Monday, December 18, 2023

Redacted 12/17/2023

"The U.S. is about to LOSE its Super Power status" Col. Douglas Macgregor

The United States is quickly losing its super power status as the most powerful nation in the world. Col. Douglas Macgregor argues the U.S. has made a serious of strategic blunders putting America on a path of self-destruction. 

Thursday, December 14, 2023

MOATS with George Galloway 12/12/2023

Episode #299, War Updates plus the Future of the Middle East

Edited to correct glitch in video

Tuesday, December 12, 2023

Daniel Davis / Deep Dive 12/12/2023


Col Douglas Macgregor: Zelensky Biden Meeting: High Stakes Gamble Likely to Fail

Judge Napolitano - Judging Freedom 12/12/2023

In the intricate web of global geopolitics, the relationships between nations often shape the course of international affairs. Among these complex alliances, the connection between the United States and Israel has been a focal point of scrutiny and analysis. In recent times, a growing discourse has emerged, pointing to a perceived isolation of the United States resulting from its association with Israel. This discussion delves into the multifaceted dynamics at play, exploring the ways in which Israel's actions, policies, and geopolitical strategies may contribute to the perceived isolation of the United States on the world stage.

Marc Friedrich 12/10/2023

Douglas Macgregor is a retired United States Army colonel, military expert and author. Today I'm talking to him about the wars in Ukraine and Israel, as well as the role of the USA in these conflicts. What he says will shock many. Do not miss!

Tuesday, December 5, 2023

Velocity 12/4/2023

Col. Douglas Macgregor JUST Revealed What The US Government Is Trying To Hide

Wednesday, November 29, 2023

Daniel Davis / Deep Dive 11/29/2023

Douglas Macgregor: Are Kyiv’s Policies Suicidal? Will IDF Clear Gaza?

A Neighbor's Choice 11/29/2023

with David Gornoski

David Gornoski sits down with Col. Douglas Macgregor for a conversation on what’s going on with the Israel-Gaza war. Was the Hamas attack on October 7 a trap for Israel? Does the US have any strategic interest in Israel’s actions? Does this conflict have the capability to become a larger regional war? Has DC finally realized that the war in Ukraine is lost? What are some of the issues that the US must deal with at home?

Monday, November 27, 2023

Judge Napolitano - Judging Freedom 11/27/2023

Interview with Colonel Macgregor

Examining the Ethical Gray Areas in Modern Warfare
On October 7th, a major mishap occurred that can arguably be traced back to an over-dependence on technology. Rather than relying on traditional military presence and old-fashioned human reliance, the incident saw an overuse of surveillance techniques. This shift towards a reliance on technology in warfare brings into focus the potential perils associated with it.

One of the most poignant parts of our discussion focused on the Israeli conflict with Hamas. The controversy surrounding the strategic choices Israel faces emphasizes the complexities inherent in ethical warfare. Balancing potential gains against potential losses, the conversation spotlights the consequences of various strategies, including some incredibly contentious ones. 

Interestingly, the discourse is not just confined to contemporary events. We delved into history, examining the standoff between Teddy Roosevelt and John D. Rockefeller over oil fields in the Middle East. This historical episode underscores the moral lines that ought not to be crossed, irrespective of perceived necessity.

Rockefeller’s ruthless plan to seize oil fields and Roosevelt's subsequent refusal presents a moral lesson for all times. Roosevelt’s stance is a stark reminder that vengeance, however tempting, is not the answer to conflicts. 

Drawing parallels between historical and current events, the podcast emphasizes the need for Israelis, and indeed everyone, to recognize the moral lines that should not be crossed, even in times of conflict and warfare. The case of Teddy Roosevelt and John D. Rockefeller serves as a mirror, reflecting back the ethical questions we must all ask ourselves as we navigate this era of technological warfare.

To conclude, the episode does not merely dwell on the dilemmas but also calls for introspection and action. It is a wake-up call for us to re-evaluate our reliance on technology in warfare, urging us to reassess the ethical implications of our choices.

The podcast episode underscores that in the quest for victory, we must not lose sight of our humanity. It urges us to remember that while technology can give us an edge in warfare, it should not be allowed to blur the ethical boundaries that underpin our moral compass.

