Iran and Israel: The Questions We Need Answered

Summary

Podcast Summary: The Charlie Kirk Show – "Iran and Israel: The Questions We Need Answered"

Release Date: June 20, 2025

Host: Charlie Kirk
Guest: Sean Davis
Platform: The Charlie Kirk Show

---

Introduction

In the episode titled "Iran and Israel: The Questions We Need Answered," Charlie Kirk delves into the escalating tensions between Iran and Israel. Joined by guest Sean Davis, Kirk navigates through a series of critical questions surrounding the potential U.S. involvement in the Middle Eastern conflict, the effectiveness of military strategies, and the broader implications for American foreign policy.

The Current Iran-Israel Conflict

Charlie Kirk opens the discussion by highlighting the intensifying conflict between Iran and Israel, emphasizing the urgent need for clear answers to pressing questions. He expresses skepticism about the proposed military actions, particularly the use of bunker-busting bombs against Iran's nuclear facilities.

Charlie Kirk [00:38]: "We're about to involve America in another military operation in the Middle East, which might be the best decision... But we need answers."

Effectiveness of U.S. Military Action

A significant portion of the conversation centers on the potential bombing of Fordo, Iran's primary nuclear enrichment facility. Kirk questions the assumed efficacy of such strikes in permanently disabling Iran's nuclear capabilities.

Charlie Kirk [08:40]: "If Fordo is hit with an American bunker buster, will it totally take out Iran's nuclear capability? What is the percentage chance that it will?"

Sean Davis echoes Kirk's doubts, pointing out the unpredictability of military outcomes and the risks of escalation.

Sean Davis [08:07]: "Iran's leaders could have avoided this conflict had they agreed to a deal that would have prevented them from ever obtaining a nuclear weapon."

Trust in the Intelligence Community

Kirk raises concerns about the reliability of intelligence reports, referencing past instances where intelligence was misleading or inaccurate. He advocates for the reinstatement of a "Team B" approach—a second layer of intelligence analysis to verify the primary data.

Charlie Kirk [03:32]: "Our own intel community should probably be questioned and challenged because they're the ones now pushing to bomb Fordo."

Sean Davis adds that the intelligence community's track record, including controversies like Russiagate and the Hunter Biden laptop incident, has eroded public trust.

Potential Consequences of Military Action

The hosts explore the possible repercussions of military strikes against Iran, including retaliation that could jeopardize American lives. They discuss the deployment of American troops in regions vulnerable to Iranian ballistic missiles.

Charlie Kirk [08:40]: "How many American troops might die in Iranian retaliatory strikes?"

Sean Davis [25:03]: "We don't want to be accepting any American casualties. The best way to ensure that crazy regimes can't target our troops is not having them everywhere."

Regime Change vs. Nuclear Prevention

A contentious topic is the push from some U.S. politicians for regime change in Iran. Kirk and Davis debate whether the objective is genuinely to prevent nuclear proliferation or to dismantle the current Iranian regime.

Charlie Kirk [26:57]: "We most certainly need to have regime change in Iran. This is the same regime that's threatened America."

Sean Davis [19:44]: "What is the evidence that they are about to get nuclear weapons? Where does it come from?"

Lessons from Past Conflicts

Drawing parallels with historical U.S. military interventions, the discussion underscores the unintended consequences of regime change efforts, such as prolonged conflicts and refugee crises.

Sean Davis [27:53]: "In Iraq, after blowing it up and creating a disaster, leading to ISIS, we faced significant repercussions."

Potential for Escalation and Civil War

Kirk and Davis express concerns about the potential for the conflict to spiral out of control, possibly leading to a broader regional war or a civil war within Iran.

Charlie Kirk [32:30]: "What are the chances of a civil war if there's regime change in Iran?"

Sean Davis [32:30]: "These wars have massive consequences. We're not learning from history."

Refugee Crisis Estimates

The hosts discuss the potential humanitarian impact of regime change, estimating millions of refugees that could flee Iran, drawing comparisons to past refugee movements from countries like Syria.

Charlie Kirk [26:19]: "Where are they going to go? Pittsburgh? Springfield, Ohio?"

Leadership and Successors in Iran

A pertinent question revolves around the future leadership of Iran post-regime change. Kirk probes into who might succeed the current Supreme Leader and the potential shift in Iran's political landscape.

Charlie Kirk [27:53]: "Who is most likely to take power next if the Ayatollah is taken out?"

Sean Davis [27:53]: "We don't know. It's really kind of sad and discouraging."

