15% in active force (); F-35C combat range 600 miles, need refueling (); F-35A 700+ mile flight to Iran border ().
2Iran's Robust Defense Capabilities and External Support
Iran has significantly enhanced its defense systems with advanced Russian and Chinese technology. This includes long-range air defense missiles, advanced 3D radars (430-mile range), and S-300/S-400 systems capable of intercepting US air-to-ground missiles (JASMs). Russia and China view Iran as a critical economic crossroads and a testing ground for their military technologies against the US. Iran's drone and missile production is likely extensive and largely underground, making its true capabilities underestimated by Western intelligence. Russia's combat experience in Ukraine provides invaluable lessons shared with allies.
China deployed advanced 3D radar (430-mile range) and long-range air defense missiles (); Russia providing S-300/S-400 air defense systems (); JASMs shot down in Ukraine (); Iran's role as economic crossroads for China/Russia (); Russia's combat experience shared (); Iran's drone production underground ().
3Insufficient US Munitions Production for Sustained Conflict
The US military's production capacity for critical munitions is inadequate for a high-intensity conflict. For example, Patriot missile production is only 700 missiles per year. If Iran fires 50-100 missiles, requiring two Patriot missiles per inbound, 60% of annual production could be depleted in a single day. Naval destroyers carry only 96 vertical launch system cells and require port facilities with cranes for reloading, making them vulnerable to depletion and withdrawal from combat.
Patriot missile annual production 700 (); Iran firing 50-100 missiles () would deplete 60% of annual Patriot production in one day (); Destroyers carry 96 vertical launch cells, require port for reloading ().
4Political Deception and Public Opinion
US politicians, including JD Vance and Marco Rubio, are accused of using 'flat-out lies' and recycled propaganda (e.g., 'Iran is the number one sponsor of terrorism') to justify a war against Iran, despite overwhelming public opposition (over 70% against a new Middle East war). This strategy mirrors the lead-up to the 2003 Iraq War, aiming to manipulate public sentiment for an unconstitutional military action.
70% of US public opposes new Middle East war (); JD Vance's rhetoric 'direct lift from George W. Bush in 2002' (); Iran not number one sponsor of terrorism (); US responsible for 300,000 Iranian deaths vs. Iran responsible for less than 1,000 American deaths ().
Bottom Line
Russia and China may use a US-Iran conflict as a live-fire testing ground for their advanced military technologies against a peer adversary (the US), similar to how Nazi Germany tested equipment in 1936 Spain.
This transforms the conflict from a regional skirmish into a proxy testing ground for global powers, potentially accelerating military innovation for US adversaries and revealing vulnerabilities in US systems.
For defense analysts, this highlights the need to closely monitor the performance of non-US military tech in such scenarios. For policymakers, it underscores the risk of inadvertently providing adversaries with combat experience and intelligence.
Iran's optimal strategy, if attacked by Israel, would be to destroy Israel first, and only then engage US assets if the US intervenes directly. This would leverage the initial attack to achieve a primary objective before facing the full US force.
This 'out-of-the-box' strategy could lead to the rapid elimination of Israel, fundamentally altering the geopolitical landscape of the Middle East before the US can fully respond or recalibrate its objectives.
This highlights a potential blind spot in US strategic planning, which might assume a linear escalation. Understanding such asymmetric response strategies is critical for anticipating and mitigating worst-case scenarios.
Lessons
- Challenge political narratives promoting military intervention by scrutinizing claims of 'state-sponsored terrorism' and demanding concrete evidence, especially when public opinion is against war.
- Advocate for increased transparency and accountability regarding military readiness reports, logistical capabilities, and troop morale, rather than relying on official pronouncements.
- Recognize the potential for rapid escalation in geopolitical conflicts, particularly when multiple global powers have strategic interests and advanced military capabilities in the region.
Quotes
"If you're going to go into a negotiation, you gotta the other side's got to understand that you're what you say goes and you can you can deliver on what you promise. Whit cough can't they cannot and I think this is an entire charade uh that's preparing for uh you know I don't know if it's going to be Sunday or Monday but uh the United States is going to attack Iran."
"The Northern Arabian Sea has some of the best convergence zones, temperatures, salinity levels, and so forth to negate both active and passive sonar, which is to say, subs can hide there better than any other water on the face of the Earth."
"The USS Gerald Ford has been at sea for 241 days. Her deployment has been extended twice. She is now heading back toward the Middle East for a third time. Sailors are missing funerals, missing births, missing their children's first steps. The sho ship's sewage system is failing... Morale is described in terms that defense journalists have not used since Vietnam."
"If I were a run, I would let Israel attack me and then destroy them. And then if the United States came in, only then only then would I start attacking US assets."
"If you go down the list of terrorists in the world, according to the definition of terrorism that we've all pretty much signed up to, if you go down that list, the greatest terrorist organization on the face of the earth is the Israeli Defense Force. And who then is the greatest sponsor of terrorism on the face of the earth? The empire, America."
Q&A
Recent Questions
Related Episodes
Col. Jacques Baud: What a US Ground Invasion of Iran Would REALLY Look Like
"Colonel Jacques Baud dissects the strategic futility of a US ground invasion of Iran, arguing that current troop levels are insufficient and such an action would backfire, exposing US allies and potentially leading to Iran's nuclearization."
Robby Soave GOES OFF On ANNOYING Liberal Black Woman Making Emotional Trump Deranged Arguments!
"The host dissects a heated foreign policy debate, arguing that 'left-wing' emotionalism and 'Trump derangement' prevent a rational understanding of US sanction strategies against Cuba and Iran."
TRUMP PANICS AS FINANCIAL APOCALYPSE HITS; TRILLIONS LOST; TEHRAN IN ‘NUCLEAR WINTER’ & CHAOS ERUPTS
"The host details a catastrophic global economic and humanitarian crisis stemming from the US-Israel war on Iran, framing Trump as an incompetent, lying leader whose actions are escalating the conflict and destroying the world."
Col. Jacques Baud: Middle East on Fire — Is This the Start of Something Bigger?
"Colonel Jacques Baud dissects the escalating conflict between the US, Israel, and Iran, arguing that Western misunderstanding of Iranian culture and strategic duplicity have forced Iran into a position of necessary escalation, ultimately degrading the West's own strategic posture."