The episode is an appeal to our collective consciousness to think critically about the complexities of modern warfare, the role of technology, and the tough moral questions it raises. It is an invitation to engage in a thoughtful and robust discourse on the ethical dilemmas of our time.

Backup Videos:

Thursday, November 23, 2023

Colonel Macgregor interviews Robert F. Kennedy Jr 11/22/2023

Full Interview Douglas Macgregor with Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

Backup Videos:

Stephen Gardner 11/22/2023


Dan Ball - Real America 11/21/2023

Dan Ball interviews Colonel Macgregor

Telling military personnel to avoid a pro Trump rally is an illegal order.

The senior ranks in our Military are horribly politicised.

For the last 30 years we have been picking people on the basis of everything but character, competence and intelligence.

Now your either picked because of your race, gender or acute lack there of.

Backup Videos:

Wednesday, November 22, 2023

Tuesday, November 21, 2023

Monday, November 20, 2023

Judging Freedom - Judge Napolitano 11/20/2023

Col. Douglas Macgregor: Forecasting Global Security: The Israel Question and WWIII

Colonel Douglas Macgregor takes center stage as we delve into the intricacies of global security and its intersection with the Israel question in a dialogue titled "Forecasting Global Security: The Israel Question and WWIII." Drawing on his extensive military expertise, Colonel Macgregor provides unique insights into the potential implications of the Israel question on the broader landscape of international security.

Backup Videos:

Sunday, November 12, 2023

Friday, November 10, 2023

Thursday, November 9, 2023

Natalie Brunell 11/8/2023

Are we on the brink of World War 3?

Col. Douglas Macgregor on Threat of WW3, American Dream vs. Foreign Empire, Financial System Risks

backup videos

Saturday, November 4, 2023

W Radio - 11/2/2023 Audio Only


There are those who benefit from the Israel-Hamas war: former advisor to the US Secretary of Defense Colonel Douglas Macgregor, former advisor to the Secretary of Defense of the United States, in dialogue with La W, presented his perspective on the war and the reason for the North American country's participation in it.

In the midst of the war between Israel and the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas, senior world leaders are analyzing solutions to this conflict in which it has claimed the lives of thousands of innocent citizens and does not seem to be coming to an end.

In this case, to talk about the issue, Colonel Douglas Macgregor came to the microphones of La W , who affirms that a negotiated agreement is necessary to stop the war in the Middle East, however, he assured that there are those who benefit from this conflict.

“Industries, specifically the world's top five defense firms, are making profits thanks to the war in Ukraine and Palestine, due to the contribution of the weapons that have been shipped. It is an important market because they receive money in exchange for weapons, hence there are those who want this war to continue," said the colonel.

Other countries would end up in the middle of the war between Israel and Hamas.

Colonel MacGregor assured in La W that, if the war continues as it is, other countries close to the area would end up immersed in the conflict.

"If there is no effort for Israel and Hamas to negotiate, it is very likely that the war will spread and involve other regions, because the Arabs, the Turks and the Iranians are shocked by the number of children killed in these raids, not to mention the other civilian deaths (…) Only a few Hamas leaders have died compared to the thousands of civilians, there is a lot of pressure from the governments of the region to intervene,” he explained.

Finally, he realized how harmful the unconditional support of the US Government can be for the Palestinians.

“ Netanyahu has the unconditional support of the United States and he can do whatever he wants, whatever he decides, and that is very dangerous. The president must put limits on Israel and that has not happened, he must condition the support ,” he concluded.

Original link:

Friday, November 3, 2023

The Great America Show with Lou Dobbs 11/2/2023 Audio Only


Col. Doug Macgregor says he wants to help Israel and wants to see them survive but we’re not acting in a way that would help Israel save itself. There are 90 million Turks, almost the same number of Iranians. Do we think 6 million Israelis will prevail? For the moment Israel is focusing on annihilating Hamas but it’s rapidly growing into a regional conflict. All of the Muslim Arab states from Morocco to Indonesia are upset with what the Israelis are doing in Gaza because they see it as disproportionate. Macgregor believes they’re reaching the point where they’re willing to take action collectively against Israel. Iran has an enormous arsenal capable of reaching all of Israel. Turkey could put 2 million men in the field with a naval fleet of more than 100 ships. Pakistan has said they would lend support to the Turks in the form of nuclear warheads. Egypt wants to put 200K on the border. Gen. el-Sisi doesn’t want war but he may not have a choice because his people are enraged and want to protect the Arab population in Gaza. Macgregor thinks we’re overwhelmed. The Israelis are in a very difficult position and should reconsider the wisdom of pressing ahead in Gaza. Israel is isolated in the region, The U.S. is their only friend and we don’t have the forces and very few war stocks. Macgregor says we’ve emptied almost everything into this pit called Ukraine. The war in Ukraine is lost. We’re trying to keep it on life support at the same time we’re confronted with a much larger, more dangerous situation. Macgregor believes Russia will stand by the Iranians and Turks so the best option for the U.S. and Israel is to work out a ceasefire.  

Backup Video:

Tuesday, October 31, 2023

Friday, October 27, 2023

Die Weltwoche 10/27/2023

Roger Köppel interviews Colonel Douglas Macgregor

Steak For Breakfast 10/27/2023 Audio Only

Episode 286 of Steak for Breakfast
We inch closer to WW3 in a conversation with Colonel Macgregor.

Colonel Macgregor's interview begins at the 1 hour and 39 minute mark.

Backup Audio: Edited to include only Colonel Macgregor's interview.

Tuesday, October 24, 2023

Redacted with Clayton Morris 10/23/2023

Israel tells Hezbollah that Iran would cease to exist if they attack the IDF in Gaza. Col. Douglas Macgregor joins redacted and warns we are watching Armageddon unfolding before our eyes.

Video Backup:

Tucker Carlson 10/23/2023

Ep. 33  Looks like we’re actually going to war with Iran. Are we ready for this?

Video Backup

Wednesday, October 18, 2023

Avoiding Armageddon - The American Conservative 10/17/2023

The U.S. must consider encouraging a ceasefire before stumbling into another complicated large-scale conflict.

Limited war is a form of warfare constrained by the exercise of deliberate restraint in the application of force and the pursuit of political-military goals that exclude annihilation. In Ukraine, all sides shared an interest in avoiding the use of nuclear weapons, and contrary to the Western narrative, Moscow’s goals were arguably confined to the destruction of hostile Ukrainian forces (“denazification”) and the establishment of a neutral Ukrainian state.

In the Middle East, the situation is very different. When Hamas fighters attacked Israel’s heavily fortified border at daybreak on October 7, the first wave of roughly 1,000 fighters advanced behind a curtain of rocket fire using motorcycles, pickup trucks, paragliders, and speed boats, Israeli forces were surprised. Ali Baraka, a senior Hamas official, said in an interview on October 8, “We made them think that Hamas was busy with governing Gaza, and that it wanted to focus on the 2.5 million Palestinians [in Gaza] and has abandoned the resistance altogether.”

In the days that followed, 3,000 fighters, including an unknown number from the Palestine Islamic Jihad (PIJ), penetrated Israeli territory, killing at least 1,300 Israelis and wounding approximately 3,500. Subsequent cross-border raids into Gaza revealed that some of the Israelis who were kidnapped were executed after entering Gaza.

The speed, coordination, and effectiveness of the Hamas operation was unexpected, but the horrific damage the Hamas fighters inflicted on Israel’s population was not surprising. Hamas exists for one purpose: to terrorize and kill Jews with the goal of destroying the State of Israel.

In response, Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declared war and mobilized 360,000 reservists to form an army of between 470,000 and 500,000. Netanyahu is obviously determined to impart a lasting object lesson, one that will crush Hamas in Gaza and probably eliminate any more talk inside the Palestinian population of a “two-state solution.” Having already pulverized Gaza from the air, the stage is now set for a battle of annihilation. The question is: whose annihilation?

Israeli rage is justified and widely shared by Americans. Like the Israelis, Americans are inclined to see terrorism through the lens of 19th-century piracy: “no quarter given, none expected.” In this total war setting, the Geneva Convention cannot apply to Hamas’s terrorist forces. But how long can the Israeli Defense Force (IDF) wage total war, depriving Gaza’s Arab population of food and water, without creating an enormous humanitarian disaster that will play for years in the news?

