PDB Situation Report | February 28th, 2026: Former MI6 Chief Sounds Alarm On Iran & U.S. Combat Aircraft Move In

Summary

---

The President’s Daily Brief: Situation Report – February 28th, 2026

Episode Theme:
A comprehensive analysis of rising Iran-West tensions: the risk of Iranian proxy retaliation in Europe, US-Israeli military cooperation as F-22 Raptors deploy to Israel, the state of negotiations with Iran, implications for European and US security, and strategic perspectives on the Ukraine war.
Guests:

• Sir Richard Dearlove (Former MI6 Chief, “One Decision” podcast co-host)
• Ryan Macbeth (Open-source intelligence analyst, military commentator)

---

Executive Summary

This episode delivers an expert-driven, wide-ranging update on urgent security matters facing the US and its allies. The first half focuses on intelligence that Tehran could activate proxy terror networks in Europe following possible US strikes on Iran, with former MI6 chief Sir Richard Dearlove weighing in on the reality and scope of this threat, the challenges of border and diaspora security, and skepticism about negotiations with Iran. In the second half, Ryan Macbeth provides a deep dive into the US deployment of F-22 Raptors to Israel, dissects Iranian retaliatory capabilities, and offers projections on the timelines and strategies potentially shaping a coming conflict.

---

1. Iran’s Proxy Threat in Europe and the UK

Key Points and Insights

• Intelligence Warnings:

  • Western intelligence believes Iran could trigger proxy attacks across Europe if the US launches military strikes on Tehran.
  • Intercepted communications point to “rising coordination among Iranian backed networks” ([00:38], Mike Baker).

• Precedent and Nature of Threats:

  • “Hezbollah has carried out attacks in Europe before, including a deadly bombing in Bulgaria back in 2012.”
  • Iranian operatives have been convicted for plotting attacks under diplomatic cover on European soil ([00:55], Mike Baker).

• Target Selection, Motives, and Modus Operandi:

  • Sir Richard Dearlove:

    “Their choice of targets… would be very specific in who and what they go after. Iranian terrorist activity historically has either been aimed at the diaspora, the opposition, or specifically American targets… This is a state-driven terrorism. It’s not the sort of anarchic terrorism of ISIS… but it would be lethal, it would be organized and it would be pretty professional.” ([02:48])

• UK Vulnerabilities & Response:

  • MI5 (the UK’s domestic intelligence agency) has disrupted close to two dozen Iranian-originated plots in the last year.
  • UK authorities face challenges as illegal migration across the Channel creates opportunities to insert sleeper operatives.
  • Sir Richard:

    “Given the level of illegal immigration…very little vetting indeed. You can easily insert sleepers or operatives into that group. There are probably a few [sleeper agents]…waiting for a crisis.” ([07:42])
    “Easier to penetrate a planned [state terror] operation than to track lone wolves.”
    “MI5…have been efficient at taking down this sort of potential activity.” ([04:42])

• Threat Prioritization:

  • The current Middle Eastern escalation makes it “a pretty challenging and difficult time to prioritize where the threats may come from.” ([09:35])

Notable Quote

“Organized terrorism, not lone wolf terrorism…if the intelligence is good, it’s easier to counter state-driven terrorism if you have a certain penetration.” – Sir Richard Dearlove ([04:42])

---

2. Iran Negotiations: Skepticism and Strategic Impasse

Key Points and Insights

• Status of Negotiations:

  • Ongoing, but highly skeptical assessments prevail regarding any “comprehensive” agreement—especially on nuclear limits, missiles, and proxy activity.

• On the Prospects for a Deal:

  • Sir Richard:

    “There is the potential… for a partial nuclear deal. [But] I don’t think…there is acceptance of the possibility of a larger deal… What I mean by that is a complete ban on their nuclear program and some sort of deal which limits their ballistic missile capability….I was a huge opponent of the JCPOA… I think it gave the Iranians what I would describe as a laissez passe to misbehave across the Middle East.” ([17:02])

• On Iranian “Good Faith”:

  • “You cannot have a good faith negotiation with Iran. ...They always have a duality of policy… The identity of the Iranian regime is defined not by anything internal in Iran. It's defined by commitment to destruction of the State of Israel. And there is no compromise. It's ideological, it's religious belief, it's a conviction that does not submit to negotiation.” ([19:25])

Notable Quote

“Negotiation is about compromise. We’ve learned this lesson over and over again with the Iranians.” – Sir Richard Dearlove ([19:25])

---

3. Ukraine War: Stalemate, Risks, and Russian Intransigence

Key Points and Insights

• Personal Insight on Putin:

  • Dearlove describes Putin as:

    “Ice, cold, almost inhuman, and very much wedded to a vision of Russian history which is intransigent and very out of date.” ([25:49])

• Nature of the Conflict:

  • The war is “a civil war,” given the deep historic and ethnic links between Ukraine and Russia.
  • The geopolitical consequence is “a Ukrainian army of nearly a million holding off Russia…which has now been fighting in Ukraine longer than it fought the Nazis in World War II, with casualties and deaths well above the million mark.” ([27:19])

• Likely Outcomes:

  • No sign Putin will reduce his demands—return to a line of truce (à la Korean DMZ) is possible:

    “I think in the end, it probably ends in some sort of line of truce and an unresolved conflict, rather like...North and South Korea.” ([29:24])

• Escalation Risks:

  • If Ukrainians gain the advantage, risk increases of Russia resorting to tactical nuclear weapons out of desperation.

Notable Quote

“There’s an intransigence about the situation…The Ukrainians on the part of Europe are conducting Europe’s war.” – Sir Richard Dearlove ([29:24])

---

4. US-Israeli Military Buildup: F-22s in Israel and Implications

Key Points and Insights

• First-Ever Deployment:

  • The US has stationed American F-22 Raptor fighter jets in Israel for the first time for “possible offensive operations” against Iran, transforming Israel into a “critical launch point and defensive hub.” ([39:05], Mike Baker)

• Ryan Macbeth on Military Posture:

  • “We have a lot of iron in the Middle East right now. More aircraft since 2003… Look for the tankers—they are the force multiplier… It’s costing us $6.5 million a day per aircraft carrier strike group…” ([41:33])
  • Predicts action: “It is likely that if attack occurs on Iran, it will be Friday night or this weekend” ([43:36], [72:37])

• Iranian Retaliatory Capabilities:

  • Iran has a sizable, but not unlimited, stockpile of ballistic and short-range missiles—est. 2,000 remaining, with few capable of hitting Israel; logistical and technical challenges.
  • Drone capabilities: “Shahed 136, fantastic piece of equipment… big for area denial but not precise… US AWACS, fighters, and new countermeasures make them less of a threat.” ([51:55])

• Potential for Iranian Counterstrike:

  • Iran’s navy: “Very small…put it to the bottom of the ocean” in the 1980s. Fast boats and drones could threaten, but finding and targeting moving US carrier groups is very difficult. Chinese satellite intel could help, “but does China want that smoke?” ([43:21], [47:16])

Notable Quotes

“Whenever we put that carrier, it is essentially a little piece of America that’s floating in the middle of the ocean.” – Ryan Macbeth ([58:09])
“If you drop a bomb inside a facility that has centrifuges…knock them out of alignment…and it takes two years to refurbish, you’ve effectively obliterated the site.” – Ryan Macbeth ([67:51])

---

5. Strategic Calculations: Campaign Duration and Risks

Key Points and Insights

• Limitations on Campaign Sustainability ([70:19]):

  • Israeli intelligence estimates suggest the US and allies may only be able to sustain a major aerial operation for a few days given munition stocks and readiness gaps.