Call for Transparency and Honest Dialogue

Both hosts advocate for greater transparency from U.S. leadership regarding Iran's nuclear capabilities and the strategic objectives behind military actions. They stress the importance of honest communication to rebuild public trust.

Charlie Kirk [34:40]: "How does someone get back to first principles here?"

Sean Davis [34:40]: "Tell us what you know, tell us how you know it, and just be honest."

Conclusion

The episode concludes with Kirk and Davis reiterating the necessity for the American public to demand clear, honest answers from their leaders. They emphasize learning from past mistakes and approaching the Iran-Israel conflict with caution, prioritizing national interests and global stability.

Charlie Kirk [35:31]: "We need to reconsider the premise of what they are being told... The very same people have been lying to you for the last five years."

Key Takeaways

• Skepticism About Military Efficacy: Both hosts question the effectiveness of bombing Iran's nuclear facilities and express doubts about the intelligence underpinning such actions.

• Trust in Intelligence: Concerns about the reliability and integrity of intelligence agencies highlight a need for independent verification mechanisms.

• Consequences of Regime Change: Historical precedents caution against unintended outcomes like prolonged conflicts and massive refugee crises resulting from regime change efforts.

• Need for Transparent Leadership: Emphasizing honesty and transparency from U.S. leaders is crucial for informed public discourse and decision-making.

• Focus on National Interests: Advocating for an America-first approach, prioritizing domestic stability over entanglement in foreign conflicts.

---

Notable Quotes:

• Charlie Kirk [08:40]: "If Fordo is hit with an American bunker buster, will it totally take out Iran's nuclear capability? And what is the percentage chance that it will?"

• Sean Davis [19:44]: "What is the evidence that they are about to get nuclear weapons? Where does it come from? What's the veracity?"

• Charlie Kirk [26:57]: "Is this clearly about nukes or removing a regime?"

• Sean Davis [33:53]: "We have to level with our government. Tell us what you know, tell us how you know it, and just be honest."

---

This episode of The Charlie Kirk Show provides a critical examination of the proposed U.S. strategies in the Iran-Israel conflict, urging listeners to seek deeper understanding and demand accountability from their leaders.

Transcript

[Charlie Kirk]

Hey, everybody. Charlie Kirk here live from the Bitcoin.com studio. Today in the Charlie Kirk Show. Israel, Iran, and a series of questions that no one has yet to answer. I think it's very important that you hear about this and these are questions that nobody really understands. But I think you should email us as always, freedomarliekirk.com and subscribe to our podcast. Open up your podcast application and type in Charlie Kirk show. That is the Charlie Kirk show podcast and again become a member today. Members.charliekirk.com, members.charliekirk. com Buckle up, everybody. Here we go.

[Sean Davis]

Charlie, what you've done is incredible here.

[Charlie Kirk]

Maybe Charlie Kirk is on the college campus.

[Sean Davis]

I want you to know we are lucky to have Charlie Kirk.

[Charlie Kirk]

Charlie Kirk's running the White House, folks. I want to thank Charlie. He's an incredible guy, his spirit, his love of this country. He's done an amazing job building one of the most powerful youth organizations ever created, Turning Point us. We will not embrace the ideas that have destroyed countries, destroyed lives. And we are going to fight for freedom on campuses across the country. That's why we are here. Noble Gold Investments is the official gold sponsor of the Charlie Kirk Show, a company that specializes in gold IRAs and physical delivery of precious metals. Learn how you could protect your wealth with Noble gold [e-mail] that is noblegoldinvestments.com it's where I buy all of my gold. Go to noblegoldinvestments.com I was out on assignment in Washington D.C. and one day, a month, a year, 10 years from now, I will tell you where I was and what I was doing. So you'll just have to infer and guess what I was doing. More importantly though, we have this ever growing conflict in front of us. The Israel, Iran conflict. Will the United States get involved? Will the United States decide to use bunker busting bombs? As I've said once, and I'll say again, President Trump has beyond earned our trust on all foreign affair issues. He took out Soleimani, he took out isis. He has bombed the Houthis. President Donald Trump has been a leader who is willing to use American military might where necessary, but not for prolonged conflicts. He's not a nation builder guy. He's not a let's change the population sentiment guy. There's only one nation that Donald Trump wants to build and that is America. He wants to rebuild this country with infrastructure, a border, rising wages to get rid of inflation, mass deportations. President Donald Trump is focused on pouring money back into America. He's focused like a laser beam on that. And President Trump has earned our trust on all things foreign affairs. So right now you have Lindsey Graham, you have James Lankford, you have Thom Tillis. They're calling for regime change. They're calling for regime change. But a step before that, almost the entire industrial media class right now is calling for a bombing of Fordo. Sounds good. But I think it's time that we get a couple answers. And we, the American people, deserve answers to this. Because after the 2020 election, after Covid, remember 2020, most secure election in history, everything was wonderful.

[Sean Davis]

Oh, really?

[Charlie Kirk]

We all know the truth there. How about COVID 6ft to slow the spread. Vaccine is safe and effective. Shut down the schools mask while you shower. Covid came from a bat. So we were lied to there by the mass media and lied to there by the intelligence agencies. How about Joe Biden's mental decline? Joe Biden's perfectly fine. He's perfectly fit. It's a deep fake. You're wrong. He's never been sharper. How about the Hunter Biden laptop? That is Russian disinformation that our own intel community signed a letter saying that it was Russian disinformation. Our own intel community did that. Well, I'm sorry. That very same intel community should probably be questioned and challenged because they're the ones that are now pushing to bomb Fordo. The very same intel community that told us that Covid came from a bat lab and the very same intel community that is telling us that was Russia. Russia. Russia was the biggest threat ever. You're going to have to earn our trust. You might be right. But you're going to have to earn our trust on this one. We are not going to blindly trust the intel community based on the track record of the last five years. 2020 election, most secure election in history. Covid six feet to slow the spread. Safe and effective. So before we commit to another military operation in the Middle east, we which might be the best decision, here are some questions that I'm curious about that I think that we need to have answered. Do you know that Ronald Reagan had Team B? He had Team A and Team B. Team B. I learned this from Steve Mannon. Team B was a totally independent intel group that would analyze the intel the President was getting to double check to make sure the President wasn't being crosswired by Team A. All of the the intel experts. This is necessary. I think President Trump needs team B immediately. Team B could be led by J.D. vance. You could have Amarylli Kennedy, you could have these incredible people that would double check what the intel agencies are saying to make sure that the President Trump's information flow is robust. And by the way, the President has such good instincts here, phenomenal instincts. I have no idea why the President all of a sudden is saying two weeks. Could it be that maybe he's just doing a little of a double beat? Maybe he just wants to make sure he gets all sides, no blind spots. Because these very same intel agencies, even though that we have great people now running them, we have not rooted out all of the cockroaches. These are the very same intel agencies that targeted him and did Russiagate and went and did a foreign dossier funded by the Democratic National Committee while they were lying about it, to go get a warrant against Donald Trump to displace him from becoming president. And President Trump hasn't forgotten that. That's why we must trust President Trump. But I have put together a list here, and it's a working list of some things that we, the American people, deserve to know. And if you get angry as I go through this list, I'm really suspicious as to why. We deserve answers to this. And maybe some of these things we don't know, maybe the answers are there's a high risk, we don't. And that's fine. That is an acceptable answer. Just be honest and tell us the truth. Because there were lies about the invasion of Afghanistan. There were lies about the Iraq war. There were lies about the Libya civil war. There were lies about the Syrian civil war. There were lies about what's happening in Ukraine. And so before we involve America in another military operation in the Middle east, which might be the right decision because Iran should not get a nuclear weapon, here are some answers to some questions. If Fordeau is hit with an American bunker buster, will it totally take out Iran's nuclear capability? What is an approximation chance that it will? Will the bunker buster actually work? And secondly, what percentage chance that it will take out the entire nuclear program of Iran? I was talking to some people and they said, oh, this, this will be the death blow of the nuclear program of Iran. Is that right? Because I actually don't think that's true. Because we're told right now that Iran is 15 days out from a nuke if they want it. Even after the Israeli strikes, even after the strikes that Israel has had. A week later, they're still 15 days out. Can we play that from the U.S. ambassador to the U.N. can we play that piece of tape, please, that we had. It's very powerful. 400.

[Sean Davis]

Iran's leaders could have avoided this conflict had they agreed to a deal that would have prevented them from ever obtaining a nuclear weapon. But they refused to do so, choosing instead to delay and deny.

[Charlie Kirk]

We can no longer ignore that Iran.

[Sean Davis]

Has all that it needs to achieve a nuclear weapon. All it needs is a decision from their supreme leader. That is unacceptable. And this council must urge them to change course.

[Charlie Kirk]

This is today. They're saying that to the UN 15 days after Israeli airstrikes. Has anything changed since the airstrikes? I know that there was uranium enrichment facilities that were bombed. I know that nuclear scientists were taken out. The New York Times is reporting today that the 15 day timeline from Israeli intelligence shows that even after all these airstrikes, they still might be able to get a nuclear weapon. So I will repeat. If Fordeau is hit, will it totally take out Iran's nuclear capability? And what is the percentage chance that it will? And if it doesn't work, what is the plan? Here's another very heavy question. How many American troops might die in Iranian retaliatory strikes? You know, I was talking to somebody that was, you know, watching cable news a lot and they're very on board for Ford O. I said, you know, American troops might die in response. They said, no, no, no, Iran doesn't have any missiles left. I said, well, no, that's not true. Actually. They have 2000 hypersonic ballistic missiles that are still reigning terror over Israel. And we should pray for the peace of Jerusalem as Iran strikes hospitals and There are over 40,000American troops within ballistic missile range of Iran. So what are the estimates? Because you better believe the American military and the intel community, they run war games and estimates. What are the estimates of how many American troops will die if Iran responds after we bomb Fordeau? So imagine a scenario where we bomb Fordo. It doesn't work. We tick off the Iranians. They then launch a ballistic missile at an American base, killing 100Americans. How do we respond? Do we respond then with more bombing? I thought this was about a nuclear program. That's a very important question. If American troops were to die in the response of the Iranian ballistic missile attack, what then would our response be? More escalation. Troops on the ground. And how many Americans would potentially die in such a strike? I am just beginning with this comprehensive list that we as Americans deserve answers to after we have been lied to so repeatedly. You better believe President Trump understands this better than anybody else. Hey, everybody, Charlie Kirk here by the time the show ends, another family farm will be shut down. Not because they stopped working hard, but because the meat in your grocery store isn't coming from them anymore. It's coming from overseas where safety standards are different and the quality is questionable. That's why I buy all of my meat and goodranchers.com it doesn't just sell meat, they guide you back to the source. To American ranchers, to real quality, to food you can actually trust. Unlike imported meat, all Good Ranchers products are 100% born, raised and harvested in America from local family farms. Now more than ever, you need to switch to Good Ranchers because Good Ranchers is tariff proof due to their 100% American supply chain. So while new tariffs make grocery store prices unpredictable, Good ranchers stay consistent. And if you subscribe to any Good Ranchers box today, you get your pick of free meat for life. That's Wagyu burgers, hot dogs, bacon or chicken wings in every box for the lifetime. For your subscription, if you use my exclusive code, Kirk at checkout, you'll get an extra $40 off your first box. Goodranchers.com American meat delivered so I do have a question. God forbid a single American troop, Diesel. God forbid. However, it is likely that the Iranians will retaliate if we bomb Fordeau with ballistic missiles at American bases. For those of you in the audience that want us to bomb Fordeau, what would be an acceptable number? If 1,000 Marines die, would that have you second guess? Now that is a very high estimate, but no one is being honest with us about estimates. Would 100 be acceptable? If 100 Marines died, would we just kind of say no more? By the way, that's not unprecedented. Remember Ronald Reagan had the barracks bombing in Lebanon and over 280 Marines died and Reagan pulled out. He was mocked by the neocons. But Reagan said there is no good option after this. 280 marines die and we're pulling out Somalia. Another option, another example, Black Hawk Down. Sometimes when a lot of American service members die, you back out. Now, it doesn't make you look overly strong, but it might actually be the prudent decision. What assurances can we have that bombing such a facility will result in no nukes for Iran? Will that end the program permanently? If not, what will? If that won't end the nuclear program, how long would it take to undo the damage? How long would it take for a country like Iran to build a nuclear program if they really truly wanted to? According to the US ambassador to the UN they could get it in nearly six weeks, 15 days. They have not been sprinting towards a nuclear bomb recently. So let's say that you bomb fordo. The Ayatollah is still alive. The country is in a very weak position. But because they're being bombed relentlessly, what if a more charismatic younger leader says, the number one priority is that we are going to want to bomb, to buy it, to build a nuclear bomb? What does that timeline look like? Does this eliminate the program for good, or does this just buy us time? Because I could tell you right now, a lot of the rank and file that I'm talking to, they said, this gets rid of the nuclear program for good. Pure annihilation. I don't think that's right. And if it just buys us time, what does it buy us time for? Exactly. And of course, we're clear. We don't want Iran to get a nuclear weapon. Nobody wants that. But is this a permanent death blow, or is this a. Hey, we're gonna purchase you guys two years. And if it. Again, if it buys you two years, is 100 troops worth two years? I don't know if Iran moved at max speed. What is the timeline to get a nuclear weapon? Another question. Have the Israeli airstrikes done anything to actually prevent their nuclear program? If so, what? Because it sounds like it hasn't. It sounds like they're all saying, well, they're still very close to a nuclear bomb. They've been bombing them for a week. They took out the nuclear scientists. They are bombing oil fields, they're bombing uranium enrichment. Has it derailed the nuclear program? And if not, what has the objective of this mission been? If this is a big if, if bombing fordo can't permanently destroy the nuclear program, will advocates of a limited intervention pivot. Pivot to immediately demanding a full regime change war? Because a lot of people are calling for regime change right now. Lindsey Graham, James Lankford, Thom Tillis. What does that even look like? Here's a big one, because you better believe the intel community has done this. They run these war games. One of the most important questions that we deserve an answer to, what are the refugee estimates of such regime change? A million? 5 million? It was 6 million in Syria. And Iran is nearly, I think, triple the size of Syria. So 18 million refugees. Well, that's nice. Where are they going to go? Pittsburgh? Springfield, Ohio? You break it, you bought it. They're not going to go to Tel Aviv. I can tell you right now, Israel, nor should they. Will they accept a single refugee? Where will they go? Berlin, Denver. Who is most likely to take power next if the ayatollah is taken out? Who's the frontrunner? Who's the Kalshi Poly market odds on favorite for being the successor to the Ayatollah. What do we know about him? Is he more moderate? Is he younger? Is he more religious? Is he more radical? It's Mojtabi Kahameini, Mochaba Khamenei. Okay, fine. The sun. Is he more moderate? Is he more radical? And if we take out that guy who comes after him? What is the line of succession here? This is an ideological regime. Boy, I have so many other questions here. And no one's saying this why? Guys, learn the lesson from COVID Learn the lesson from the 2020 election. Learn the lesson from the Hunter Biden laptop. Learn the lesson from Biden's health decline. You can always bomb tomorrow today, measure twice and cut once. And President Trump, he understands this. Hey, everybody, Charlie Kirk here. Brand new year. Brand new opportunities to change the world for the better. It's easier than you might think. You can save babies by providing ultrasounds with preborn. Together with the Sanctity of Human Life Month, we're going to save 35,000 babies to show the world that not only do we believe life is precious, but we're going to do something about it. Your gift of preborn will give a girl the truth about what's happening in her body so that she can make the right choice. What better way to start this new year than to join us to save babies? And $28 a month will save a baby a month all year long. A $15,000 gift will provide a complete ultrasound machine that will save thousands of babies for years and years to come and will also save moms from a lifetime of pain and regret. I am a donor to this organization, and you should be, too. Start this new year by being a hero for life. Call 833-850-2229 or click on the preborn banner at charliekirk.com that is charliekirk.com and click on the pre born banner. I'm a donor. You should be, too. Charliekirk.com Preborn Banner we have the great Shaun Davis here. Sean, welcome. You went very viral yesterday on X. And thank you for your courageous moral clarity on all of this. Not I don't like people. Oh. What side are you on? It's not a matter of what side I'm on. America's side I'm on seems civilization I can't stand. Iran. I hate the mullahs. I'm profusely pro Israel. I also have the battle wounds and scars the last five years of being lied to about the 2020 election, Covid Biden's mental health decline Hunter Biden laptop, all of that. And so I'm going through a list of questions here, Sean, and I just want to have you kind of go through this with me. So the other one, I asked this because I'm saying, like, here's the things we deserve answers to. By the way, President Trump's handling this beautifully because I think this one, who knows why he's pausing. This could be one of the main reasons. What are the chances of a civil war if there's regime change in Iran? Since the same people who pushed for Libya, Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan regime change are doing it again, what have they done to re earn our trust? Is this about nukes or is it about removing a regime? Sean, in the last week, it's gone from very interestingly, this is Israel's war and let Israel finish it. Great to America needs to do bunker busters to now some people are saying we need to do regime change. What exactly is the goal here?

[Sean Davis]

Yeah, we don't know. And that's what I find so frustrating because I lived through and watched the Iraq war run up. You know, they spent a year and a half telling us about all this intel they sent Colin Powell to the UN Congress, at least to its credit, mistakenly, in my view, obviously in hindsight, actually authorized it, which is apparently something we don't do anymore, is have Congress authorize or declare wars. But they spent a year and a half kind of working the public telling us all this stuff. Well, let's ignore that most of it was false. I feel like they're speed running through that propaganda campaign in the span of like a week right now. And I guess what I totally bothers me. I want to go back to the beginning. I absolutely don't want our enemies, people who want to kill us, to have nuclear weapons that they can use against us. But I want to go right back to the beginning. What is the evidence that they are one about to get nuclear weapons? Where does it come from? What's the veracity? And then number two, what ability do they have to attack us? So I think even before we get to regime change, which a lot of people have wanted for 40 years, let's just talk about like that baseline question. What's the evidence? And I don't feel like we've been given any at all. Just like in the Iraq war, It's being asserted. And, you know, it's not that I disbelieve everything that we're told. It's that I don't believe any of it, rather than just assuming, oh, yeah, it's coming. Coming from people who obviously wouldn't get stuff wrong. I just don't believe it anymore. Convince me, show me, don't tell me. And I don't feel like any of that's happening. And I find it really frustrating, having seen in the past where that leads.

[Charlie Kirk]

Well, so let's just take one of these pieces. So that's a phenomenal analysis. So somebody just emailed us. They said, charlie, we have to bomb Fordo because it will totally eliminate Iran's nuclear program. Actually, that's not true. Okay? And by the way, if it is true, then someone prove it to me, because we just had someone in front of the UN say, they're still 15 days out, they're still six weeks out from a bomb. So, by the way, if Fordeau is like a death blow and that's it, they'll never get a nuke like you have just eliminated it, then go make that case. But if that was the case, then why are they also simultaneously calling for regime change? And the Israeli government is doing that. And so, again, we have been so misled the last 20 years. Misled on Iraq, misled on Afghanistan, misled on the open border, misled on Covid, misled on the 2020 election, misled on Hunter Biden laptop, misled on Joe Biden's. You know, Joe Biden's perfectly fine. It's a bunch of deepfakes. So you and I are trained as outsiders to look at kind of this narrative war and say, whoa, whoa, it's been a crazy week. Let's take a pause. Let's take a breath. And we just need to make sure we're morally clear. Israel is a moral civilization. Iran is controlled by crazy ayatollah mullahs. No one has any moral confusion on this program. We're America first. We love America. We grieve when any innocents are dying. Okay, we get all those moral parameters there. But, Sean, I can't help but think that there's so many different components here. Like, for example, if Fordeau is hit with an American bunker buster, will it totally take out Iran's nuclear capability? And what is the percentage chance that it will?

[Sean Davis]

Yeah, that's a great fundamental question. And again, I completely trust President Trump and his judgment, and I'm so thankful. Thankful that he is president right now, doing all this and not all the other people, you know, in the past or who've tried to run for that job in there, because I don't think they would have withstood any of the hysteria or the pressure. I think they would have gone right in, tried to do regime change. And we're right back in the mire that we were in, in Iraq. So I'm thankful he's in charge. The problem is that, you know, a lot of these agencies, they're still run by the. The same kind of permanent bureaucracy, the deep state, whatever you call it. They've not exactly filled me with a lot of confidence. You know, for example, we had bin Laden, who, who was the architect of 9, 11, killed thousands of American people. It took us, what, 10 years to find that guy. He was living in Pakistan, like, next door to their. The equivalent of their West Point military Academy. We had no idea he was there. So I'm a little skeptical when I'm told that Fordo is the only source of uranium enrichment. There's. That's the only thing they have to worry about. They're 100% certain that if they take that out, there's no more nuclear threat. Okay, but what if that's not correct? What if there's somewhere we don't know about? What if they have other facilities? What if the bunker busters don't work? And I'm reminded of the. The timeless quote from foreign policy sage Mike Tyson. Everyone had to plan until they get punched in the face. And we seem to think that, you know, as long as we're the ones throwing punches, no one else is going to counterattack or counteract. And I'm really concerned if we go and do this and it's not immediately 100% successful, there are some really, really serious ramifications at that point. What if we don't take out the nuclear program? What if that causes them to race into producing something that they maybe hadn't thought of that creates a really, really dangerous, completely unstable, chaotic situation that will probably make us far more endangered than we are now. And it bothers me that nobody's actually talking about what we know and what we don't know and with what certainty we know or don't know anything.

[Charlie Kirk]

So, Sean, let's go through another one of these questions. How many American troops might die in an Iranian retaliatory strike?

[Sean Davis]

That's a great question. And I've seen some stuff from maybe it might have been the Pentagon or some other sources. And they said, well, yes, obviously Iran can't hit the U.S. mainland. They just don't have the ballistic missile capability, as far as we know. We could be wrong on that, but they're able to endanger troops in the area. And so I think, well, obviously that that's intolerable. My generally baseline kind of operating assumption is if something's not directly in our interest, if we're not directly threatened, I really don't want to be accepting any American casualties. But the best way to make sure crazy regimes or evil regimes can't target people around them is, you know, maybe we don't have troops everywhere around there. It becomes a lot harder to target our troops around the world if we don't have them everywhere around the world. And again, it's us having to relearn the lessons of Iraq. If we hadn't gone in there and blown it up and created a disaster of the whole thing, leading to ISIS and all kinds of horribles, there wouldn't be people over there to be getting harassed or shot at. And that's something that I don't think is discussed nearly enough. We kind of just take it as a given as if we have no control over where our people are and how close they are to being targeted.

[Charlie Kirk]

I think President Trump deserves enormous credit here that he's not getting from the media because the clamoring from Capitol Hill. Let's play some of these pieces of tape here. Do we have Lindsey Graham or Thom Tillis? I'm sure we do. We have endless clips here. And President Trump, he's not an isolationist, he's not an interventionist. He's something completely different. He's willing to use American force where necessary. We have dozens of these. Okay, how about this one? Thom Tillis, rock star play cut. 380 time for regime change.

[Sean Davis]

And I believe that this president should be given a fair amount of leeway.

[Charlie Kirk]

To affect that regime change. How about this one? 331? Do you think the United States should.

[Sean Davis]

Assassinate the Supreme Leader? If they can.

[Charlie Kirk]

The assassination of individual, any foreign dignitary or leader on this. But we most certainly need to have regime change in Iran. This is the same regime that's threatened America and Americans. This is the same regime that oppresses their own people, that they use the money that they get from oil money to be able to put towards terrorism, to be able to kill us and our allies. They chant Death to America in the streets. We definitely need a new regime there. So basically his answer is, yes, we should assassinate the Supreme Leader. So let me kind of go through my questions Again, what are the refugee estimates of such a regime change? And what are the chances of a civil war? Sean, what did the quagmires of Middle east tell you about when D.C. is calling, by the way? They have, like, they're safe, no shame. They haven't, like, gone to a PR agency and come up with, like, a new term, then regime change. They're just using the exact same term as if nobody's learned and nobody cares. Sean Davis.

[Sean Davis]

Yeah, it's really actually kind of sad and discouraging to see how many D.C. politicians on both sides have never found a war they're not willing to send other people's kids to die in. And I'm of the generation, the. The war on terror, Iraq war generation. I have friends who are over there who are injured, you know, spiritually, mentally, physically. You talk to a lot of them now, and they say, well, I look back now and what. What did we accomplish? We would go and, and pour out our blood and sweat and tears to take one little hamlet or village, and then a month later, we'd be pulled out and it would be back to where it was at the beginning. And that's not even getting into the brought up of refugees, you know, is our government was pushing Syrian civil war. Where did all those people go? They flee. They flee to Europe. They flee to the US when we had the fall of Afghanistan in place that we should have been out of 15 years ago, if not longer, we had all kinds of people, not good people, by the way, a lot of them terrorists flooding into here claiming asylum or refugee status. This always happens. And it's. You look back through history, whether it's the Middle east or whether it's through Africa, these wars have massive, massive consequences. And as Americans, we seem to just think that if we say or wave a magic wand of regime change, that we'll have western liberal democrats in there who will say all the things we have, and they'll have a thriving democratic republic like we do. And what actually happens is you end up displacing millions, if not tens of millions of people. You have refugee camps around the world. You have people coming in here by the millions, many of whom are impossible to vet and often mean us harm. It creates utter, utter chaos. And it is shocking to me, given what we've lived through. We're not even talking about having to go read a history book to learn its lessons. We all lived through the last 25 years, and to see so many people not learn a single thing from. It's insane.

[Charlie Kirk]

We just hit $37 trillion in debt yesterday. Okay. And some people in D.C. are clamoring for yet another regime change war. Why refi.com, private student loan debt in America totals about $300 billion. Why refi has been an amazing partner of us and it's only getting started. They were a huge supporter of our Young Women's Leadership Summit. Game changer. Largest ever. Go to yrefi.com that is yrefy.com you don't have to ignore that mountain of student loan statements on your kitchen table anymore. Yrefi offers a 3 minute rate check without any credit impact. Go to yrefi.com let's face it, if you have distressed or defaulted private student loans, nobody is coming to bail you out and bankruptcy is not an option. But you could take charge of your situation by contacting yrefi. Go to yrefi.com that is yre f y.com that is yrefi.com Many clients are not able to even make the first monthly payment on their private student loans when they contact yrefi. Go to yrefi.com Again, they don't care what your credit score is. You got to check it out right [e-mail] whyrefi is not a debt settlement company and they work with each borrower individually, tailoring each loan. Each borrower's specific situation you will not be calling a faceless call center. Go to yrefi.com that is yre f y.com I wish it was as easy and simple as it is being presented. Maybe it is. Probably isn't. In a country as old and proud and grand and ancient as Persia, it's probably not so easy as you just drop a couple bombs on a mountain and today you go away. Usually when things are presented in simple terms in foreign policy, they're usually wrong. That's one of the biggest takeaways of the last 100 years. These things tend to be infinitely complex, very deep, and the potential for mass escalation. So the complexity of this is enormous, Sean. And I think the President has been incredibly prudent and restrained with high rhetoric, but also understanding that once you involve yourself in Fordeaux, the on ramp for escalation is rather significant. So, Sean, of all these questions that you and I have, what is in the process and the best way for the American people to get answers? And should we trust Lindsey Graham and the people associated with when it comes to all things Iran?

[Sean Davis]

Yeah, I think the only thing we can trust Lindsey Graham to do is push wars that he's not gonna have to bear the burdens or consequences of. I think as American people, we have to do the thing that we always do, which is help our government and our representatives understand. You represent us, you represent our needs and our concerns, and you have to level with us and be honest with us. You can't just come out there and say, trust me, we've got the intel, it's right this time, we gotta go. Because the thing is, the American people, like, we're a pretty trusting people, we're pretty open. We have zero appetite for being threatened or attacked by anyone. I think your average American is far more Jacksonian in their foreign policy outlook than anything. They don't really want to be enmeshed or entangled in foreign affairs or with foreign countries. But when it comes to defending ourselves, they want to be able to do it. And so I think our government just needs to be very clear eyed and honest with the people. Here's what we know, here's what we don't know, here's what we think the best course of action is, and then listen. And one of the things I love about Donald Trump is he's got his own internal instincts, he's got his own political compass and radar. But the man listens, like minute to minute, day to day. He listens probably better than any politician we've had in modern memory. And I know that if people start telling him what they want, what they believe, what they think they need, he listens.

[Charlie Kirk]

Yes, he does. And he is acutely aware of all the dynamics at play here. He's a phenomenal listener, and it's one of the main reasons why he has developed such great instincts over his entire career. In closing here, Sean, you and I both have seen nothing but lies and deception and misleading. Isn't it important for the audience to reconsider the premise of what they are being told? I encourage everybody here and by the way, the premise might be right, but let's try to go down to first principles. Right? Go back down to first principles. And please understand, the very same people that have been lying to you for last five years about all the other stuff very well might be lying to you again. How does someone get back to first principles here? Sean?

[Sean Davis]

Yeah, I think the best thing to do is start at the very bottom. What do we know? What do we not know? Are we at risk? Are we not at risk? What are the likely consequences of doing things? What are the consequences of not doing things? I think this is a conversation we need to be having with Our representatives, both in Congress and in the White House. And the best way for these institutions to get their trust back, which they've destroyed over the last 25 years, is to level with us. Tell us what you know, tell us how you know it, and, and just be honest and level with us as opposed to this tell, don't show thing that is still going on now, which I personally find maddening. Like we don't trust these institutions. It's not that we always assume they're lying. It's not that we disbelieve them. It's that we don't believe you automatically. And that is a major, major problem when we're discussing things as weighty as war and life and death.

[Charlie Kirk]

Sean, excellent work everyone. Check out the Federalist. He's been great on X. Thank you so much.

[Sean Davis]

Thank you.

[Charlie Kirk]

I wanna just repeat some of these because I think it's very important. If bombing Fordeau can't permanently destroy the nuclear program, will there be a pivot towards full regime change? What is the plan and the process for that? Is this clearly about nukes or removing a regime? What role do the Iranian people play here? Oh, here's another really good one. Can we get third party analysis not from talking points on the media. What is the best on the ground sentimentality of the Persian people right now? Because it's mixed. I opened up a whole TikTok where I said, hey, if you're in Persia, send me a message. Now, some of it could be fake, some of it looked very real based on IP addresses. But a lot of the people emailing said that sentiment has turned more against America and that people actually are less likely to rebel because they're tired of being bombed. It's actually creating consolidation. That could be propaganda, of course, but we should also let misstest that as well, right? Thanks so much for listening, everybody. Email us. As always, freedom. Charliekirk.com thanks so much for listening and God bless.

[Sean Davis]

For more on many of these stories and news you can Trust, go to charliekirk.com.