Can Hamas and its leadership be destroyed without killing large numbers of civilians who may hate the Israelis but have nothing to do with Hamas? Does it not serve Hamas’s purpose for the IDF to become bogged down in an open-ended, full-scale ground invasion of Gaza because the urban conflict will unavoidably entail loss of innocent life? Does it not seem ominous that Hamas is urging the population of Northern Gaza to remain in the ruins of the city?

Americans stand behind Israel, but many are unconvinced that killing more Arabs in Gaza will solve Israel’s security problem. Americans also have doubts about the Israeli government’s ultranationalist officials, Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich and National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir. These men are widely seen as emboldening Jewish extremists.

These questions and concerns may explain why Israel is rushing to carry the war into Gaza. If Russian forces arrive to help Egypt and Turkey establish a humanitarian corridor, there will be Russian and Turkish troops in Gaza to defend the distribution of humanitarian aid. Outpacing the arrival of Russians, Turks, and Egyptians makes sense.

These points notwithstanding, the Middle East today is very different from the Middle East in 1973. Technologies have altered the conduct of warfare, but more importantly, the societies and states of the Islamic world have also changed. Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, Iran, and Turkey are different in character from what they were in the 1970s. None of the states bordering Israel will tolerate population shifts that introduce large numbers of Palestinian Arabs into their societies. Europeans want them even less.

Iran’s national leaders have already called on Islamic and Arab countries to form a united front against Israel, but Iran’s influence in these matters is more limited than most Americans realize. Iranian military power is largely restricted to Iran’s use of proxy militias like Hezbollah and their cooperation with the Pasdaran, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. Iran is simply incapable of adding high-end conventional military forces to such a front. Tehran’s government also knows that the use of Iran’s formidable theater ballistic missile force against Israel risks almost certain Israeli nuclear retaliation.

The governments of Egypt, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, the Emirates, and Lebanon are very probably opposed to a general war against Israel, but their enraged populations could easily trap them into doing so. Scenes of celebration across the Middle East showing people waving Palestinian and Hamas flags, dancing, and singing in the streets are being shared on social media.

Turkey’s President Erdogan has offered to mediate between Hamas and Israel, but Erdoğan himself has warned that the war won’t just stop “in a week or two.” However, Turkey, a nation of more than 80 million, is the one actor in the region with the societal cohesion, martial culture, and military power to lead the Sunni Arab states in a confrontation with Israel.

In a regional war, Turkey can field large armies and air forces equipped with modern weapons, manned by disciplined and determined fighters. The advent of a regional Sunni Muslim alliance guided by Ankara and financed by Qatar resurrects the specter of advanced conventional warfare for the IDF, a form of warfare known to only a few of today’s IDF leaders.

Sadly, the region has not advanced much beyond the conditions described by Ramsay MacDonald, Britain’s Prime Minister in 1924 and again from 1929 to 1931:

We encouraged an Arab revolt against Turkey by promising to create an Arab Kingdom from the Arab provinces of the Ottoman Empire including Palestine. At the same time, we were encouraging the Jews to help us, by promising them that Palestine would be placed at their disposal for settlement and government, and, also at the same time, we were secretly making with France the Sykes-Picot agreement partitioning the territory which we had instructed our Governor-General of Egypt to promise to the Arabs. The story is one of crude duplicity, and we cannot expect to escape the reprobation which is its proper sequel.

Both the Jews and the Muslims continue to live inside civilizational conflicts that have defined Jerusalem since World War I.

With American offshore naval power, Washington is certainly poised to stumble into the conflict if it widens, but the use of American naval power will not end it. Although it is distasteful to the ruling political class in Washington, the Biden administration should consider taking the lead in supporting a ceasefire, even if it means cooperating with the Turks, Egyptians, and Russians to secure the arrival of humanitarian aid.

In Ukraine, Washington underestimated Russian resolve and military power. Washington should not repeat this mistake by underestimating the potential for a regional Muslim alliance that could threaten Israel’s existence. The possibility that Israel could end up like Ukraine should not be discounted.

Thursday, October 12, 2023

Thursday, October 5, 2023

Wednesday, October 4, 2023

The American Conservative 10/4/2023


Washington on the Knife Edge

Will faltering support for the Ukrainian cause at home and failures on the battlefield make the uniparty warmongers reconsider?

Douglas Macgregor
Oct 4, 2023
12:05 AM

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has gone from hero to zero in the space of a few months. The mélange of Western military equipment, from tanks to missiles, in the hands of courageous but unprepared and poorly led Ukrainian conscripts has failed to improve Ukrainian battlefield performance. The resulting hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians killed and wounded are reportedly inducing thousands of exhausted Ukrainian soldiers to surrender. Ukrainian soldiers are tired of dying, and their feelings are justified. 

Russian military power rests on the systematic integration of strike assets—rockets, missiles, artillery, drones, and aircraft—with space- and terrestrial-based persistent surveillance. Once Russian forces halted their advance and established a defense in depth in eastern Ukraine, the Russians’ accurate, devastating firepower began swatting the attacking Ukrainian ground and air forces like flies. In the words of a Ukrainian military official, “The sheer number of drones operating in Ukraine, as well as battle-management systems that provide real-time imaging and locations, mean that troops and tanks out in the open have just minutes before they're targeted.” 

Without any serious evaluation of Russia’s true military potential, particularly when committed to action on Moscow’s doorstep in Eastern Europe, Washington’s globalist-neocon leadership assured Zelensky that he and his government would have the financial and military backing of the United States and its NATO allies “for as long as it takes.” Like the Poles in 1939 who thought their flight to London had purchased protection from Germany and the Soviet Union, the Ukrainians swallowed the lies. Yet, geography has made it impossible for Washington to assert its dominance in Eastern Europe.

Thanks to the compliant and supportive Western media, Zelensky and his political backers in NATO promised mountains, but delivered molehills. Claims of Ukrainian battlefield successes from the popular “Ghost of Kiev” to the recovery of Bakhmut turned out to be flatulence on steroids. When NATO members met in Vilnius in July 2023, the mood had changed. Ukraine’s fate, let alone its membership in NATO, would be determined by the outcome of the Ukrainian Army’s celebrated counteroffensive.

As Ukrainian losses mounted and Ukraine’s counteroffensive failed catastrophically, things went seriously wrong for Washington, D.C. American political and military leaders callously criticized Zelensky and his senior military leaders for deeply flawed strategic decisions leading to heavy losses of men and equipment. The hunt for an exit strategy from Ukraine without openly calling it such was underway.

The behind-the-scenes split between the national leaders in the U.S. and Europe who embraced the myth of Russian backwardness and those who privately questioned the wisdom of backing one of the most corrupt regimes on the planet against a nuclear-armed Russia began breaking into the open. Viktor Orban, Hungary’s wise and canny prime minister, always rejected Washington’s assurances that Russia’s weakness meant certain defeat for Moscow. Now, more European leaders are adopting his policy stances. Why? 

Orban argues that the conflict between Kiev and Moscow “is not our war.” His insistence that Europeans should strive to “isolate it, separate it, prevent it from spreading further” now resonates with Europeans as it becomes painfully clear to more and more Europeans that Putin was not and is not interested in making Ukraine a part of Russia. Moscow’s strategic goal was and still is to prevent Ukraine from becoming a platform for the projection of American and Allied NATO military power against Russia, not to conquer Eastern Europe.

For many of the American and European critics of the dangerous fiasco in Ukraine, it is the breakdown in civil order across the United States and Europe, not Russia, that presents a clear and present danger to Western civilization, not Russia. As seen recently in Philadelphia, the lawlessness in America’s major cities is reaching a new boiling point. Americans want the U.S. judicial system to protect Americans and punish criminals, not mollify them. 

In Sweden, the breakdown in law and order is now so acute Sweden’s prime minister has called for the use of Swedish troops to restore order. Europeans and Americans know that the millions pushing through their borders are not asylum seekers or political refugees. The masses are being invited to dilute American and European national identity and culture, overwhelming the American and European capacity to assimilate them. 

In their haste to benefit from Washington’s proxy war in Ukraine, the West’s politicians, corporate bosses, hedge fund managers, and media moguls made a serious mistake. They cast their lots with the Washington uniparty; the radical left’s woke agenda and the globalists’ permanent proxy war against Russia. It was a serious miscalculation.