• US-China Global Calculus:

  • Extensive use of precision munitions now risks unpreparedness for a future Taiwan crisis.
  • Macbeth’s (provocative) predictions:

    “For every night that we're dropping munitions inside of Iran, that's one more night that we're not going to be able to fight China when China invades Taiwan…” ([70:19])
    “If an attack on Taiwan occurs, it'll happen in May or April or October of 2027 or April, October of 2028.” ([71:04])

---

6. Memorable and Notable Moments

• Sir Richard’s stark skepticism, at times differing from the UK diplomatic line, driving home the difficulty of negotiation with purely ideological regimes.
• Ryan Macbeth’s punchy, accessible explanations: “Iran is like the Costco of the Middle East… Kirkland brand missiles…” ([47:31]) and on the US Navy: “4.5 acres of sovereign US territory wherever the hell we want.”
• Macbeth’s running jokes about smoking:

  “That's the great thing about my life. I have nothing alive in my house. I don't even have a plant…no one’s gonna complain.” ([40:31])

---

Notable Timestamps

• 00:38 – Iran proxy threat in Europe; Hezbollah precedent
• 02:48 – Dearlove on target selection and nature of state-driven terrorism
• 07:42 – Dearlove on UK screening/vetting challenges, MI5 performance
• 17:02 – Dearlove’s skepticism of nuclear negotiations with Iran
• 19:25 – Fundamental obstacles to good-faith negotiation with Iran
• 25:49 – Dearlove on Putin’s character
• 27:19 – The war in Ukraine and its implications for Russian identity
• 29:24 & 34:40 – Possible Ukraine conflict outcomes, truce scenarios
• 41:33 – Macbeth on US military buildup, significance of tankers
• 43:36 – Targeted predictions for timing of US action against Iran
• 51:55 – Iran’s drone threat and US countermeasures
• 58:09 – US carrier strike groups: composition and capabilities
• 61:58 – Iranian military structure and campaign targeting logic
• 67:51 – On bomb damage assessments and lasting degradation of Iranian nuclear program
• 70:19–72:37 – Campaign duration limits, Macbeth’s China/Taiwan conflict prediction

---

Conclusion

This episode provides a sharply focused, real-time “briefing” on evolving security flashpoints, rigorously weighing the intelligence, strategic calculations, and the realities of power projection and diplomatic impasse. It blends granular technical insight (Macbeth) with high-level strategic perspective (Dearlove). Listeners are left with a deeper appreciation of the complexity and stakes of potential escalation with Iran, the lingering risks in Europe, and the sobering lack of off-ramps in Ukraine and beyond.

---

Transcript

[Mike Baker]

Welcome to the PDP Situation Report. I'm Mike Baker, your eyes and ears on the world stage. All right, let's get briefed. First up, Western intelligence officials are warning that Iran could activate proxy networks across Europe if the US Moves forward with military strikes against the Iranian regime. We'll be joined by Sir Richard Deerlove, former head of UK's MI6. For more on that later in the show. In a first, US combat aircraft are now operating from Israeli soil as Washington prepares for the possibility of strikes on Iran. We'll be joined by good friend of the show. You know him, you love him. Ryan Macbeth for details. But first, today's Situation Report. Spotlight. Western intelligence officials are warning that Iran could direct proxy terror attacks across Europe if the US Launches military strikes against Tehran. Intercepted communications show rising coordination among Iranian backed networks, raising concerns, of course, about asymmetric retaliation targeting U.S. embassies, military facilities or allied interests. Now, this is not without precedent. Hezbollah has carried out attacks in Europe before, including a deadly bombing in Bulgaria back in 2012. Iranian operatives have also been convicted for plotting attacks under diplomatic cover on European soil. Security experts warn that Europe could become an asymmetric battleground, not just operationally, but politically, if Tehran seeks to fracture Western unity. Joining me now is Sir Richard Dearlove. Sir Richard spent 38 years in Britain's Secret Intelligence Service, known as MI6. He held numerous overseas posts including Washington station Chief before becoming head of operations and eventually director of MI6 for several years. And I should point this out because you need to be listening to this. He's also the co host of the terrific geopolitical podcast One Decision. And Sir Richard, I want to thank you very much for taking the time to join us here on the Situation Report.

[Sir Richard Dearlove]

Mike, it's a real pleasure to be with you and I'm delighted to contribute to your podcast as you have to mine.

[Mike Baker]

Well, thank you. And that was a delight as well. Let's if we could, I want to start with these reports about the potential, should there be US Military strikes on Iran, the potential for Iran to activate their various proxy networks to conduct potential attacks in the eu. First of all, I want to know whether you give much credence to these reports and this potential and how concerned you are about the possibility of this.

[Sir Richard Dearlove]

Well, I certainly give credence to that sort of intelligence, but I would say that the irgc, who would probably be driving this, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, which is essentially the Muller's intelligence and the sort of overseas arm the Quds Force, will be behind such activity. But I think that what I would say is that their choice of targets, if they do this would be. When I say careful, what I mean by that is they would be very specific in who and what they go after. So if you look at Iranian terrorist activity historically it's either been aimed at the diaspora, the opposition or specifically American targets. I think they would be reluctant to go after specifically European targets in a manner like isis, because this is a state driven terrorism. It's not the sort of anarchic terrorism of isis. So you have to make a distinction in terms of what we're actually talking about. But it would be lethal, it would be organized and it would be pretty professional.

[Mike Baker]

And it seems it wasn't that long ago, I believe when reporting out of the uk basically they were saying we've uncovered, I think it was almost two dozen potential plots being conducted or at least planned by Iranian intel operatives. Again that's within the UK and within the course of about a year, I believe they say they disrupted close to a dozen plot or two dozen plots.

[Sir Richard Dearlove]

Yeah, I think the activity in the UK has been inspired through extremist Shia groups in certain mosques. And I think the evidence points to attack attacks on Israeli or Jewish targets. But the fact is that what we're talking about is organized terrorism, not lone wolf terrorism. And I think if the intelligence is good, it's easier to counter state driven terrorism if you have a certain penetration or a certain level of information. So I think what we've been looking at in the uk, the Security service has mentioned the numbers. Obviously it's not being specific about the targets or the plots, but it's pretty clear that MI5, which is our equivalent of the Bureau, the FBI, have been reasonably well, I've been efficient at taking down this sort of potential activity in the uk and of course the, there's been this dispute in the UK about designating the IRGC as a terrorist organization, which I'm not sure exactly where the situation is now. I think it has been designated, but it's rather late in the day because this has been ongoing concern for a long period of time.

[Mike Baker]

This may sound like a strange question, but I'll give it some context. In the US obviously during the past few years there's been a lot of criticism about the lack of controls at the southern border, in particular for the US and depending on what estimates you read, 8 to 10 to 12 million people coming across the southern border and very little in terms of vetting. When you actually drill down into what Customs and Border Protection were able to do in terms of vetting individuals coming across the border. And those are not the gotaways, those are not the ones who came across without being detected. So that became a big issue, obviously, and the concern that perhaps terrorist groups, certainly transnational criminal groups, were using this porous border situation to take advantage and perhaps put sleeper cells in the country. And that's been a concern for quite some time. Obviously border security is tightened up during the course of the previous administrator, the present administration. But in the uk, this. Here comes my question. I know you're thinking, I thought he said he was going to ask a question in the UK and I suppose, you know, in the EU as well, how would you assess, over the recent times, how would you assess the, the vetting of immigrants, of people coming into both the UK and the EU in general?

