UnHerd with Freddie Sayers

Episode: US General: Will Trump Take Kharg Island?

Guest: Major General Randy Manor

Date: April 1, 2026

Episode Overview

This episode explores the alarming question: Will the United States, under President Donald Trump, pursue a military operation to seize Kharg Island—a crucial Iranian oil export hub in the Persian Gulf? Host Freddie Sayers speaks with Major General Randy Manor, a highly decorated and seasoned former commander in the US Army with deep experience in Gulf region operations, to assess the military feasibility, strategic aims, and wider implications of such an action. The conversation also critiques the Trump administration’s approach to military leadership, legal and moral responsibilities, and the current culture within the Pentagon and US military.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. The Strategic and Tactical Realities of Attacking Kharg Island

• Kharg Island’s significance: The island handles around 90% of Iran’s oil exports.
• Potential US objectives: Sayers asks what taking Kharg Island would mean and whether it makes military, economic, or diplomatic sense.
• High-risk scenario: Manor highlights that occupying the island would expose US forces to immediate, massive retaliation and casualties due to the island's proximity to Iran and its vulnerability.

  “Once you put boots on the ground, those individuals cannot move very quickly... you can imagine that the Iranians would swarm the island.” — Major General Manor (03:17)

• Feasibility of a US operation: Airborne or amphibious landings would be extremely costly and dangerous. Ships or planes delivering troops would be high-value targets for Iranian forces.

2. The Geo-Political & Economic Context

• Global oil market risks: Destroying or disrupting Kharg Island’s operations could send global oil prices skyrocketing, damaging both the US and global economies.

  “…it would absolutely drive up the cost of oil worldwide… It’s also something where do the Iranians not know we’re coming? The President and the administration have been telegraphing it non stop…” — Manor (05:46)

• Mutually dependent security in the Strait: Control or reopening of the Strait of Hormuz demands cooperation or coexistence between the US and Iran; neither can secure it unilaterally.

  “Neither side on their own have the ability to open it up… it takes both the Iranians and the US collaborating…” — Manor (07:54)

3. Ambiguous US Strategy and the Risks of Escalation

• Lack of clear objectives: Manor repeatedly stresses that the Trump administration has not articulated coherent tactical or strategic goals for any military move on Kharg Island or the broader region.

  “I do not know what the objectives are because, quite bluntly, the administration is not clear on what the objectives are.” — Manor (05:46)

• Potential for catastrophic escalation: Any land operation could trap US forces and provoke major escalation with uncertain end goals.
• Alternative explanations—Bargaining Posture: Both Sayers and Manor discuss that the White House may be bluffing to add pressure at the negotiating table, in line with Trump’s “Art of the Deal” philosophy.

  “Isn’t it pretty obvious... he wants the spectre of [an invasion] in order to bring the Iranians to the table?” — Sayers (12:06)
  “I hope that is the President’s strategy. My concern is the Secretary of Defense and the President have a very unsophisticated perspective of the unintended consequences…” — Manor (15:24)

4. The Debate over Attacking Iranian Nuclear Sites

• Logistical nightmare: Manor dismisses the idea of physically seizing Iranian nuclear material as “asinine,” pointing out the huge material volume and formidable defenses.
• More rhetorical than real: Such ideas fuel headlines but lack operational plausibility and, if anything, should be negotiation points rather than military goals.

  “…it sounds good for the press and maybe for people who are uninformed. Again, it is an absolute asinine idea… the logistics are immense.” — Manor (10:13)

5. Military Culture under Trump: Loyalty vs. Competence

• Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth: Manor is bluntly critical, calling him severely underqualified—a “disgraced major”—serving only due to personal loyalty to the president.

  “His only socially redeeming quality is that he is extremely loyal to the President. ...This is essentially putting a major in charge of the entire US Military.” — Manor (16:58)

• Impact on morale and professionalism:
  • Senior military leaders are worried about the current civilian leadership’s approach.
  • There is significant distress among military families facing unclear purposes for deployments, especially those not aligned with the president.
  • The military’s true allegiance is to the Constitution, not the president or Secretary of Defense.

    “It is every officer’s duty to be able to follow lawful orders... We pledge allegiance to defend the Constitution.” — Manor (20:12, 18:15)

6. Legal and Ethical Boundaries

• Lawful vs. Unlawful Orders: Discussion of what constitutes an order that military officers are obliged to follow, including the duty to refuse illegal commands.
• Potential for war crimes: Manor asserts that statements such as “no quarter will be given” could be prosecuted as war crimes, regardless of any presidential pardon.

  “That’s actually in writing a war crime. …The list of people that will eventually be called upon in the Hague probably are going to include investigation of the Secretary of Defense…” — Manor (24:37)

7. Shifts in Culture and Comparisons to the Past

• Trump administration vs. previous eras: Manor draws a sharp distinction between Trump and earlier presidents, notably George W. Bush, who he says at least sought consensus and defined objectives with allies.

  “There is no comparison whatsoever between the two administrations… The question gets down to are they working on behalf of the American people or… themselves?” — Manor (29:56)

8. On Healing and the Future

• Post-Trump prospects: Manor expresses faith that the US military will eventually restore its professional and ethical standards, though not without a reckoning for those engaged in exclusionary or racist practices during the current administration.

  “There will be, quite frankly, a reckoning for some of the officers… because that does not represent who the United States is.” — Manor (31:36)

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On the dangers of occupying Kharg Island:

  “I think it would be an extremely high risk operation that could result in dozens, if not hundreds of US military casualties.” — Manor (03:17)

• On US objectives being unclear:

  “The administration has been telegraphing it non stop that American military are on the way…” — Manor (05:46)

• On Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth:

  “His only socially redeeming quality is that he is extremely loyal to the President. …This is essentially putting a major in charge of the entire US Military. He doesn’t have the experience for that.” — Manor (16:58)

• On the duty of military officers:

  “It is every officer’s duty to be able to follow lawful orders. …It’s not treasonous. It’s actually being a patriot and it’s being responsible to safeguard the lives of our young men and women in uniform.” — Manor (20:12)

• On the administration’s ‘machismo’:

  “People who are weak, people who are afraid of losing power, they puff up their chests. …They actually lack power. They lack self confidence…” — Manor (25:54)

• On comparing Bush and Trump:

  “This current administration is nothing like the administration of President Bush. … There is no comparison whatsoever…” — Manor (29:56)

Timestamps for Important Segments

| Timestamp | Segment/Topic | |------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------| | 01:26 | Introduction to Kharg Island, the threat scenario, and guest intro | | 02:59 | Manor outlines various military approaches and their risks | | 05:46 | Why attacking Kharg is a bad idea for US, Iran, and the oil market | | 07:54 | Strait of Hormuz: why neither US nor Iran can open it unilaterally | | 10:13 | Logistical impossibility of seizing Iranian nuclear material | | 12:06 | Is Trump bluffing to pressure Iran at the negotiating table? | | 15:24 | Criticisms of Trump’s motivations and loyalty-based appointments | | 16:58 | Direct critique of Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth | | 18:15 | Impact of current leadership on military morale and families | | 20:12 | Duty to the Constitution and lawful orders | | 24:37 | Calling out “no quarter” as a potential war crime | | 25:54 | On the new tone and machismo in military leadership | | 27:17 | How the current era contrasts to previous presidencies | | 31:36 | Can the military heal after Trump? |

Overall Tone

The conversation is candid, occasionally blunt and forceful, marked by General Manor’s deep unease about current US civilian military leadership and what he sees as reckless bluster and unprecedented disregard for established norms and legal boundaries. Manor’s manner is pragmatic, much more focused on operational realities and risks than on political posturing—frequently expressing concern not just for the institution, but for military families and the core constitutional commitments of American service.

Conclusion

This episode delivers a sobering, high-level analysis of the military and strategic realities behind speculation that the US could attack or seize Kharg Island under President Trump. Major General Manor dissects the feasibility, motivations, risks, and wider legal and cultural implications, throwing strong light on the chasm between military logic and current political rhetoric. The episode also offers insight into how US military tradition, morale, and constitutional loyalty are being strained—and what it might take to restore trust and professionalism in its aftermath.