Washington and its allies are running out of ammunition, equipment, and domestic support for Ukraine. European armies are without exception boutique forces designed for low-intensity conflict. The Washington uniparty’s feeding frenzy at the public trough has left the U.S. Armed Forces in poor condition to fight enemies other than insurgents. Frankly, it’s a wonder that any young men with both brains and character would want to enlist and live inside today’s armed forces.

The stark truth is that the proxy war in Ukraine is lost, but the habit-forming drug of endless conflict overseas enabled by frenzied defense spending at home seems too strong for Washington’s uniparty to resist. Short of a miracle on the Potomac, Washington’s uncompromising globalist political ideology founded on fear—fear of alleged enemies abroad and fear of free thinking and free speech at home, will drive the Ukrainian nation to its total destruction. 

Thus, the descent of the collective West into a Hell of its own making continues. Washington and its NATO allies confront a distasteful choice: Acknowledge Moscow’s legitimate national security interest in Ukraine and end the bloodbath, or risk dragging Europe into a devastating regional war for which Europeans and Americans are not prepared.

"Zelensky is planning his eventual exit" JOACHIM SCHEFFER 10/4/2023


"Zelensky is planning his eventual exit"

04.10.2023 12:23 p.m

Volodymyr Zelensky owns substantial homes and bank accounts in the West. He is undoubtedly planning his eventual departure with these in mind, Douglas Macgregor said in an interview for Magyar Nemzet. The retired US colonel says Ukraine has already done all it can and that the war has entered the "Biden phase".

The Ukrainian counter-attack has failed to deliver what was hoped for, and the rainy weather of autumn is approaching, making it impossible to carry out ground operations. Could the Ukrainians be capable of one last major offensive in the coming weeks?

Kyiv's forces are exhausted. They can do no more than launch, small, limited attacks designed to create the illusion of remaining strength. Meanwhile, Moscow is building at least 200-300 kilometers of new rail lines according to open sources including imagery: one leg begins at Burne [in Donetsk] and terminates in Malovodne. 

This will shorten the distance from Rostov on Don to Mariupol, eliminating exposure to Ukraine frontline shelling.

The new line will run directly from Mariupol to Berdiansk on the coastline. The line will then run from Berdiansk to Melitopol. In summary, these improvements will provide redundancy to the rail logistics support to Donetsk by avoiding the Kursk bridge. Russian military rail lines (logistics) will be beyond the range of the [US] HIMARs, but still vulnerable to the [British] Storm Shadow, and, potentially, the [US] ATACAMS. However, this activity also suggests their ability to sustain an offensive on a much larger scale in the future. 

The first Abrams tanks have recently arrived in Ukraine. Can these, or even the F-16 fighters, make any difference?

No. Armies cannot be built on the fly. Armies require years of investment in human capital, as well as in force design, modernization, and training. 

Expectations of Ukrainian battlefield success were never realistic. 

In addition, the training and advice provided by NATO were a poor fit for the warfare in Eastern Ukraine. Russian military power rests on the systematic integration of strike assets—rockets, missiles, artillery, drones, and aircraft—with space- and terrestrial- based persistent surveillance. Once Russian forces halted their advance and established a defense in depth in eastern Ukraine, the Russians' accurate, devastating firepower began swatting the attacking Ukrainian ground and air forces like flies.

You recently said that "Biden's phase" of the war is beginning. What do you mean by this?

Ukraine has done all that it can do. The Biden phase means that Ukraine has become the 51st

state of the United States in a financial, economic, and military sense. 

There's a lot of talk about the "Ukraine fatigue", which is real and more serious than at any time since the outbreak of the war. Developments in Poland and Slovakia indicate this, and Washington is sending signals to Kyiv that unwavering support is under threat. Should Zelensky be worried?

Zelensky owns substantial homes in the West and has bank accounts to support them. I am sure he's planning his eventual exit with these things in mind.

How will the upcoming US presidential election campaign affect aid
to Ukraine?

Americans are rarely interested in anything beyond the borders of their country and, if consulted, would refrain from all overseas interventions and entangling alliances. Woodrow Wilson in 1917 and Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1941 had to maneuver Americans into war with Germany and Japan, two states with which the United States had enjoyed good relations for decades. Americans wanted nothing to do with either World War One or World War Two.

The situation is no different now. 

This time the potential for bankruptcy, and debt-fueled inflation, as well as the frustration and disappointment with the Biden administration's destructive policies, argue for an end to the conflict in Ukraine, adopting something similar to the Vietnam model. But it's premature to assume that rationality will prevail in Washington DC.

Friday, September 22, 2023

Wednesday, September 20, 2023

Elvia Politi and Sascha Picciotto 9/14/2023

Interview with Douglas Macgregor “The real question is not what we will accept but what the Russians will tolerate”

Interview by Elvia Politi and Sascha Picciotto

English Translation Below:

It’s been about 600 days since the SMO started, all NATO aids have proven useless and have been mostly destroyed. There is not much left in the stocks of all the European countries.
What are NATO’s chances of survival following these rates while running out of all our resources? Is this equipment replaceable and in what time frame? NATO tanks performance has not been up to par, what do you think will happen with U.S.-made tanks under combat conditions?

Equipment is only as good as the Soldiers manning it. In addition, no weapon system whether a tank, a mortar or an infantry fighting vehicle is effective if the operational framework for employment is unsuited to warfighting environment. Ukrainians are not adequately trained. They are not organized to fight properly with integrated air and missile defense, real-time intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance. The Ukrainian force, like NATO forces, is organized to refight a version of WW II. This is a recipe for certain defeat. NATO is in trouble. It was never designed for offensive warfare. Its original purpose was to deter Soviet Military Power from attacking Western Europe. After 1991, most US and European officers through the NATO Military Structure was designed to ensure no future wars would break out on European Soil. Events in the Balkans in the 1990s and NATO’s proxy war against Russia in Ukraine have altered the original purpose. At this point, alliances involving 32 Nation States with very different interests are unprecedented. Such a large, fragile grouping like NATO is unlikely to endure in the current environment.

If you had the same men and means at your disposal as you did in 1991, do you think you would be able to break through Russian lines?
No. See my books, Transformation under Fire (2003) and my recent work Margin of Victory (2016) for the reasons why. The West has systematically rejected the radical changes in force design, organization and modernization that are required to operate on the modern battlefield. (New technologies) 3) New technologies show that complex anti-tank systems are no longer needed to destroy a tank; a few thousand dollars drone is often enough. How will drones impact the warfare scenario of the future, given the results and conclusions that can be drawn after the blitzkrieg between Azerbaijan and Armenia, or the ongoing conflict between Russia and Ukraine?

New technologies show that complex anti-tank systems are no longer needed to destroy a tank; a few thousand dollars drone is often enough. How will drones impact the warfare scenario of the future, given the results and conclusions that can be drawn after the blitzkrieg between Azerbaijan and Armenia, or the ongoing conflict between Russia and Ukraine? Does the West have anything ready among its arsenals to be able to respond even minimally to Russian superiority?

Adequate air and missile defense including a range of air defense systems and radars must be integrated into the ground force to protect it from destruction in the current environment. At the moment, the Ukrainians confront conditions similar to the German Army in 1944-45. The Anglo-American forces had 5,0000 fighter aircraft in the air over their ground forces in France when the entire German Air Force was defending German cities against US and UK Bombers. German forces had no tactical fighter coverage or air support. As a result, German Formations could move only at night and never in daylight. Even then, movement was dangerous. This effectively robbed the German ground forces of the opportunity to maneuver. However, this did not lead to the end of tanks and supporting mobile arms.

We often talk about swarms of drones, new exoskeletons, new weapons, but is there anything concrete behind the U.S. industry or just million-dollar contracts that bleed taxpayers dry and fatten the military industrial complex? We could cite the F-35s. These are proposed to “partners” almost forcing them to buy them, despite dubious characteristics. At the moment, the coalition maintains air superiority but under non-simulated warfare conditions how long would our planes last against Russian air defenses and fighters? Does the West has any possibility to win if the conflict expands further?

Yes, the United States could also have lived with a neutral Ukraine. Ukraine’s principle strategic value was the distance a neutral Ukraine created between Russia and NATO’s Eastern Border. It worked to the mutual advantage of NATO and Russia. Unfortunately, the globalist-neocon leadership in Washington, London, Paris, Berlin, Rome and other European Capitals decided to exploit Ukrainian manpower and resources in a pointless war to destroy Russia and its government. Thus, the real question is not what we will accept, but what the Russians will tolerate. They would likely still tolerate a rump Ukraine that was neutral with a government that was not hostile to Russia. Whether that rump Ukraine is exclusive West of the Dnieper River or also includes some territory on the Eastern side is unknown.

In your opinion, could the United States accept a partition of Ukraine or would it be inclined to end this game at the expense of the Ukrainians, at any price, including neighboring European nations?
Do you think Europe will be involved more than it already is?

Drones of various types can be employed in volleys or small numbers against targets that lack air and missile protection. The Ukrainians lost their air and missile defenses over the last 12 months thanks to a systematic Russian campaign to eliminate them. Meanwhile, the Russians have developed and fielded dense, and effective integrated air defenses that would seriously weaken, even neutralize US and Allied Air Power. Remember, German air defenses between 1942 and the end of the war in 1945 shot down 18,000 bombers that tried to penetrated Germany’s homeland air defenses. Today, the West has too few aircraft to fight and defeat such a threat. The best way to fight Russian integrated air defenses is a combination of missiles and drones (unmanned aircraft) with advancing ground forces. The Israeli Defense Forces experienced similar problems in their fight against Soviet Air Defenses in Egypt during the 1973 war. In most cases, Egyptian Air Defenses were destroyed by Israeli artillery and tanks. I suspect the same would happen to Russian Integrated Air Defense today, but the operation would require thousands of missiles, rockets and drones, as well as robust ground forces protected by effective air and missile defenses as noted earlier.

In your opinion, could the United States accept a partition of Ukraine or would it be inclined to end this game at the expense of the Ukrainians, at any price, including neighboring European nations? Do you think Europe will be more involved than it already is?

Yes, the United States could also have lived with a neutral Ukraine. Ukraine’s principle strategic value was the distance a neutral Ukraine created between Russia and NATO’s Eastern Border. It worked to the mutual advantage of NATO and Russia. Unfortunately, the globalist-neocon leadership in Washington, London, Paris, Berlin, Rome and other European Capitals decided to exploit Ukrainian manpower and resources in a pointless war to destroy Russia and its government. Thus, the real question is not what we will accept, but what the Russians will tolerate. They would likely still tolerate a rump Ukraine that was neutral with a government that was not hostile to Russia. Whether that rump Ukraine is exclusive West of the Dnieper River or also includes some territory on the Eastern side is unknown.

Since the end of the Second World War, Italy is a vanguard against communism and has gone through tremendous phases of internal struggles. Today that there is no longer this distinction, red communists or blue capitalists, how are Italians viewed by our allies and masters, given the number of bases we host on our territory? Do we still have a strategic relevance or are we losing that too, after the economic one we already lost?

Italy’s strategic relevance lies with its central position in the Mediterranean and proximity to the Middle East. This is an unchanging condition. The U.S. Military views the strategic position as vital to the capability to project U.S. Power and influence. Americans, in general, like Europeans and they certainly like Italians. The real question is whether the Italian people want their country to host foreign forces that regard Italy as a platform from which to extend US military power and influence to other regions including the Balkans, Near East and North Africa. To date, the US presence has not invited war to Italian soil. However, changes in the technology of warfare have turned static bases of all kinds into potential targets that are increasingly difficult, if not impossible, to protect. This naturally includes U.S. Bases in Italy that depending on the warfighting scenario could come under attack.


Judging Freedom - Judge Napolitano 9/19/2023

Ukraine and American Decline w/Col Doug Macgregor

Saturday, September 16, 2023

The Ron Paul Liberty Report 9/2/2023

Douglas Macgregor - "Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse"

Which way America? What are the forces conspiring to bring us down and destroy our country? Former senior advisor to acting Secretary of Defense Doug Macgregor offers insights into what we can do to reclaim the Republic,

Glen Diesen 9/15/2023

NATO Escalates: The War enters a new phase - Colonel Douglas Macgregor and Glenn Diesen