[Sir Richard Dearlove]

Well, let's take the UK first. Given the level of illegal immigration coming across the channel, I think that there is very little betting indeed. You can easily insert sleepers or operatives into that group. And I'm pretty sure that we have a problem in that. There are probably a few. I don't think the numbers would be large, but there will be a number of sleepers who are sitting there waiting for a crisis. But I mean, bearing in mind what I said about the irgc, the Quds Force from Iran, this is not non state terrorism, it's organized by an intelligence organization. Therefore they would be driven and controlled by policy decisions back in Iran. So the question is how the situation now that we've got in the Middle east escalates. But I think that there is definitely a potential here in the UK for people who are unidentified sleepers, who have a link back to the irgc, who could be activated in a crisis to go and blow up, let's say, a synagogue or mount some attack. But I think it would not be a random attack. It wouldn't be a sort of ISIS shooting in a shopping street. It would be attack on a specific target. It would be an American military base in the uk, maybe the embassy in the uk. It would, you know, it would depend on. But what I'm saying is it's a planned operation. It's much, much easier to penetrate a planned operation than it is to sort of track an individual or two or three individuals who might be just on the edge of the visibility of the security service. But the trouble is, you know as well as I knew that at any point in time the security service has to prioritize 15, 20, 100, 200 targets and decide who are the real Threats who might be imminent. So I imagine at the moment the situation because of what's happening in the Middle east with both Gaza and this buildup of US forces around Iran, it's a pretty challenging and difficult time to prioritize where the threats may come from.

[Mike Baker]

Now I think it's an excellent point to, to note the differences between the state sponsored terrorism and these sort of coordinated plan directed attacks. And Wolf, I suppose there is a, there is a concern that you then get copycat potential from other elements that are out who see these and think, let's do this.

[Sir Richard Dearlove]

Yeah.

[Mike Baker]

Something that you, you also just said made me pause also was you, you, you referenced Gaza and how remarkable it is that the situation in Gaza has just taken a complete backseat. I know it hasn't. And from a, from a, you know, a certain perspective, there are a lot of people focused on it, but in terms of just the general, you know, attention being paid to it out there in, in the world, it's just taken this, it seems like it's been swept off the headlines.

[Sir Richard Dearlove]

Well, it has in a way. I mean, you know, we in the UK have had significant demonstrations by Hamas sympathizers and that's been a real policing problem, particularly in London, given the legal situation and the restraints on public support for Hamas as a terrorist group. But on the other hand, like you, I'm surprised the terrorist incidents that haven't happened but have almost happened have really been by individuals who have been arrested. I mean, we've just had a couple of arrests here in the uk but they were clearly inspired, radicalized by Hamas, but they were lone wolves. They were not part of any major terrorist organization. So striking this balance is very complicated I think at the moment. What's extraordinary is that isis, which is a real problem, is in abeyance politically. Hamas supporters are not. There have been some radicalized individuals, but they're not organized centrally by any sort of Hamas brain. So it's quite a complicated situation and we have a big Muslim diaspora as you know. And in fact we have a by election today in the uk. I mean, maybe I shouldn't bring this up in the context of terrorism, but we have the Greens in this particular constituency who have gone heavily pro Palestine without expressing pro Hamas in order to try to secure an extremist Muslim vote for a sort of highly left wing extremist Green Party. So it'd be very interesting tonight to read the results of this election because it's the first time the Greens have held a by election or have been represented in a byelection with a very, very large Muslim population and they've been really campaigning in the most cynical fashion to appeal to the Gaza shocked Muslim community. You asked me about Iranian driven terrorism. I mean, I think there is a problem generally in Europe, but it isn't specifically different from what I've described here in the uk.

[Mike Baker]

So, Richard, if you could, I've got another several pages of questions for you. I won't throw them all at you today, but you could stick around. Sir Richard, We've got to take a quick break and then we'll be right back with more from former MI6 director Sir Richard Dearlove here on the BDB situation report. Please stick around. Hey, Mike Baker here. Now, many of you may know me as the host of the President's Daily Brief. At least I hope you know me as the host of the pdb. But did you know I'm also a business owner? That's right, have been for years. And I want to take just a moment to talk with all you business owners out there. Now, you probably already know this, but small businesses face an uphill battle with big banks, right where getting a loan means endless paperwork and delays. But I want to tell you about a business out there that's working to make life easier for small businesses. And I'm talking about Cardiff. For bank rates without the weight, you can go to Cardiff Co PDB for up to $500,000 in funding. Their application takes less than five minutes and has no impact on personal credit. And approvals can happen in minutes with same day funding. It really is the fastest way to get the capital you need to keep your business moving forward. Look, banks try to lock out small businesses, but Cardiff has the key. Big banks may not want to approve your business loans, but Cardiff does. If you've been in business for at least a year and are pulling in $20,000 a month in revenue, apply now for up to $500,000 in same day business funding at Cardiff Co PDB. Again, that's Cardiff Co PDB. Real growth, fast funding. That's Cardiff.

[Abercrombie Announcer]

Abercrombie's new spring collection has every outfit you need for the season of long weekends. Full of linen shirts, sweaters and coastal shorts designed to go from your desk straight to days off. For me, the collection's a must have are the baggy trousers, but the casual fit is hand tailored. Look for endless versatility. Get your closet ready for spring plans. Shop Abercrombie in the app online and in stores.

[Mike Baker]

Welcome back to the PDB Situation Report. Joining us once again is Sir Richard Dearlove, former director of the UK's MI6. Sir Richard, thank you very much for sticking around. I, I was hoping to wrap up our conversation. We kind of were focused on, in a sense, on what's happening with Iran right now. And I wanted to get you a assessment of the negotiations, the conversations that are taking place. Foreign Minister Abbas Arag, she talking with, I, I believe, apparently the only two envoys we have in the us, Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner. But those conversations, those discussions, do you have any insight into or thoughts on the seriousness of them, whether there's any potential for a negotiated deal that would then cause the US to back off from the military posture?

[Sir Richard Dearlove]

I think there is the potential as far as the Iranians are concerned on a partial nuclear deal. I don't think as far as the Iranian view is expressed, there is acceptance of the possibility of a larger deal. What I mean by that is a complete ban on their nuclear program and additionally some sort of deal which limits their ballistic missile capability. And then the third element being their support for Shia militias, or let's say, what's left of what we call the axis of resistance across the Middle East. You know as well as I do that the Iranians are very, very tricky and difficult negotiators. And even when they negotiate, I'm not sure that they stick by the agreements. I was a huge opponent of the jcpoa, the original deal over Iran nuclear. And the reason being, I think it gave the Iranians what I would describe as a laissez passe to misbehave across the Middle east after they had signed the jcpoa. And we will all see what the consequences of that are now. So I'm extremely skeptical that the Iranians are going to accept any sort of negotiated deal with Wytkoff.

[Mike Baker]

Now, I share your skepticism there, and I guess I'm not sure that this is a question. It's more of a thought that I have been puzzled recently over this idea that we're having some sort of good faith negotiation or attempting a good faith negotiation with a regime that just finished murdering thousands of their own citizens and detaining tens of thousands of others and, and somehow imagining that there will be some good faith compromise or that they would even abide by any terms of an agreement. So I, I start from that. I realize that from a pragmatic geopolitical perspective, you have to have these conversations. You have to look for opportunities for diplomacy and create channels of communication. But I suppose on another level, it's rather Galling.

[Sir Richard Dearlove]

You cannot have a good faith negotiation with Iran. And the reason for that is they always have a duality of policy. They will agree one thing, and they will, as it were, create a framework that tries to persuade you that they've agreed something. But at the same time, there is another dimension to policy, and you've only got to look at the intransigent character of the Supreme Leader. The fact is that the identity of the Iranian regime is defined not by anything internal in Iran. It's defined by commitment to destruction of the State of Israel. And there is no compromise. It's ideological, it's religious belief. It's a conviction that does not submit to negotiation. And negotiation is about compromise. We've learned this lesson over and over again with the Iranians. And the JCPOA is a great example of them agreeing a deal which was very complex, but at the same time, regarding that deal, as I've already said, a laissez pacific, to do what the hell they wanted across the Middle east and to cause chaos. So I'm very, very strongly of this view. I mean, a lot of my, maybe Foreign Office colleagues in the UK do not agree with me, but many of my Intelligence service colleagues would agree with me.

[Mike Baker]

Yeah, we, we have that. That interesting dynamic as well in the US and we've seen it over the years, where it's probably not fair of me to say, and I'm saying it because I'm biased, I suppose, but the intel community tends to be, I think, a little bit more realistic, a little bit less hopeful in the face of track records of whomever you're dealing with. And certainly on the, on the Iranian side, if you were, if you were a betting man, where do you think this goes in terms of the potential for conflict?

[Sir Richard Dearlove]

An aerial strike on Iran? Yeah, I just don't see at the moment, although, you know, the report coming from the meeting in Geneva is, oh, it went extremely well. That's what they would say. I don't think there's any common ground. I don't think it's in the DNA, the theocratic regime, to compromise with the devil, if you see what I mean. And that's what we're talking about. I mean, I think there are elements in the Iranian regime which would like to do a deal. But ultimately, what it reminds me of is maybe it's not a great parallel, but it's a significant parallel, is that when Yasser Arafat could have done a deal at Camp David, when he got up to the line, he backed off. He just couldn't do a deal psychologically, which is one of the great tragedies of the Middle East. And I mean, I discussed that many times with your former director, close friend of mine, George Tannett, and both he and I dealt with Arafat at the time. And Arafat could have done a deal, but he just couldn't bring himself. Now, if Arafat couldn't bring himself, but certainly the theocratic leader cannot. So if you make a sort of comparison, because he is far more ideological, he's far more committed to his sheer vision of the world, it's just not on the cards. So I think we are heading for a crisis.

[Mike Baker]

Well, I want to move, if I could. I want to shift from one crisis to the next, and I want to kind of steer. There's a lot of them we can go to. But. But this one is. Is. Is related to Putin's invasion of Ukraine four years on into the fifth year. And this, I. I may sound like a strange, you know, start to the conversation, but if I'm not mistaken, I understand that you've. You've dealt with Vladimir Putin face to face.

[Sir Richard Dearlove]

Well, is that correct? I mess him, yeah. I mess you with tiny blood. Way back when he was first elected president, in effect, I think I was almost responsible for Tenable going to the opera with him in Saint Petersburg for a new production of Boris Goodenough whilst he was running his presidential campaign on the grounds he's a new leader, maybe a dialogue with him. And. And for a brief period of time after 9, 11, we had an interesting relationship with Moscow, with Russia. And I had the extraordinary experience of going to Moscow to meet the head of the GRU to talk about Afghanistan. Sergey Varnov was then Minister of Defense talking to Sergey Varnov. And we made a big effort to have a different relationship with Russia in that window. That brief window lasted about 18 months. My final visit to Moscow, things were already going awry. I mean, it's too long to explain the detail, but they were. And it was frosty, cold and difficult and was an indication of what was subsequently going to happen. But we certainly gave Putin the chance to have a different relationship with the West. Okay, we didn't succeed, which I think is a great tragedy. And things have now evolved to where they are, which are pretty catastrophic and catastrophic for Russia and very, very difficult for global security.

[Mike Baker]

If I could ask, what's your assessment, the character of Putin? How would you describe the man?

[Sir Richard Dearlove]

Ice, cold, almost inhuman, and very much wedded to a vision of Russian history which is intransigent and Very out of date. I mean, what I mean by that revival of a Russia which no longer exists and which no longer is going to exist. I mean, what I find extraordinary about the war in Ukraine is actually it's a civil war. It's not a European war. I mean, Kyiv is Old Ruse. It's a fundamental part of Russia. What I mean by that is I'm not echoing Putin's interpretation of Russian history, but the identity of the two countries is very, very close. And I think that's why the war is so vicious, because if Moscow loses Kyiv to the west, then it's always been a hinge between east and West. This is a fundamental crisis for Russian identity. So in a way, you can understand why Russia has conducted this war. But on the other hand, the movement of the hinge swinging towards the EU and towards NATO, which is effectively what's happened, is a geopolitical change of huge historic significance, and it's not going to swing back the other way. I mean, we now have a Ukrainian army of nearly a million holding off Russia, which has now been fighting in Ukraine longer than it fought the Nazis in World War II, with casualties and deaths well above the million mark. And there's no way that Ukraine are going to be defeated. So where does this actually end up? I mean, it ends up possibly with Russia occupying 19% of Ukrainian territory with a line of truce, but with Ukraine definitively leaving the Russian orbit in spite of the ethnic link between the two countries. I mean, this is massive geopolitics.

[Mike Baker]

Do you see a scenario where Putin would come to the table and negotiate a deal that provides that territory, not the territory that they don't currently occupy? That seems to be a red line from Kyiv's perspective, for obvious reasons. But then one of the other elements which you've referred to is this idea that then Ukraine swings fully to the West. That seems to be, for Putin, that seems to be almost as important as territories. This idea that you're not joining NATO, you're not becoming part of the EU in terms of your leanings, you're not going to have an unlimited military. He doesn't seem or hasn't shown any interest in backing off of those demands.

[Sir Richard Dearlove]

There is no reduction in Putin's original demands in relation to this war, and he's in a hole and still digging. So what happens? Does it just continue or. I think in the end, it probably ends in some sort of line of truce and an unresolved conflict, rather like the last Cold War line of truce, which still exists between north and South Korea. But the Ukrainians are not going to concede, and they're nowhere near military defeat. In fact, militarily, in the last two to three months, they've been doing rather better and regaining territory. And I think the Russians are having a rough time of it. So there's an intransigence about the situation. And the thing that really concerns me, being a huge supporter of your country, is that this doesn't seem to have quite got through to the White House in terms of their apparent wish to end the war, with which I agree, but it's only going to be ended on certain terms. Those terms have to be, to an extent, coercive on Putin, because otherwise he's just going to carry on. And I think we're in a very sensitive and difficult situation at the moment, and no one expected the Ukrainians to have fought so hard. And in effect, the Ukrainians on the part of Europe are conducting Europe's war. And what I find extraordinary is that the war has not escalated outside of Ukrainian territory, which is remarkable. It's been contained. The element that worries me is if the Ukrainians do gain the upper hand militarily, which isn't out of the question, then I think we are faced with the risk of Russian escalation. And what I mean by that is desperation on the Russian side, which could lead to the use of what we call a battlefield tactical nuclear weapon, which would be catastrophic in consequence. So, I mean, what I would like to see is an end to the fighting, but along the current line of division, so that you have a truce, which is not going to be policed by foreign armies. I mean, this is, you know, the idea of boots on the ground, the coalition of the willing is completely, you know, the Ukrainians don't need that. They've got a million men under arms. They can police their own line. Maybe there's some observers on both sides, but I think that's what we should hope for and what we have to aim at is that Russia gives up its ridiculous claim to territory which it has not won militarily.

[Mike Baker]

I think you've raised what appears to be, from Zelenskyy's point of view, a real key element here, which would be some official, some confirmed security guarantees. And I agree with you. I think this idea of the international force, boots on the ground, I hate to say it and sound cynical, but much like in Gaza, I don't see Hamas as in disarmed. I don't want to go off in a different direction, but you're not going to get an international force of boots on the ground there either. I don't believe so. For Zelensky, I can see why he's so focused on this idea of security guarantees. Should Putin, and I suspect he will. He didn't start this invasion with the idea of just taking 19 or 20% of the country. He wanted the whole thing. I don't think that changes.

[Sir Richard Dearlove]

The security guarantee could be quite straightforward. You can have an aerial security guarantee based outside Ukrainian territory, which would, as it were, give air cover to an extent which the Russians would find it very hard to deal with. So you can have a security guarantee based in Poland, based somewhere else, where aircraft could be deployed, and they can guarantee a line of truce. That's the only solution. But to put boots on the ground. The Russians are never going to accept that it was, whoever it is, whatever countries, and particularly not from any NATO member country, even if they're there in an individual capacity anyway. Look, these are details, but they're important ones.

[Mike Baker]

Do you imagine. Last question. Sir, I want to be mindful of your time. Do you imagine that we'll be having the same conversation towards the end of this year, or do you see some sort of off ramp within 2026?

[Sir Richard Dearlove]

Not yet. It has to get worse for Russia before we get to an off ramp. Although there is one encouraging statistic, although I shouldn't speak about it as a statistic, it's more a tragedy. The Russians are losing casualties and soldiers at a faster rate now than they're recruiting. That's pretty significant. The kill rate, the casualty rate is somewhere between 2540 to one of the Ukrainian, I mean, one Ukrainian, for up to above 30 Russian casualties and deaths. I mean, this is catastrophic. In humanitarian terms, it's catastrophic. In military terms, it doesn't make sense. And I mean, bear in mind, when this initial invasion took place in February 2022, the guards forces that set off down the main road to Kyiv had their dress uniforms in the back of their vehicles and thought they were going to be parading down the Maidan in six weeks time and that they would have knocked over the government, they would have controlled the whole country. Didn't happen quite like that.

[Mike Baker]

No. I don't think anybody saw the level of mistakes, of misinformation, miscommunication on the part of the Kremlin. And you're right. I remember people talking about giving it a matter of days at the beginning of that move. But sir, I suspect, and I hope that you'll come back on and we'll be able to work through what looks to be several more pages of questions that I have for you. Great talk with you and I encourage everyone to tune in. Put it on your favorites list. It's Sir Richard Dearloves co hosting the podcast One Decision, a great geopolitical podcast and we very much thank him for his time here on on the situation report. Amazing experience. Almost 40 years in UK's intelligence organization, eventually running MI6. Great, great guest to have on. Terrific insight. All right, coming up next, nearly a dozen American F22 Raptors have arrived in Israel, giving the US new basing flexibility, of course, and strike capability amid the Iran standoff. We'll be joined by friend of the show, Ryan Macbeth. You know him, you love him. For more on that, stay with us. Hey, Mike Baker here. Let me take just a moment to talk about personal finances and reaching your financial goals, both very, very important topics. Now look, let's be honest. For many folks right now, it can seem like the math just isn't adding up. You know what I'm talking about. Grocery store bills, gas bills, utility bills, those skyrocketing insurance premiums. It can be tough to make ends meet. Even with a steady job. More and more families are being forced to rely on high interest credit cards just to cover expenses. So if you're a homeowner caught in that cycle carrying balances with interest rates in the 20s or even 30s, and it's time to get some relief, American financing is helping homeowners pay off that high interest debt at rates in the low fives. Their salary based mortgage consultants can build exit strategies to get you out from that debt. On average, they're saving their customers $800 a month. Plus if you start today, you may even delay the next two mortgage payments. There are no upfront fees. Just to find out how much you could save America's home for home loans, you is American financing the number 866-885-1881. That's 866-885-1881 or just visit americanfinancing.net PDB

[Experian/Weight Watchers Announcer]

My dad taught me a lot, including how easy it is to forget to cancel things. So I downloaded Experian, my bff. Big financial friend. Experian could help me cancel my unused subscriptions and lower my bills, saving me hundreds a year. Get started with the Experian app today. Your big financial friends here to help you save smarter. Results will vary. Not all bills or subscriptions eligible. Savings not guaranteed $631 a year average savings with one plus negotiations and one plus cancellations. Paid membership with connected payment account required. See experian.com for details.

[Mike Baker]

Experian welcome back to the PDB Situation Report. As the US continues its buildup in the Middle East, a major First American F22 Raptor fighter jets have been deployed to Israel for a potential wartime mission against Iran. Now, it marks the first time that the US has stationed top tier combat aircraft in Israel specifically for possible offensive operations. The move represents a new level of military integration between Washington and Jerusalem and expands options should President Trump move forward with strikes on Iran's nuclear or missile programs. With some Gulf states restricting US Basing access, Israel now becomes a critical launch point and defensive hub. For more insight into this and the ongoing military buildup, I want to bring in a friend of the show. You know him, Ryan Macbeth. Ryan's an open source intelligence analyst, a smart guy and friend of the show. You can check out his YouTube channel at Ryan Macbeth programming. Brian, thank you very much, man. It's good to see you again.

[Ryan Macbeth]

Thank you so much for inviting me on and letting me smoke. I really appreciate it.

[Mike Baker]

Yeah, look at that. Get that with that, with the smokes.

[Ryan Macbeth]

Yeah.

[Mike Baker]

You know, I would do the same thing, but I'm not allowed to smoke in my own office. It's so sad.

[Sir Richard Dearlove]

Yeah.

[Mike Baker]

Just when you think you're, you're, you know, you're, you're charting your own course. You're, you're a man of yourself. You know, you're king of the castle. And then I find out I can't even smoke in my office.

[Ryan Macbeth]

It's the great thing about my life. I have nothing alive in my house. I don't even have a plant. It's just me. So no one's, no one's gonna complain.

[Mike Baker]

Hey, listen, let's. I guess that's probably not why people tune in to hear you talk, but let's, let's get stuck into a couple of the things that we really want to cover here. The buildup in Iran or off the coast of Iran essentially. Couple of carrier groups and a lot of support assets. I want to, I want to go at it to two different ways. First, you know, give me your assessment of that build up.

[Sir Richard Dearlove]

Right.

[Ryan Macbeth]

What it means.

[Mike Baker]

I mean, a lot of been talk about. Yeah, well, this is the biggest thing since 2003 and the Iraq incursion back then. But then on the other side of the fence, I want you to talk about the Iranian defenses, Right. Their capabilities not just to defend themselves, but also then maybe perhaps to strike out at U. S. Assets that are there within Reach.

[Ryan Macbeth]

Absolutely. Well, to start, we have a lot of iron in the Middle east right now. More aircraft there since we had since 2003. We also have more tankers. And you know, Mr. Rogers said look for the helpers. Well, Ryan Macbeth says look for the tankers. If you want to know what we're going to do, it's tankers that make that happen. Right. In fact, I even have a patch right here that it's dedicated to the tankers which says Alcoholics Moving Cargo. People have actually put this on their uniform, AMC Alcoholics Moving Cargo. But yeah, these tanker guys are absolutely incredible and they are the force multiplier. All right. They are the guys that can get the stuff where it needs to go. And it doesn't matter if you're even something like an F15 which I believe carries £25,000 of gas, I might be off on that. But you're going to need to refuel at some point. And that's where these tankers come in. They enable these long range strikes. It's costing us $6.5 million a day per aircraft carrier strike group in the Middle east right now. That is not a small amount of money. And you know, back on January 1st, I put out a video where I came out with my bingo card for the year and my free space was Maduro will be gone sometime this month. And that's because you don't send a $6.5 million a day strike group into the Caribbean unless you intend to do something with it. So it is likely that all this metal means that something is likely to happen either Friday probably at around 8 o' clock our time, 2 o' clock Tehran time, or perhaps in mid March. Now for the uranium side, look at,

[Mike Baker]

look at, wait a second, wait, wait a second. I don't want to bury the lead here. You're just here. That's what we do here on the bdb. We make very specific predictions.

[Sir Richard Dearlove]

Yeah.

[Mike Baker]

Or at least Ryan does.

[Ryan Macbeth]

Okay.

[Mike Baker]

So that's okay. I'm putting down that marker.

[Ryan Macbeth]

Yeah, I, I would say Friday, Friday on 80. Friday. Because it's, it'll be about two in the morning in Tehran. And that's because, you know, the Ford is ready to go, the Lincoln is ready to go and these, these assets, they cost money as they're floating. Right. The 4 needs maintenance. Maintenance has been pushed back. So we need to get the forward in the fight and then back to Norfolk where they can refit. And then when you take a look at advantages right now it's Ramadan. Right. So that Means the Iranians are going to be fighting hungry and thirsty if they're fighting during the day. Right. So once we hit mid March, we've kind of given up that because Ramadan ends on believe the 19th of March. Now March gives us a little bit more time to get more force into theater. It gives us more time to safely put satellites over the target because it takes a lot to maneuver a satellite, but if you maneuver it correctly the slow way, you can save a little bit of fuel. So it might be waiting until mid March, but I would say either Friday, probably around 8 o' clock at night, or perhaps on, on mid March that we will strike around if we choose to do so. Now what Iran can do back is kind of interesting. So I can go over all of Iran's missiles, but they have so many of them with a million different names. You know, unlike the United States, when they create a variant of a missile, they rename it, they don't give it the B designation or the C designation, you know, fire and then there's another one and they're, they're all these different names. So Iran has a limited supply of missiles, ballistic missiles that can reach Israel, which would probably be a major target. Iran has multiple short range missiles which can hit bases in Qatar or even hurt oil production in Saudi Arabia. They probably only have about 2,000 or so of them and they most likely spent a lot of their long range missiles hitting targets in Israel the first time. These things aren't easy to make. Remember back when we talked about planetary mixers a couple episodes ago? These planetary mixers, they make the fuel that goes into the rocket. Now rockets are all great, but they only have maybe 100 or so TELs or transport erector launchers. So if you can only fire these missiles in batches of 100, it makes it a lot easier to intercept. Now for the naval strike group out in the Arabian Sea, or as I like to call it, the Sea of America. Whenever we have an aircraft carrier there a little bit of a different story. In order to take out a strike group, number one, you have to find it. And this strike group is always moving. So ISR intelligence rails reconnaissance. How does Iran find that strike group? They only have two satellites, so that means that satellite has to be over the target right when that, right when that strike group is there, it's hard to do. China has a lot more satellites. They could be feeding Iran information. So that way they can glean information about what it would be like to attack an American carrier strike group. But again, does China want that smoke. If we found out Iran helped them. Iran has a navy, very small navy, we put it to the bottom of the ocean. At least half of their ships, I believe it was in 1986, 1987, Operation Praying Mantis, I believe with Reagan. So now nowadays Iran does have anti ship missiles mounted on fast boats. They could perform swarm attacks, they could perform drone attacks. But again the hard part is finding the carrier strike group in the first place.

[Mike Baker]

Do you have any insight into. There had been some reporting that China under Xi Jinping might be looking to close a deal to sell anti ship missiles, rather sophisticated to, to Iran.

[Ryan Macbeth]

I haven't heard about that, but they did before. That was the Silkworm missile which I believe hit the USS Stark back in, I think it was 1986 or in the mid-80s, around that time. So you know these, China has a reputation of selling weapons and equipment to Iran. Iran is actually, they have a lot of engineers in that country, very smart people, they make their own stuff and some of it's cheap stuff, but it is, it is, there's value, right? Iran is like the Costco of the Middle east, right? It's Kirkland brand missiles, right? And the these things, they are good enough for what you need to do. You look at The Shahad drone shed 136, it is good enough, right? Only might have a 250 pound warhead, but it's good enough to cause terror inside a city. It can hit a city block, might not be able to hit directly into an air vent, but it's good enough. Now in a case like that, I don't know if China can get those missiles over fast enough. And even if they do, you always need training, right? It's one thing to just drop off a bunch of missiles, but after you do that, all right, we have to train people up on this, we have to teach them how to fire it and Iran still has to find the carrier group in the first place.

[Mike Baker]

Yeah, it's interesting because first of all I never thought I'd mention a weapon system or a potential arms sale to you that you hadn't heard about. So I'm feeling very clever right now. But it seems as if to your point about China maybe not wanting the smoke, given that we've got potentially, well, supposedly a summit that's going to be occurring in the not too distant future between Trump and Xi Jinping, you would think that they would drag their feet on delivery of a more capable anti ship missile system. And I think they were talking about, I think it's designated the CM302, something like that. And so I, I, I would be surprised. Also, there's no telling how long it again would take to close that deal. May not have any immediate ramifications for what's happening right now. But, you know, I guess there's also the concern. And you, and you talked about it, you mentioned Israel being a likely target. When I have conversations, sometimes people say, well, why, you know, why would that be the case? Well, it's the case because a stated objective of the Iranian regime is the destruction of Israel. So in a conflict like this, if it kicks off, they may look at it and think, well, now's the time. Why, why don't we, you know, make an effort? And so targeting Israel, perhaps because they feel like they're in, it's an existential threat for the Islamic Republic, maybe they try to go out swinging.

[Ryan Macbeth]

They can try that. Absolutely. But like I, I said when we were talking before, they have maybe 2000, 1500, 2000 missiles left of varying ranges. So let's say they have 200 that have the range to hit Israel. So if each one has a 2,000 pound warhead on it, then we're talking 20,000 tons of explosives or 20,000 pounds of explosives could fall on, on Israel. Right. Now, when you look at World War II, I think we used to drop like at every single raid on Berlin. Yeah, we'd drop like a hundred tons of bombs every single night. Iran could launch a couple of missiles at Israel. Right. It's horrible to do this math because I was actually speaking with an Israeli and he said, should I worry? Should I be close to my shelter? And I said, look, maybe they'll fire 200 missiles at you. Some of them are going to get shot down, some of them are going to land in the sea, some of them are going to land in the desert, A couple are going to land on people's heads, but no more than 20,000 tons of explosives are going to be coming down. And Germany got way more than that every single night during World War II.

[Mike Baker]

You'll be fine. Yeah, no, it's, it is though, from a, from a perspective of not just their ballistic missile program. What can you tell us about their drone capabilities?

[Ryan Macbeth]

They have some incredible drone capabilities for a country of their tech level, they really kind of drilled down into the tech tree when it comes to drones. Shahed136, fantastic piece of equipment. Only problem is it's not really guided. So once you set that target up on the shahed, you let it go. It's going to go to that target, but it can't necessarily seek targets on its own. So if you thought, well, we can fire, but we can blanket the Sea of America, formerly known as the Arabian Sea, we can blanket that with drones. Well, those drones can't really talk to each other and say, hey, I found a target. And meanwhile, as it's doing that, we're shooting them down because we have AWACS aircraft, the specifically the E2 Hawkeye, which is a Navy aircraft that loiters above the carrier strike group and it uses a very powerful radar to find targets. So the exact range is classified, but Wikipedia range I believe is around 400 nautical miles or so. So we're detecting these things as they come in. 400 nautical miles. These things are extremely slow. You always have to. You do an equation whenever you manufacture any kind of weapon system, missile, a drone, about a third goes to the actual structure and engine, about a third goes to fuel, and about a third goes to warhead. If you want more warhead, you got to get less fuel. If you want more fuel, there's less warhead, right? So in drones case like the Shahed 136, you might be able to throw them all out at sea, but we're going to detect them coming. And the last time Iran used shahed drones against Israel, we knew they were coming for about 10 hours. In fact, I was on Newsmax at 8 o' clock and I said I'll be back on at 6 o' clock to do the damage assessment because that's how long it takes those drones to get there. And I believe we shut all of them down. These days we actually have a rocket system, look like the old Zuni rocket pods. You can fit these onto a fighter and it's a very cheap way of destroying these slow moving drones. That is something that the F18 should have installed. The F15 has it installed, if any are flying and doing cap out of Jordan. So I think that dealing with the drone threat, especially these slow moving drones, or maybe a lot of them, we have a lot more ways to kill them now than we did even just two years ago.

[Mike Baker]

I tell you what, don't go anywhere, Ryan, all right? Stay right where you are. We have to take a quick break and then we'll be right back with more from Ryan macbeth here on the situation report. Smoke them if you got them. Hey, Mike Baker here. Let me take just a moment of your time to talk about security, specifically your online security, and to tell you about a great company out there working to make people safer online. Of course, I'm talking about DeleteMe. DeleteMe makes it easy, quick and safe to remove your personal data online at a time when surveillance and data breaches are common enough to make everyone vulnerable. Look, it's, it's easier than ever. You know this to find personal information about people online. But having your address, your phone number, your family members, information just hanging out on the Internet, well, that can have actual consequences in the real world and can make you vulnerable to all sorts of scams. If you're like me, privacy and protecting your online presence is important. We all want to stay protected from identity theft or harassment and doxing. And you can do that with the help of Delete Me. Take control of your data and keep your private life private. By signing up for Delete Me now at a special discount for PDB listeners, you can get 20 off your Delete Me plan when you go to JoinDeleteMe.com PDB and use the promo code PDB at checkout. Again to get 20 off, just go to JoinDeleteMe.com PDB and enter the code PDB at checkout. Once again, that's JoinDeleteMe.com PDB code PDB

[SimplePractice Announcer]

if you're a therapist listening, you already know your work doesn't magically end when the session does. There's scheduling, notes, billing, insurance, follow ups, all of the admin that happens before and after the work you actually care about. That's where SimplePractice comes in. SimplePractice is an all in one EHR built specifically for therapists with HIPAA compliant tools and high trust certification. No juggling systems or cutting corners just to keep things moving. Scheduling, documentation, billing, insurance, communication, even automated appointment reminders. It all lives in one place. And if you're starting or growing a practice, SimplePractice also offers a credentialing service that helps simplify insurance enrollment, which can be a huge lift alone. It's no surprise SimplePractice is trusted by over 250,000 health and wellness professionals. Start with a seven day free trial, then get 50% off your first three months. Go to SimplePractice.com to claim the offer.

[Mike Baker]

That's SimplePractice.com welcome back to the PDB Situation Report. Joining us once again is Ryan Macbeth. Now you can check out his YouTube channel and you should be checking out his YouTube channel regularly. It's at Ryan Macbeth programming and on his substack. Don't know what that is, but you, you probably do. So it's substack.com Ryan McBeth I'm going to say that one more time. Substack.com McBeth and after the show, I'm going to look up and find out what subst stack is. We'll have links to both of those in the show description. By the way, Ryan, thanks very much, man, for sticking around.

[Sir Richard Dearlove]

Absolutely.

[Mike Baker]

If, if I could ask, obviously we've been talking about the buildup out there from, from the US Military side, and we're always talking carrier strike group. Yeah, there's the Ford that's going out there. It's a carrier strike group. If you could, in relatively simple terms, tell us about what a carrier strike group consists of and its most impressive capabilities.

[Ryan Macbeth]

Absolutely. So, boy, the most impressive capability is to put 4.5 acres of sovereign US territory wherever the hell we want. I joked before that right now the Arabian Sea is the Sea of America. That's because whenever we put that carrier, it is essentially a little piece of America that's floating in the middle of the ocean. Typically, a carrier wing will have four squadrons of fighters. In the Abraham Lincoln's case, I believe they have one squadron of F35s and three squadrons of Super Hornets. They also have six Growlers. And Growlers are extremely important. These Growlers provide electronic warfare and also another capability called sea or suppression of enemy air defenses. So these guys will take off from the carrier and they will essentially play chicken with surface air missile sites. They'll get close to it, try to get it to turn on, and as soon as they turn on, they start electronic countermeasures and they fire a missile. They'll follow that radar beam down to the surface to air missile site and blow up the radar. So essentially any kind of package you have, the seed aircraft go in first, they find all the surface to air missile sites. Once they're gone, you have the strike groups come in and they can start hitting targets. Now, in addition to this aircraft carrier, this aircraft carrier has multiple escorts. I believe we have 20 vessels in the area right now. And of these 20 vessels, a good portion of them are US Navy Arleigh Burke class destroyers. Now, these can carry up to 72 Tomahawk missiles. Although each VLS tube, which is essentially think of it like a small shipping container that pops into the destroyer vertically. This thing can open up, it'll fire a missile out of the container, and to reload, you just pop in a new container. There's a little more to it than popping it in, but it's a very easy way to load and store these Missiles in a very fast way of firing them. Now, it's more unlikely that these Arleigh Burke class destroyers have perhaps 20 tomahawks on them and a mix of self defense missiles like the SM2, SM6. However, these tomahawks provide a very, very powerful cruise missile punch if that needs to be used. In addition to those screening destroyers that surround the carrier to make sure nothing gets to it, we also most likely have in the area an attack submarine that is protecting the carrier strike group from below and perhaps an Ohio class cruise missile submarine. These were former ballistic missile submarines that had their ballistic missile tubes taken out and cruise missile tubes put in. I believe it's instead of one launcher per, instead of one missile per tube, they have four in each of these Ohio class cruise missile submarines. And these will be able to launch. I believe it's 196. I might be getting the math on that wrong. Cruise missiles into Iran. So these are all options and we haven't even talked about the air options yet from the Air Force.

[Sir Richard Dearlove]

Good lord.

[Mike Baker]

Okay, so in the scheme of things, and this is going to probably sound like a bit of a simplistic question,

[Sir Richard Dearlove]

but

[Mike Baker]

if you were organizing this, right, and say that they, that it was going to Connecticut action, we were going to engage in conflict of some sort, what would you recommend as the target package here when we're talking about the Iranian regime? And what from your perspective is the most logical objective?

[Ryan Macbeth]

You know what's interesting about Iran is that it's really a country with two armies. Imagine if America had the US army and then we had a religious army. And Iran is kind of like that. The irgc, Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, they are the religious Army. It's about 125,000 hardcore Islamists. Then you have the Artash. The Artash is what you might consider the regular army, the People's army of Iran. Now when you get conscripted, you can go to either place. They kind of randomly assign you based on needs of the military. However, for the most part, the artes is composed of people who are loyal to the country. They're loyal to the regime too, but they're loyal to the country. So this kind of gives you a target package. What you probably don't want to do is target the Artesh. You want to target command and control sites for the irgc. Those are the bad guys. Those are the guys you want to take out. And at some point the artes is going to wake up and go, you know what? The IRGC got all of our funding. They have a budget of about $6 billion a year in US dollars. The Artes gets a little less than half that. So there's a little bit of animosity between these two organizations. So ideally, you target these IRGC sites and at some point the artes is going to rise up, hopefully and take over the country. And then you will see the end of the mullahs. So ideally, you attack IRGC sites, specifically command control sites. You leave the army alone. And at a certain point, the army goes, you know what, we're done. We want a country again. We want wealth and prosperity, and we're going to get that with America, not with the mullahs in charge.

[Mike Baker]

How effective? There's two parts to this. First of all, what was your assessment after last year's US Strikes on nuclear facilities? And did you see any bomb damage assessments that, you know, from your perspective, seem, you know, highly credible? And what is the utility of going after those nuclear facilities currently if there's a, if there's a decision to, to strike? I guess I'm, what I'm wondering is, you know, are you focused on, on their nuclear program or are you focused on ballistic missile program? Are you on regime? There's a lot of layers here. Regime change. Anyway, I throw that back at you.

[Ryan Macbeth]

So, so from what I. I've seen the same pictures you've seen when it comes to satellite footage. And of course, if I had any more knowledge, I wouldn't be able to

[Mike Baker]

talk about that, of course.

[Ryan Macbeth]

But what we've seen is that Iran has covered a lot of their nuclear sites with sand or tents, which means one of two things. Either they, they're covering that site in order to seal off any possible hole. It is very difficult to go through sand. Or they're covering it so they can perform some sort of excavation operation to try to recover what equipment they can. Now, when you're talking about something like a uranium centrifuge, that thing is very delicate. Those things probably all have to be refurbished or they have to be remanufactured. Because these are centrifuges, they spin literally at the speed of sound to try to separate the heavier uranium from the lighter uranium. So with something like that, it's, it's not something you can just go down to target and replace, right? Just like the planetary mixers. We can't get a kitchen, a mixer, and mix rocket fuel with it. There'll be too many air bubbles in it. However we may, there may be a point of diminishing returns in going after these nuclear sites. Those may be removed, reserved for heavy bombers, and the fighters will be reserved for targets of opportunity or IRGC sites. So perhaps after one or two days is not going to be a lot remaining from the nuclear program because we took out so much of it before. And, you know, you can move rocks, you can move one, one. You're turning big rocks into little rocks at this point. Right. So after that, you get the B2s back at Whiteman and you continue on with the small tactical fighters hitting these targets of opportunity. So that's. That's probably how that sort of thing would roll.

[Mike Baker]

Yeah. It's interesting because in the immediate aftermath of the, of the 12 Day War, after the US strikes on the facilities, you know, there was some talk we completely obliterated them. We completely destroyed them. And, and, you know, I mean, part of that was, you know, kind of trying to think, drive a narrative, but I don't think anybody really believed it. You know, we weren't going to completely obliterate the Iranian nuclear program. Right. But I take your point. There was significant damage. I think the problem is I. I have not seen, and not that I would. It would be, you know, speculation, but I've not seen anything that. That looks like highly credible bomb damage assessments from those strikes. So you just kind of wonder as they're preparing target packages, which I'm sure they've already prepared, and they're sitting on the shelf to what degree they thought, let's revisit that or let's focus elsewhere. And part of it is also, you've got this, this, you know, the recent murder of thousands of their own citizens. Part of this could be retribution in the sense that, look, you're trying to send a message to all those people who are brave enough to get out on the streets and protest.

[Ryan Macbeth]

Right.

[Mike Baker]

If you identify the units that were involved in. In, you know, the, the significant portion of that repression and the killing of citizens, detaining of citizens, then maybe you target those facilities that house those units. I don't know. I don't know that there's a question in there, Ryan, and we're just having a conversation.

[Ryan Macbeth]

Well, like I said, when it, when it comes to obliterate. All right, if you drop a bomb inside of facility that has centrifuges, and those centrifuges are highly sensitive pieces of equipment, you might not necessarily destroy those centrifuges, as in blow. Blow them to bits, but if you knock them out of alignment and it takes two years to refurbish the centrifuges, you've effectively obliterated the site. Right. So I have no doubt that the bombs are being, that were being used. I believe 12,000 pound bombs, essentially artillery shell or artillery barrels packed with explosives that can penetrate deep. And the first bomb knocks the lid off the, the vent shafts. It's literally the end scene in Star Wars. The first bomb knocks the lid off, the second bomb goes right into the trench. Right. And if you have that kind of earthquake type concussion that can certainly damage these centrifuges. So they might not be destroyed, but, but they have to be scrapped or they have to be refurbished and that takes time. The interesting thing here. Yeah, go please.

[Mike Baker]

I was, I was going to say interesting. Interesting fact that I'm sure people will be fascinated by is I've only seen the first Star wars movie. I had a conversation the other day with our executive producer about this. He seemed incredulous at the idea, but I watched that first one and then I had no interest in more. And not that it wasn't a good movie, it was a very entertaining movie, but you know, I think it was 1977. I never watched another one. It was like with me with Star Trek. I watched all the episodes with William Shadner, had no interest in anything that followed on after that.

[Sir Richard Dearlove]

Yeah.

[Mike Baker]

Right now people are listening, going, thank you Mike for that insight. That's fascinating. All right, last question. Being mindful of your time, Ryan, and, and the fact that I know you got to go get a new cigar. What do you make of the, the reporting that came out where Israeli intelligence was saying, look, despite the, the size of this military buildup for a potential conflict with Iran, that the intel assessments from the Israelis I believe were saying, look, in terms of a sustained operation, you probably not more than a few days. It seemed somewhat pessimistic about the ability to maintain a weeks long assault.

[Ryan Macbeth]

I can tell you this, every time CENTCOM fires a Tomahawk, someone in Indo Paycom cries and we're all going to be speaking Chinese in 10 years if we keep shooting million dollar missiles at camels. All right, now I, I can tell you this. For every night that we're dropping munitions inside of Iran, that is one more night that we're not going to be able to fight China when China invades Taiwan essentially next year.

[Sir Richard Dearlove]

Right.

[Ryan Macbeth]

Next year maybe in 2028.

[Mike Baker]

So wait a second, ladies and gentlemen, a second prediction from Ryan. Macbeth here and this one's based on Taiwan. Okay, let me wait while I make a note. Ryan.

[Ryan Macbeth]

April 2027 or October 2027, if I were Xi Jinping, I would invade Taiwan in April or October 2028 because it'll be during the presidential election. But Xi Jinping has said to his army, you must be ready to invade Taiwan by 2027. When a dictator tells their army something, they've already started building the landing barges. Right? They've, they've done that. I've just recently read a document that was translated from Chinese that was in the Chinese military magazine that mentioned how reunification of China is a priority. And this was in an article in this Chinese magazine about landing craft. So they're prepared. And if it happens, it'll most likely happen in April or October of 2027 or April, October 2028. And that's because that's when the weather window that's when the sea state in the Strait of Taiwan is is low enough for ships to land, ladies and gentlemen.

[Mike Baker]

That's why you should be checking out his YouTube channel. That's at Ryan, Macbeth programming and also whatever. Substack out substack, substack.com McBeth Ryan, I had a bunch more questions to ask you, but yeah, we, we ran out of time. Listen, thank you as always, man, for being on the show. We'll definitely be calling you back. And I'm going to be holding you to these predictions, frankly.

[Ryan Macbeth]

Well, I would say it's a likely. How about that using ICD203, I would say that the it is likely that if attack occurs on Iran, it will be Friday night or this weekend, I should say. And I would say it is likely that if an attack on Taiwan occurs, it'll happen in May or April or October of 2027 or April, October of 2028.

[Mike Baker]

Nice. Well, I'll make a prediction as well. I'm going to predict it. We're going to have you back on THE SITUATION REPORT here in the not too distant future, man.

[Ryan Macbeth]

Thank you so much.

[Mike Baker]

Cool. Take care, Ryan. Well, that's all the time that we have for today's PDB Situation report. Great guests. And if you have any questions or comments or humorous anecdotes, please reach out to [e-mail] you know what we do? Once a month, we all gather around our very fancy conference table in our very fancy conference room and we sift through the mailbags. We select a bunch of your questions and comments and we push him into an episode that we call Ask Me Anything. The most recent one hit the airwaves not too long ago. I hope you've enjoyed it. And there you have it. Don't forget, keep your cards and letters coming to listen to the podcast of the show ad free. Well become a premium member of the President's Daily brief by visiting PDB premium.com It really is that simple. I'm Mike Baker and until next time, you know the drill. Stay informed, stay safe, stay cool.

[Experian/Weight Watchers Announcer]

Weight Watchers now offers access to affordable GLP1s. It works for members like I'm Haley and I've lost 100 pounds. Weight Watchers has everything I need from weight loss medications to nutrition support and help with my side effects. It's all in one place. Weight Watchers handles the insurance for you and offers affordable cash pay options. With our program, our members are losing more weight with expert nutrition and side effects support.

[Ryan Macbeth]

I'm Mike and I've lost 135 pounds. Weight Watchers prescribing GLP1 medications it's been life changing.

[Experian/Weight Watchers Announcer]

I'm Sharia and I lost 80 pounds on Weight Watchers. I realized that it would take more than a prescription to lose weight and

[Mike Baker]

feel good on a GLP1.

[Experian/Weight Watchers Announcer]

Better results, expert support, lose more weight, make it last.

[Ryan Macbeth]

I can't imagine doing a GLP1 without Weight Watchers.

[Experian/Weight Watchers Announcer]

Get started for as low as $25 at weightwatchers.com New medications require eligibility and prescription. Patients on 15 milligrams of prizepatite had an average of 21% weight loss in a 72 week clinical trial when paired with diet and exercise. First month this little $25 with a 12 month plus plan does not include the cost of GLP1 medications.