We'll be right back. Now on 105.9 FM and screaming worldwide on the W M A L. A O'Connor and company. Oh, yeah. Yeah. 806 Good morning. Thursday, the second day of April. Busy day here on O'Connor and company coming up in 30 minutes. Curt Schlichter senior columnist at Town Hall. He'll help us through it. It's very O'Connor with Cassie Smedley and the president's president. And then, of course, that was following the arguments at the Supreme Court of our birthright citizenship and then later in the evening, the launch of the Artemis to mission to the moon. And now, and then immediately after that at 9 PM, you had the president addressing the nation on the current status of the military action in Iran. It was a very, very, very busy day for the president, especially considering that last element probably the most important element after a long day to the president. And then the president, the president of the United States, General Jack Kane, he's retired four star general chairman of the Institute for the study of war and a Fox New senior strategic analyst. General King. Thanks for joining us. Yeah, delighted to be here. Larry and Cassie. Thank you. So the president said last night that basically this is one of the most successful military campaigns in just 32 days. No country has suffered and been debilitated at the level that Iran has in such a short period of time. Would you concur with that assessment? I think is is is is is is is is is is is is is is is is is is is is is is is is is is is is is is is is is is is is is is is is is is is is is is is is is is is is is is is is is is is is is is is is is is is is is is is is is is is is in that short a period of time, yes. But one focus right now on the military objectives has to do with the Strait of Hormuz, because that is what's sort of becoming a choke point there for international oil distribution. That's affecting the price of oil. It's affecting the price of gas. And if Americans are feeling any repercussions from this, that's what it is. So when the president says, because we don't get our oil there, but it does affect the price of oil, he says to the countries that can't give fuel, that number one, either they should buy from the United States, or number two, just go to the Strait and take it yourselves. How feasible is that? I mean, if they go and they just say, okay, let's just take this oil, aren't they setting themselves up for an attack from Iran that could in fact devastate that oil tanker? Yeah, well, in my own mind, I don't think that we should cease our operations obviously against Iran and leave them in control of Gulf oil distribution. I think that should be a task we assign ourselves and make certain that the streets are open. I know for a fact that we have detailed plans to be able to do that with an acceptable risk in executing that. And I know the central command is prepared to do that. If the president told them today, they could execute that mission. So, I get that and I appreciate that. And I suspected that we had a plan to do this. My question is, is it feasible when the president says to, you know, the UK or France or whoever, if you're upset about the trade or Hormuz, you want your oil, just go and take it, just go. We've already done the heavy lifting. Is that feasible for those countries? Well, certainly, I mean, it would take them considerable amount of time. I've talked to the secretary general more than once about this. This is Mark Ruta. I mean, for them to organize the capability to do it, to get in the region, to be able to do that. Yeah, certainly they can put something together to do that. They have air power themselves. They, some of the European countries do have navies. I've always thought we'd been a little off going after NATO about this. I really think it's select European countries who are dependent on Persian Gulf oil as well as Asian countries that are involved that it's not necessarily a NATO issue. But nonetheless, yeah, that would take a considerable amount of time. I mean, even in my discussions with Ruta, because they, when they first got the request, they thought it was, they needed to be there immediately. I said, well, it's going to take you a week or two to get there with your resources to begin with. I mean, we're talking about opening this up. The United States opens it up and turns it over to allies and partners, also recognizing we would likely have to leave some capability there with you to assist you if you didn't have that capability. That to me is a feasible plan. But yeah, certainly they can, it would take them time to organize something like that. It looks like they're attempting to do something that would storm into prime minister to UK having a meeting with multiple nations. I understand the reasons and the argument for European countries getting involved here. What about Middle Eastern countries and what is, what should be their involvement or their responsibility to maintain the, hopefully we're on the cusp of stability, but maintain the stability, maintain this new arrangement with Iran? Well, I think it could be maintained. Obviously it's resource intensive and that's why the United States even needs help to do this. I mean, we have naval ships in the area obviously doing offensive and defensive missions and the position accordingly, we would have to strip away some ships to be able to do escort duty. And it, so ideally it's two ships, two warships escorting a couple at best in a ship convoy. And that's pretty intensive, but you just don't go back in 20 minutes and pick up two more ships. So when you lay out, hundreds of ships are moving, this is really quite a considerable undertaking. But it is definitely feasible in terms of military operation. So when the president says that he thinks that the military operation should end shortly, that was the word he used. And he also said that he's dealing with some more reasonable people right now who appear to have some authority in Iran. And he's hoping that they can make a deal, but over the course of the next three weeks, we're gonna start pummeling them as he put it into the Stone Age. From your perspective, what exactly does that look like and what exactly are we trying to secure from these more reasonable negotiators on the Iranian side? Well, my own sense of it is we are still dealing with people who are radical ideologues in Iran. I mean, they may not be the top leaders that were in those positions and have subsequently been killed. But these are not nationalist versus radical ideologues. These are not people in the army, say, who don't represent the ideology of the top tier. These are people still very much committed to the ideology of what Iran stands for. That's the reason why after the 12-day war, we're here doing this operation because Prime Minister Netanyahu and the president both came to the same conclusion that Iran has to be able to resist by their intelligence services and also their military leaders that Iran has gone right back to its old objectives. And nuclear weapon, ballistic missiles, considerably amount of drones, influence the Middle East, and support their proxies. So that ideology and the leaders that are there that we're talking to, they still represent that view in my mind. I don't think there's any way Iranians here. I mean, we're holding that out as a whole, but I don't believe for a minute that the president privately believes that he's gonna make a deal with these radical folks. He would like to make a deal. I get that, but the reality is they're not in a deal-making business. They don't want that. They wanna personally survive. They want the regime to survive. They believe that the regime survives and the United States pulls away. That somehow that is a victory of sorts for them. The Marines who are certainly poised off the coasts of Iran and are ready to execute missions there on the ground, obviously it's not an invasion force or an occupational force in any way whatsoever. These Marines will be there to do very specific missions. Can you, and again, without, obviously, I don't wanna either reveal state secrets or anything like that, but would you expect those Marines, if they are deployed to be there to sort of acquire or occupy certain strategic facilities, be it oil or power or that sort of thing? And have the defenses been softened enough at this point where this could be a relatively easy mission? Do you understand my question? Sure. I mean, we've been working on reducing Iran's ability to retaliate and certainly deal with the straits of the moose. That's how to focus, to deal with Karg-Alan. So our audience understands that's the distribution point for the tankers to load up off the coast of Iran. 90% of their oil moves through that distribution point. Yes, so Central Command has been attempting to reduce whatever retaliation they would have if and when we used ground forces, either assist with the straits of the moose or with Karg-Alan. But I really think we're overthinking this issue in terms of ground forces. And I understand it because they're there and we're working through a whole bunch of options in terms of what's going to take place. I'm not going to get into the details of it myself. But I do believe if we put ground forces any place in that theater, believe me, we will do that understanding what the risk is and in the minds of the commanders, it's an acceptable risk or we would not put them there. All right, thank you, General Keene. I appreciate you joining us as always. I know that you are sort of plugged in on all of these things, so appreciate it so much. And I'm sorry if I'm putting it, but I know you're not going to answer any questions about specific plans or it drives me nuts when reporters say, when are you going to send ground forces? