The World According to Trump (w/ Col. Lawrence Wilkerson) | The Chris Hedges Report

Summary

The Chris Hedges Report: "The World According to Trump" Summary

Release Date: November 8, 2024
Guest: Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson

Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Chris Hedges delves deep into U.S. foreign policy under the Trump administration with Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson, a retired military official and former Chief of Staff to Secretary of State Colin Powell. Their extensive conversation covers a range of critical topics, including the internal conflicts within the Pentagon, the ramifications of Christian nationalism, the ongoing crises in the Middle East, the strategic failures in Ukraine, and the intricate dynamics of the U.S.-Israel relationship.

---

1. Trump's Election and Its Impact on U.S. Foreign Policy

Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson begins by analyzing the deep-seated animosity that Donald Trump evokes within the Pentagon and the broader intelligence community. He attributes this hostility to Trump's divergent strategic appraisal, which contrasts sharply with the establishment's perspective.

"I think the animus was created within my community."
— Colonel Wilkerson [03:12]

Wilkerson emphasizes that the military establishment fears Trump's unpredictable approach and his willingness to challenge entrenched systems, particularly regarding China and NATO commitments.

---

2. Christian Nationalism within the Military

A significant portion of the discussion centers on the rise of Christian nationalism and its infiltration into military ranks. Wilkerson expresses concern over factions within the military that support the establishment of Christianity as the national religion, potentially leading to authoritarianism.

"They really, they have flag officers in the military who were very much Christian nationalists."
— Colonel Wilkerson [06:53]

He cites instances like the involvement of Mikey Weinstein's Military Religious Freedom Foundation and remarks on high-ranking officials exhibiting behaviors aligned with Christian nationalist ideologies, thereby unsettling the secular foundation of the U.S. military.

---

3. Diverging Policies on Ukraine

Wilkerson critiques the Trump administration's stance on Ukraine, highlighting Trump's apparent detest for NATO and his desire to reduce U.S. involvement in international alliances.

"He sees NATO as being, and he's right in this, as big an aider and a better Brussels is of the war in Ukraine as Washington is led by that perfidious Albion London."
— Colonel Wilkerson [12:35]

He forecasts that Trump's policies could undermine Ukraine's defense against Russian aggression, potentially leading to prolonged conflict and strategic setbacks for the U.S.

---

4. War Gaming and the Feasibility of a Conflict with Iran

Exploring potential military confrontations with Iran, Wilkerson discusses war games that predict disastrous outcomes for U.S. forces, primarily due to outdated strategies and insufficient preparedness.

"He war gamed it with the lieutenant general in the Marine Corps who took great censure from his own buddies in the Pentagon. He was retired at the time, but he used to be my boss when I was down at the Quantico War College and he said we would lose."
— Colonel Wilkerson [27:26]

He warns that an aerial bombing campaign, akin to past U.S. efforts in Iraq, would be ineffective against Iran's robust air defenses, potentially escalating into a full-scale, costly war.

---

5. The U.S.-Israel Relationship: A Strategic Liability

A contentious topic is the characterization of Israel as a strategic liability for the United States. Wilkerson argues that Israel's aggressive military actions and uncompromising policies in the Middle East create significant geopolitical risks.

"A total liability, a strategic liability of the first order."
— Colonel Wilkerson [37:37]

He references historical incidents, such as the attack on the USS Liberty, to illustrate the deep mistrust and problematic aspects of the U.S.-Israel alliance. This strained relationship, he posits, complicates America's strategic interests in the region.

---

6. Genocide in Gaza and U.S. Military Support

The discussion shifts to the humanitarian crisis in Gaza, with Wilkerson holding the U.S. accountable for the extensive military aid supplied to Israel, which he believes directly contributes to violence and civilian casualties.

"We share 50, 50 responsibility for every death in Gaza and for that matter in Lebanon too."
— Colonel Wilkerson [38:33]

He critiques the disproportionate allocation of munitions to sustain Israel's military campaigns, emphasizing the ethical and strategic implications of such support.

---

7. Economic Concerns and National Debt Under Trump

Wilkerson expands the conversation to the broader economic challenges facing the U.S., particularly the burgeoning national debt and its unsustainable trajectory.

"Our aggregate debt is also saying that. CBO released a report saying it's $50.2 trillion in a decade, decade and a half... It's going to be 2 trillion."
— Colonel Wilkerson [53:02]

He warns of a looming economic crisis exacerbated by unchecked fiscal policies, which he believes will culminate in severe financial instability during Trump's administration.

---

8. Conclusion: The Future of U.S. Foreign Policy

Throughout the episode, Wilkerson presents a stark view of Trump's potential second term, highlighting the administration's departure from traditional foreign policy approaches. He underscores the risks of internal divisions within key institutions, the perilous stance towards international alliances, and the ethical quandaries of military support that exacerbate regional conflicts.

---

Notable Quotes:

• "I participated in a hoax on the American people, the international community and the United nations and Security Council." — Colonel Wilkerson [00:10]
• "Trump is a transactional. I want the money man." — Colonel Wilkerson [21:46]
• "We can't sustain that under anybody's rules of gerrymandering the financial system in the world or whatever. We just can't stand that." — Colonel Wilkerson [53:02]

Final Thoughts:

This episode of The Chris Hedges Report offers a critical examination of Donald Trump's foreign policy, shedding light on the internal conflicts within the U.S. military and intelligence communities. Wilkerson's insights provide a sobering perspective on the potential consequences of continued support for militaristic allies and the overarching threat of economic and geopolitical instability.

Transcript

[Chris Hedges]

Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson, retired and former Chief of Staff to Secretary of State Colin Powell, is a Vietnam War veteran who attended Airborne School, Ranger School and the Naval War College and who is a helicopter pilot in Vietnam. Logged over a thousand hours on combat missions. He went on to serve as Deputy Director of the Marine Corps War College at Quantico and was Executive Assistant to Admiral Stuart Ring, United States Navy Pacific Command and Director of the United States Marine Corps War College. His disillusionment with the trajectory of US Foreign policy in the Middle east followed the revelations of detainee abuse, the ineptitude of post invasion planning for Iraq, and the secretive decision making by the Bush administration that led to the invasion of Iraq. At a congressional hearing recorded on C span in June 2005, he gave his analysis of the Iraq war's motivation as quote, I use the acronym oil, he said, O for oil, I for Israel, and L for the logistical base necessary or deemed necessary by the so called neocons. And it reeks through all their documents the logistical base whereby the United States and Israel could dominate that area of the world. Wilkerson has said that the speech Colin Powell made before the United nations on February 5, 2003, which laid out a case for war with Iraq, included falsehoods of which he and Powell had never been made aware. My participation in that presentation, he said at the UN Constitutes the lowest point in my professional life. I participated in a hoax on the American people, the international community and the United nations and Security Council. He called the UN presentation probably the biggest mistake of my life. He has taught at the College of William and Mary and George Washington University. He's a senior fellow at the Eisenhower Media Network, a group of former military, intelligence and civilian national security officials who describe themselves as offering an alternative analysis untainted by Pentagon or defense industry ties and countering Washington's establishment narrative on most national security issues of the day. Joining me to discuss U.S. foreign policy, the conflicts raging in the Middle east, including the genocide in Gaza, the Ukraine, the fate of the American empire, and of course the election of Donald Trump is Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson. Let's begin with the election and its effect. I mean, you saw the intelligence community, Milley, all sorts of figures essentially join the Democratic campaign in support of Kamala Harris. Let's talk about why Trump triggers such deep animus within the Pentagon and the intelligence community and what you see happening during a second Trump administration.

[Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson]

I think the animus was created within my community. Anyway, I still call it that the Pentagon, the military in general, because they don't see any concerted effort on his part to express a strategic appraisal that agrees with theirs, theirs being the one most parroted by the New York Times, for example, and others of their ilk, who are simply spokespersons for the military industrial complex and for the national security state, which we have most assuredly become. And so they're worried about anyone who would come in and threaten to break the China. And that's what Trump, that's what his forte is, is threatening to break the China. And they are very protective of their China, just as are the national security agencies in general. And the 16, I guess it's 16 now, entities that we have that are supposed to be our intelligence eyes and ears, led by the CIA, not led by the dni, because he still has no real power over the CIA, but led by the CIA. I would say Bill Burns is the most powerful guy in the United States with regard to intelligence and what goes to the White House and what doesn't go to the White House. So that's part of the reason they just don't know this guy except from the first term. And the first term would not, through Kelly and Millie and other people's eyes, give you much hope if you were a Pentagon member of the, of the bureaucracy, if you will. The second reason, I think, is because he's so mercurial. He's all over the map. And the military doesn't like that at all. They like constancy, even if it's incorrect constancy. They prefer constantly to change and mercurial nature. And I think that's a problem with them. And there's a third reason, too, and that is that they're worried about what I call Christian nationalism. Some of them anyway, others are aiding and abetting it. And what that means, in essence, is not just this far flung but very ripe and alive effort by certain Christian groups in America to make Christianity the national religion, to change the Constitution in that effect, or to discard the Constitution with regard to religion. But they're worried that they really, they have flag officers in the military who were very much Christian nationalists. We have an occasion right now that we're looking at, at the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, Mikey Weinstein's group out in New Mexico, where the desper, the three star general who is the chief of personnel, the personnel man for the chief of staff of the army, is married to a woman who rolls in the aisle and speaks in tongues. And Mikey's obtained video of the, this general in uniform being at one of her gatherings with this group, that's just the surface, if you will. There are people like General Flynn, for example, who are still in the military. So that's disconcerting for the bulk of the military that doesn't subscribe to this theory or this desire to do away with the Constitution when it comes to freedom of religion. Those things are bothering them. And Trump has shown a propensity to use the Christian movement in this country for political gain and to not have much in the way of regard for what that might mean otherwise. So that's disturbing.

[Chris Hedges]

Yeah. I graduated from Harvard Divinity School and wrote a book on the Christian right a little over a decade ago called American the Christian Right and the War and America, of course. No Mikey's work. Well, let's just unpack that. Why do they see Christian nationalism. That's interesting that you raised that as an issue. Why do they see that as such an important issue? Just explain in their vision, and perhaps yours, how that could roll out in a really negative way.

[Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson]

You're talking about the way the military looks at it, at least those who aren't. Yeah, I think they're most concerned about it in terms of what it might mean for the tyranny that would have to come along with it. And they're having to enforce that tyranny because if you make Christianity the national religion, and that's their ultimate goal, is to, you know, not just put Bibles in classrooms and stop abortions completely, not those social issues that always loom up and paint them with their brush. The secret that they want no one to know until it happens is they do want Christianity to be the national religion in that regard. We even have a branch of American Catholics who are working on this. If you look closely at what's happened in the last 50 years, in particular with the Catholic Church. My wife was Catholic, so I'm aware of some of the things in the Catholic Church that I wouldn't have been aware of had she not been. She's passed away now. But if you look closely at it, there is this behind the scenes movement in America to create an American Catholic Church. We don't like it being in Rome, its head being in Rome. We don't like Francis in particular. We despise Francis. And when I say we using a rhetorical device to describe these people, we'd like to have our own Pope and our own Catholic Church. And there are people, some would say one or two on the Supreme Court right now are of that mind too, and would work for that or might be working for that. Were they given the occasion to do so? You put that together, that Roman Catholicism, Opus dei, like Roman Catholicism, and the other people who are, for example, like John Hagee, funding millions of dollars to west bank settlers in Israel even now, and you've got a real fear on the part of rational military people, this might get out of hand.

[Chris Hedges]

Be more specific. In what way?

[Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson]

If you make Christianity the national religion and you do all the things that you would have to do constitutionally and otherwise, or just totally disregard the Constitution in that process, but you get, as we have just seen, probably enough Americans behind you to do it, then you have a whole different ballgame for the military, because the military then is called on domestically and otherwise. And most Americans don't understand the domestic missions that the army in particular, but the military in general has to defend that, and they don't want to. They think that's fractious. They think that's unconstitutional. They think that's something that would cause more harm than good. And I'm glad to say that there are still some people like that left in my military.

[Chris Hedges]

Well, that. I mean, Trump has an ideological void, of course, but we saw in his first term that he filled it with these Christian nationalists or Christian fascists. Betsy DeVos, Mike Pence, Bill Barr and others. Certainly it appears that they will fill that void again. I want to talk about Ukraine.

[Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson]

Let me. Let me add one other thing. This is not just Trump. Remember, I served in the George W. Bush administration. I cannot tell you how many times I had to deal with the White House personnel office over such things as, this man can't go to Iraq. Why can't he go to Iraq? Why can't he serve in Iraq? He's not a Christian. Oh, talk about counterintuitive.

[Chris Hedges]

Talk about Ukraine. I mean, Trump has deviated from the establishment consensus on Ukraine. I never understood. Perhaps you can unpack it for me, the whole Ukraine policy, other than as a kind of proxy war to degrade the Russian military and isolate Putin. I was in East Germany when the Berlin Wall came down. As a reporter. I was there when the promises were made to Gorbachev not to extend NATO beyond the borders of a unified Germany. And of course, as you know, the Soviet Union had to acquiesce to the reunification of Germany. And that was the promise made. And then we kind of. I'm not defending the invasion, obviously, of Ukraine, but we certainly baited the Russians and Putin. But. But let's talk about Ukraine. I don't see how any military strategist seriously could think that In a war of attrition, the Ukrainians could dominate. But explain what's happening and then how you see if there is going to be a difference, how you see a difference in a Trump administration's policy towards Ukraine and Russia.

[Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson]

Let me say first, I was there too. I was special assistant to Chairman Powell. And the change that took place with the advent of Bill Clinton was absolutely disastrous. And I attribute to William Jefferson Clinton a lot of the problems we're living with today, including the violation, major violation of that promise not to expand NATO. That's a longer story, better enough for another time. I think what we're looking at in Ukraine vis a vis Trump or Trump vis a vis Ukraine is his. And I think Doug McGregor, for example, is right about this. I just watched him on Judge Napolitano show is his disdain for war. I think it's genuine. I don't think he likes war. I don't think he likes starting wars. I don't think he would be a president who he'll go off and kill someone like the Iranian IRGC member or other people whom he's told are terrorists or whatever. But I don't think he wants war quay war. And so he's willing to shut down Ukraine. Now. There's another reason, too. I think he detests NATO for different reasons than I. I don't like NATO much either. I think it's well beyond its sell by date. And he sees NATO as being, and he's right in this, as big an aider and a better Brussels is of the war in Ukraine as Washington is led by that perfidious Albion London. And so he wants to shut that down. And I think his ultimate goal is to not abandon NATO perforce, but he wants to get the United States out of its relationship with NATO, which is he thinks we pay for everything. We do all the heavy lifting. They do very little. Come back to the United States, as it were, and say you've got our nuclear envelope. But everything else you do because we're not with you anymore and of course save the money that that saves too. I think that's part of his. I think it was part of his first term and he just didn't get to do it the way he wanted to do it. So those I think are the major reasons that he will be positive with regard to Ukraine because you're right, Ukraine is a disaster right now. And most apparently for Ukraine. They're dying by the dozens every day now and they have no people left. They're having difficulty. They're Having to impress young people, bring them into the military to get them to fight. And they're lucky if they don't desert within the first week, because either going over to the Russians or running away wherever they can go, it's a disaster. And we've got. We don't have generals in the Pentagon saying this now. We have Lloyd Austin. He's right there with Joe Biden. But we don't have generals in the Pentagon, in my view, anyway, who are expressing these kinds of views that generals on the outside are expressing, like David Petraeus and Barnes and other generals who are saying, well, Russia's losing. They're lying through their teeth. They're lying through their teeth. Either that or they're just stupid and incredibly dumb, really. Not just stupid. So I think Trump would shut that down, and I'm looking forward to that. I hope he does. I hope he shuts it down forthwith.

[Chris Hedges]

Well, they should have read the history of Germany's invasion of the Soviet Union. Stalin would send out a million men who would either get captured or die, and then he just send out another million, kind of the Putin strategy.

[Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson]

And people don't realize that the Vermont right after it invaded, really the first 14 months began to lose almost immediately.

[Chris Hedges]

Yeah.

[Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson]

Partly because of its rapine. As it moved along, it made enemies of everyone in its path. Even Napoleon wasn't that stupid. And partly because they overextended and partly because the rule of thumb that Hitler thought would work, his food minister told him it would work, that all that food coming from Ukraine and the steps of Russia would feed not only the Vermont forces going that way, but Germany, too, didn't come true.

[Chris Hedges]

Yeah, that's because the Russians destroyed everything in a scorched earth policy. We can do another show on World War II, which I have an obsession with, but he also split his forces because of Stalingrad. Let's talk about the Middle East. What will be the difference between a Biden administration and a Trump administration vis a vis the genocide in Gaza, in Lebanon, the attacks in Lebanon, which isn't. Which I want you to talk about, because they're not going particularly well for Israel. And then this knife's edge we're sitting on between Israel and Iran.

[Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson]

I could get very complicated and complex here and try to describe what I think is going on over there. And I've made as much of an effort as probably anyone in this country to keep up with it. But let me just say right now, what I'm concerned about with Trump coming in, I'm concerned about something happening between the time that this is all consolidated, which won't be long apparently, and the inauguration and what the Biden administration does.

[Chris Hedges]

Well, just let me interrupt you, Larry. What do you mean by consolidated?

[Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson]

Well, there's going to be some court cases and other things, I'm sure, but it's going to be pretty quick, I think because the margin of victory is so great, may look razor thin, but it's pretty great from what I've seen, popular vote and electoral college. So all those things that the election task force I was a member of, for example, were worried about with a razor thin margin aren't going to happen. So we're going to get, we're going to get satisfied and the votes to the Electoral College and the process complete pretty quickly, I think. I don't think the Democrats will be like the Republicans would be had it been the other way around. And I'm a Republican, so I can get away with saying that I'm worried about what's going to happen because I think Bibi is still intent and firing of Galat was indicative of this par excellence. He's still intent on going after Iran, but he's intent on the United States going with him. And the force deployments that we've made, the force deployments we are making right now, the number of troops we're sending actually to Israel right now indicates to me that we are cognizant of this fact. We might not be yet ready to go along with it, but we are cognizant of it to the point where we're putting the forces in place that we think will be necessary. I think we're wrong. I think we're going to get our rear ends handed to us. If we do what Netanyahu wants to do with regard to Iran, which is a full bore war, we're going to find out how weak we are when, when we do it. If Iraq and Afghanistan weren't sufficient, this will certainly seal the deal. But I'm worried about this interim period and what the Biden administration might actually do in this interim period. Not just to do what Bibi wants them to do and what I think Joe Biden is inclined to do, but to mess Trump up. I mean, what better way than the inauguration takes place while we're involved in a huge war in the Middle East? And it would be a huge we go at it big time the way BB Wants and we discover immediately that we can't do what we think we're going to do in a short period of time. It's the Old bugaboo again, you know, air power. Air power. Air power is not going to defeat Iran. It is not going to. It's not going to stop their nuclear program. It's not going to defeat them. So you wind up with a choice. You either invade or you stop. And that's not much of a choice. Very bad choice, as a matter of fact.

[Chris Hedges]

My understand, My understanding is the Pentagon was always reticent. They did not want. They blocked. It was a huge push in the interim between Bush and Obama to go to war with Iran. And my understand you know more about it than I do. My understanding is the Pentagon just said, absolutely not.

[Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson]

They are saying that now. But, you know, you wonder how long that resistance can hold up if the president of the United States is intent on. And this is the one place where Trump really worries me, doing everything in his power for Israel. And Trump has made it quite clear that that's his policy, that's his belief, and I think he's being honest about it. Of course, there's the APAC business and the money involved. And Trump is. If, if anything, Trump. Trump is a transactional. I want the money man. But I think he's committed to it in a way that Miriam Adelson, for example, indicates in the amount of money that she.

[Chris Hedges]

Yeah, this is his largest donor, I think $100 million. Is that right?

[Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson]

Yeah. Well, what.

[Chris Hedges]

What would be the difference then between a Trump administration vis a vis Israel and a Biden administration? It can't get any worse for the Palestinians in Gaza.

[Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson]

What would be the difference? No, I agree.

[Chris Hedges]

What would be the difference?

[Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson]

I agree with you, although I. There was. There was, I think, and perhaps this is applicable on the other side, too. But there was some political space opening up for Harris. I think she was made aware, vividly aware, of how much the Gaza policy, if you will, with regard to the Biden administration had harmed them. I would say it probably lost them almost a quarter of the progressives that would have voted for them otherwise, particularly in some of the battleground states, key states. And that political space opening up might have changed policy with her somewhat. I'm not saying it would be a Volfa, but I am saying it might have been a more mellow policy with regard to Israel and a harder policy on Netanyahu and a complicit policy. And we could do this if we wanted to, to get him out of there. We have the power to get him out of there if we wanted to use it. He's his own worst enemy in that regard. But we're not, we're not doing that. We're leaving him in there partly because we know that those around him who might replace him would be just as bad as he, but with maybe a little bit better record and a little bit better outlook on things, especially getting the hostages back. And we've got some hostages that are left alive there, too. So that political space would have given her room, I think, to change policy somewhat, to meddle, mellow our policy a little bit. I don't think Trump will do that. I think Trump is in for a penny, in for a pound for Israel, and that's dangerous. I just was looking this morning at the meeting between the Saudi National Security advisor, Blinken and Jake Sullivan and others, and very indicative of what's happening right now. The Saudis were very forceful about not making a deal until there was a Palestinian state deal that looked like it might have some viability politically if, if not in reality. Now they are here and he just inked the deal, so to speak, making a bilateral relationship go. Israel's not even in it, a security relationship. And this adds to the one we just did with the uae, we just did with Bahrain. All of them are different deals, but they all amount to almost non, non NATO major ally status. We just did one with Qatar, where Al Udid is the biggest air force base in the world. And it looks as if the gcc, the Gulf Cooperation Council, is sort of being wedged aside. And we're doing all these bilateral treaties, if you will, with these countries. They're not, they're not, they don't have the force of treaties, but they're executive agreements for defense cooperation and so forth. And so that means Muhammad bin Salman is now playing, playing the typical Saudi game of I like Russia, I like China, but the United States is my old haven and I need the United States. So I'm going to make a bilateral deal with them if that's happening. They're worried about Iran, even though they're talking more with Tehran than they've done in the past, as are all the states. They're worried. They're worried about what might happen. They're worried about what Iran might do if Israel doesn't attack Iran's oil facilities, because Iran will wipe out all the oil facilities it can in the Gulf region. 20% of the world's oil supply won't make any difference that we're 22 million barrels a day now if they do that, because the price of oil will go to $300 a barrel. Insurers want insurer and shippers won't ship real problem. And the Saudis know that that's their nest egg, that's their future. They're not want to play put that in jeopardy. So they're back with the United States. Now this is, this is a very strange meeting in my view because the words were not there to support it. And then suddenly he's here doing this. I'm worried, I'm worried that we might be walking into a war that we cannot walk away from because of 1990.

[Chris Hedges]

So but the Saudis, Qatar, they've all made it very clear that the US is not allowed to use these bases if there are strikes against Iran.

[Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson]

Well, the prime minister in Baghdad did too. But we went ahead and let the Israelis overfly Iraq and I'm told that the king of Jordan said no, then we did it anyway. And rather than look like a fool, he said he had grudgingly given permission. So we don't seem to care about what they think. And if it comes down to it, as this visit has just testified to, I think if it comes down to it and they have to choose, they're going to do what we want to do.

[Chris Hedges]

I want to talk about what a war with Iran would look like. The Iranian air force as I understand is pretty decrepit, not very affected, outdated fighters, many going all the way back to the Shah. I don't know what their air defenses are like. Certainly it would start out as an aerial bombing campaign. Would it look like the bombing campaign that we carried out under the Clinton administration against Iraq during the sanctions? Well, what's it going to look like?

[Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson]

It's not going to look anything like that. In fact, it's going to look quite different and it's principally because of China, but more so Russia. I think the Israelis in this last attempt, they're lying about it now and I have that from very good sources. They're lying about it, they're propagandizing it. They didn't do any damage at all to speak of to Iran. And the reason they didn't is because they ran into a buzz saw of Russian provided air defense systems. They didn't know what to do. They didn't know how to read the radars. They didn't know how to jam the radars. Their suppression of enemy air defense seed did not work. They took a few out but it didn't work enough to where the pilots thought they could go any further. So they launched all their missiles as I think was the plan originally for the first echelon after the Seed got through from outside Iran. They were deterred from going inside and they would be deterred again. And there's every reason to believe that there might be some S400s as well as S3 hundreds on the ground and the S400, sorry, Lockheed Martin, sorry, Raytheon consumed by Lockheed Martin is the best air defense system in the world. That's another thing that's happening right now that's disturbing our defense contractors, Chinese and Russian equipment is outdated doing in Ukraine and in the Middle East, American equipment, which is three or four times as expensive. One of the reasons India is back with Russia again for its armaments and such. So despite what our protests are, so we're looking at a situation where we will think that aerial will be all we'll have to do, that is to say bombing. Israel's going to think that Israel really can't do anything other than bomb Iran ballistic missiles and bombing air launch cruise missiles and such as that. It's not going to do it. It's not going to work. It's simply not going to work. There'll be some damage done. There'll be some toll in Tehran and elsewhere in the outlying territories where the nuclear facilities are and such, but it's not going to work. So what do you do then? I've war game this. A war gamed it with the lieutenant general in the Marine Corps who took great censure from his own buddies in the Pentagon. He was retired at the time, but he used to be my boss when I was down at the. Down at Quantico War College and he said we would lose. He war gamed it. He ran the war game two times just to prove that the computers were not wrong. I think he's right. I think one of the things the Iranians will do is take out a US aircraft carrier that's 5,000 US sold on the bottom of the sea or in the. And incidentally, we now have so few escorts for our CVs, our aircraft carriers, that let's say there are 2,000 sailors in the water. We couldn't rescue them all because we don't have birth space on the escort ships. Interesting development there. We can't even man some of our ships because we're so short in terms of recruiting. I think it would be a disaster. And what do we do when we get into a disaster like that? It's America. We don't back away, we don't retrench. We don't check our six and look around and say maybe we made an error. We double down that's what we'll do. And then it will be a full fledged war. And if you liked Iraq and you liked Afghanistan, Iran will top $10 trillion, take 10 years to pacify if it's even moderately pacified, and cost a fortune in blood and treasure.

[Chris Hedges]

You're talking about a ground ground for. You're talking about ground forces going in.

[Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson]

That's the only way you rid the country of a nuclear.

[Chris Hedges]

Yeah, that's true, but where do they go in from Iraq?

[Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson]

Well, you'd have to, you'd have to sit down and do what we did in the Pacific when we were. I actually had the war plan for taking on the Soviets in Iran. You recall, we were very worried about them looking for a warm water port around Chaba Arbandra Vas. A typical Russian empire thing to do. Go back and check the history of the Russian Empire. We thought that was the case. So out in the Pacific, the force provider for all of this, we were war planning for fighting the Russians, the Soviets inside Iran, in the Zagros Mountains and elsewhere. I know that terrain really well. It's not Iraq. Very different country. Great strategic depth, 53% Persian. Great homogeneity amongst that 53%. A lot of problems around the periphery, but basically a homogeneous population. 10 years, $10 trillion, and you still haven't solved what you wanted to solve, which was to defeat the nation any more than you did.

[Chris Hedges]

I'm just curious, how would the ground troops. Where would the ground troops go in from? I have a hard time believing the Iraqi government, which is allied with Iran and Shia.

[Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson]

We are illegal. Illegal under international law and under our own domestic law. We, we are illegally present in Syria right now. Yeah, we're there protecting oil going to Israel. Right.

[Chris Hedges]

Which, which, which Trump said got him in a lot of trouble. But it was an honest statement.

[Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson]

Yeah. And we, we would go through Syria without batting an eye. Syria, yeah.

[Chris Hedges]

Yeah, yeah. Let's talk about how it might start.

[Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson]

Because when we were doing the war gaming out in the Pacific, our major invasion was amphibious. Now it'd be a little difficult today. We had a lot of amphibious bottoms. Then we. The ones we have today are broken. Ask the commandant of the Marine Corps, and we don't have many.

[Chris Hedges]

How would it start? So there would be an Iranian strike on Israel with significant Israeli casualties. What do you see as the trigger?

[Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson]

The debate in Tehran is heated right now. I'm told this is about 48 hours old, but Doug McGregor sort of confirmed it this morning. The debate is between the different groups of security Personnel in Tehran, the irgc, the Guardian Council, the Ayatollah, the new president, so forth. Do we continue with our previous plan? And the previous plan was we're going to smack them, and we're going to smack them really hard. Israel has seen nothing like what's coming, much the way they're seeing real casualties, significant casualties in Lebanon right now. The debate as to whether to go ahead and do that or not, because they don't want. The new president in particular, doesn't want war with the United States. They got enough problems. They don't want war with the United States. I don't know how that debate's going to fall out. But if they decide, and Netanyahu wants them to decide this, I'm quite confident of that. To go back whole hog at Israel and do some really significant damage that his propaganda machine cannot hide, which he has done a lot of up to this point, like, for example, hiding the casualties in Lebanon. The casualties are enormous in Lebanon right now. For the idf, they're enormous, enormous.

[Chris Hedges]

Have you heard a figure? I have not. Have you heard a number?

[Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson]

I've heard 4,000. And here's the kicker. Modern armies do not show loss or win by kia, battle, tactical, operational, whatever. They show it by wia, because they have such sophisticated battlefield surgery and such sophisticated hospitals that look at our casualties in Afghanistan. What you have is high rates of WIA. The WIA is over 4,000. That's missing arms, missing legs, you know, whatever. So when you're looking at a modern army fighting on interior lines in Israel is very. Interior lines. No evacuation route, hardly at all. You look at the wia, not the kia, and the WIA and Lebanon are screamingly high right now, particularly for the idf. I think you'll see them leaving very shortly. You'll see them leaving or moving.

[Chris Hedges]

They haven't moved very far.

[Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson]

No, not at all. And look at what they're doing in.

[Chris Hedges]

Terms of interior lines. They haven't gone very far into.

[Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson]

Well, what. What they're doing is precisely what they do almost every time they encounter this kind of resistance, though they've never encountered this stiffer resistance. They bombed the hell out of the cities and the infrastructure. They killed Lebanese. They even bombed tires.

[Chris Hedges]

Yeah, they got driven out in 82. And of course, that's the invasion that created Hezbollah. I remember Cy Hirsch telling me a little while ago that the reason that Netanyahu wants the United States to engage Iran is because he needs the US to take out Iran's air defense systems, which seems to be in agreement with what you said, would that be correct?

[Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson]

I think so. But I think we are going to get a rude surprise too when we lose F35s, extended range, F15s, F16s and other flights that will come out and off carriers, F18s and such. We're going to lose a lot, too. The war game said 30% attrition.

[Chris Hedges]

Wow. And is Israel's motive the same as pushing us to invade Iraq, which is Iran is a powerful center within the region that it wants to essentially cripple the way it crippled Iraq. Is that the motive behind the Israeli push for a war with Iran?

[Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson]

I think that's the major motive behind it. They see Iran as the last impediment to their hegemony in the region.

[Chris Hedges]

Right. Let's talk about Israel from a military perspective because, you know, you know so much more about this than I do. How do you look at Israel in the Middle east from a strategic point of view as a US Ally, as.

[Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson]

A total liability, a strategic liability of the first order? And right now, this moment, right now, I would say Ukraine notwithstanding, they're the greatest strategic liability we have. And you get a lot of.

[Chris Hedges]

Explain, explain, explain why?

[Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson]

Why? Because there's no positivity to it. Everything is us, nothing is them. I listened to.

[Chris Hedges]

We took it. We took out a lot of those missiles coming in from Iran.

[Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson]

We did. And we depleted our supplies to the point now where I'm not sure, even if we decided we were going to do a major aerial attack on Iran, we wouldn't run out of munitions very shortly.

[Chris Hedges]

Combining and talk about the, and the genocide, I mean, don't we apply. I think we supply 68% at this point of munitions to sustain the genocide.

[Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson]

In Gaza, at least that much. If you look at the entire panoply of things we've given Israel, I'd say Gidan Levi at Haaretz is right when he says you share 50, 50%, you know, 50, 50 responsibility for every death in, in Gaza and for that matter in Lebanon too.

[Chris Hedges]

How do you see it playing out in Gaza? I've actually been in the Middle east quite a bit in the last year in Egypt twice. Some spent much of the summer in Jordan, was in Qatar, was in the west bank and, and everything I can glean. Israel, of course, wants to push them into the Sinai. And the Egyptian military, I was told by Egyptian journalists in Cairo, has just been adamant, has told Sisi that there's no way a Palestinian is, in fact, according to them, if, if Israel attempts to push the Palestinians into the Sinai and CC accepts them. He's finished. That's what they said. But how do you see it playing out? We know what Israel's intent is, which is of course depopulating, annexing northern Gaza. They're largely towards that goal. Creating a humanitarian crisis in the south, but eventually ethnic cleansing. These genocidal tactics are now increasingly being used in the West Bank. How do you see it going? The US must be completely aware of what Israel's intent is. But where do you see that developing?

[Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson]

There are two sets of thoughts, I think, or beliefs. Strategic goals in the US and it depends on what body of people you're talking about. Are you talking about Tom Cotton, Josh Hawley, Ted Cruz and a host of others. Lindsey Graham, or you're talking about saner people, I would say on the other side of the aisle or even in the Republican Party. They think that Israel is doing our job for us, as Bibi Netanyahu is wont to say, if Israel was not killing or ridding the region of these Arabs, Palestinian or otherwise. And think about how MBS must think about this. Yeah, we'd have to be doing it. And so he's doing us a great favor. He's doing our dirty work for us. He even has said that publicly. The other side says no. Israel is our ally and our friend and we have to stand by them no matter how heinous Bibi is. We'd like to get rid of Bibi. We'd like to put a different picture on Israel. But he's there and he's in charge and he's doing what he needs to do. And then there's the group that I belong to, I think that says this is horrible what we're doing. And we all warned about this in the military. We warned about this. David Petraeus even testified to Congress one day and let it slip that Israel was a greater liability than a strategic asset. And maybe we ought to think about rearranging the relationship after that got out. Of course he walked those remarks back, as David is wont to do. But the military understands how much a strategic liability Israel truly is, especially down in the ranks where people have actually had a chance to look at it, to study it, to look at the history and to understand what's happened and understand the real history of it, which is often propagandized by the Israelis and the US for consumption by the public. But the military understands that history. The military understands liberty, for example. They understand that those sailors were machine gunned.

[Chris Hedges]

Yeah, we should be explained. That was the ship that The Israelis attacked and killed. Was it 36 or something? I can't remember.

[Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson]

31.

[Chris Hedges]

31 US sailors were killed. Yeah, yeah.

[Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson]

And a bunch wounded. And there, there's, I, I don't think there's any question, having looked at some of the investigation and some of the obscuration of that investigation, there's any doubt in my mind that Israel did it intentionally.

[Chris Hedges]

That was the 73 war.

[Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson]

Yeah. I don't know whether it was because they thought we were picking up information that they were uploading an atomic weapon or they thought we were sharing some of the information we were picking up with a very sophisticated spy ship which Liberty was with the, with Moscow in an attempt to bring pressure on Israel. I don't know what the reason was because they wouldn't let the investigators get into the real nitty gritty. President cut it off. But I do know that Israel knew what they were doing. You can't.

[Chris Hedges]

Israel had carried out a series of massacres of captured Egyptian soldiers in the Sinai. That was one of the theories. And, and the, the ship obviously would have known about this. That.

[Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson]

Yeah, well, you know, you, you remember in the London Times, I think it was reported and then when the London Time was a good newspaper and it was reported by the BBC on Panorama, by the. I can't remember his name now. I have terrible short term memory. I was just reading his piece last night where he's having the conversation with Golda Mayer. He sent her a dozen or two or three red roses every time before he went to Israel. And she, you know, really appreciated that. So she'd give him the first interview whenever he was there. This time she wouldn't give it to him. She said, I have to give it to the Americans, I'm sorry. And he just sent her the roses and everything. Anyway, he did talk to her on the telephone and he reported this in that article in the London Times and on Panorama. He asked her point blank, would you use the Samson option? I don't think he used that phrase. He said, would you use a nuclear weapon if Israel's existence were in question? Without batting an eye? She said, of course. And he said, you understand what that means? And she said, yes. Now, was that for public consumption so that people would understand that Israel was serious about winning this conflict, a conflict they started, the Egyptians didn't start. 73 war.

[Chris Hedges]

Yeah, I know. That's another myth they peddled. Yeah.

[Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson]

But I do think that Netanyahu, if his back was to the wall and he were forced to do so, the big question of Course that was being asked was even if you knew you would be taking the world into a nuclear holocaust, would you still do it? Yes.

[Chris Hedges]

I mean, how much damage do you think Iran can inflict on Israel? Israel is a small country. I think it has a population of 6 million. What does Iran have, 90 million. I mean, I can't remember.

[Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson]

It's big. You're talking about between the river and the sea. About 14 million Israeli citizens, 7 million plus are Palestinian. And 7 million not quite as much.

[Chris Hedges]

Right.

[Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson]

Or Jews. Very small. Not as small as Gaza. No bigger than the Greater London or smaller than Greater London. Gaza is where they're dropping all that ordinance. Just. I know, Just putting the military template on it and saying, how many casualties? How many casualties have been that ordinance, that concrete, that rebar, those streets, those buildings. The template puts down on the terrain and says with great accuracy how many casualties? It's 200,000. Guarantee it's not 40 or 50,000.

[Chris Hedges]

Yeah.

[Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson]

The template says it's well north of 100,000. And we'll not know because you won't find some of these people. They're buried so deeply under rubble. If Israel were to really be attacked by the full weight of Iran, it would be a nightmare for Israel. It's becoming that way just with Hezbollah. You're not never going to get those Israelis to go back to their homes. They're going to evacuate Israel eventually. I. I was told the other day by a friend in Tel Aviv that already, by his count, a million Jewish Israelis have departed. Will they?

[Chris Hedges]

Since October 7th. Yeah. That's numbers they've hidden. But I've heard 500,000, but certainly significant number have just left the country. And these are often the best educated. They tend to be the secular.

[Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson]

Yes.

[Chris Hedges]

Part of society.

[Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson]

Yes. Putin was, you know, exercising his prudence and strategic verve by offering any of the Russians who had immigrated to Israel come back. We need you. You're. You're our brain trust.

[Chris Hedges]

Yeah. I mean, one of the things that. Just to talk about the Israel, US relationship, is that Pollard, who gave Israel all sorts of intelligence information, he gave them information on CIA and Russian assets, which allowed the Soviets to roll it all up, but he gave it to Israel, and then Israel was giving it to the Soviet Union in exchange for the release of Jewish citizens of the Soviet Union. But it destroyed the. Obliterated the intelligence operation of the US in the Soviet Union.

[Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson]

And Pollard is now, I'm told, I learned this 24 hours ago. Pollard is now instrumental in and very important to Bibi's propaganda effort with regard to Gaza and Lebanon.

[Chris Hedges]

Huh?

[Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson]

A traitor. And we let him go.

[Chris Hedges]

Yeah.

[Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson]

Yeah. And Bill Clinton did almost as much damage as Trump in that regard. With Pollard. Bill Clinton pardoned Mark Rich as his last ignominious act in office. I think it was David Rothkoff or someone said that was the most ignominious use of the pardon power by the president in the history of the country. I think they were right. Mark Rich was.

[Chris Hedges]

You should explain who he was. He was.

[Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson]

Well, Mark Rich really ran a company that, a huge company that sold, amongst other products, discounted price oil to Israel and was responsible in large measure for Israel's economic success. Under the finance minister named Bibi Netanyahu. And then later, as he became prime minister, interrupted only by his fellow mate Eric Sharon. Mark Rich made sure that Saddam Hussein's oil in the UN Oil for Food program was stolen and shipped to Israel. He also made sure that the pipeline in Syria, the one we were just talking about, was pumping to Israel. And he made sure that eventually the pipeline out of Kirkuk, out of northern Iraq, which has always had a problem with Baghdad, was shipping to Israel. So one of the reasons Israel's neo. What do you, what do you call their system of capitalism, it's not quite what ours is, but they have more billionaires per capita than we do. He made that happen with that discounted oil. That discounted. And now look at what Netanyahu has done. He had inked an agreement with Lebanon for the richest gas field in the Mediterranean thus far. Far that's abrogated. It's all belonging to Israel. Now, there was a deal that Gaza had the second richest gas field in the Mediterranean for its own. That's gone. He's got that, too. 30 years of the future needs of Israeli energy are contained in those two gas fields. He's got them both.

[Chris Hedges]

Yeah, they're off the coast of Lebanon and, and Israel. That's all. You know, an important point that's often missed in terms of the occupation of northern Gaza because they need the coastline. Let's just close by talking about the institutions themselves, the CIA, the Pentagon, which, and I mean, I'll characterize it, but you can correct me if I'm wrong. These institutions appear hostile to a Trump presidency, especially the intelligence community. How much can they damage, constrain control? Trump.

[Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson]

That'S an excellent question. First of all, the intent has to be there and it has to be at some of the higher levels in order to do that. I'm not sure it's going to be particularly because he can take care of those levels if he wants to. But if it is there at the second echelon, so to speak, or the second and third echelons, it can be disturbing of anything that he wants to do, as it could any president. It can falsify intelligence. It can lead the president astray with regard to serious national security issues. Right now, one of the most serious issues Trump's going to face, I think. I'm no economist, but I know a lot of economists, and they're telling me the bond market right now is what we should be looking at, not the stock market. In fact, the stock market is euphoric. And, you know, for the rich, the bond market is saying Trump is going to have one of the worst economic situations by midterm in our history. Our aggregate debt is also saying that. CBO released a report saying it's $50.2 trillion in a decade, decade and a half. The interest payments on that debt are already the defense budget equivalent. Almost a trillion dollars this year, almost a trillion dollars by the end of that period. The CBO looked at about 10 to 12 years, and they think they're being optimistic. It's going to be 2 trillion. It's going to be the equivalent of Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and the defense budget combined. We cannot sustain that under anybody's rules of gerrymandering the financial system in the world or whatever. We just can't stand that. And when the American people understand some of this intuitively, and the crisis of confidence comes with that understanding, and many are saying it's going to happen on Trump's watch, he's going to have a real problem, and he's going to have to retrench majorly. I don't know what they're going to do. I don't know what we're going to do as a country when this comes comes to bear with full force.

[Chris Hedges]

All right, well, that was Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson. I want to thank Diego, Sophia, Thomas and Max, who produced the show. You can find me@chrishedges substack.com down.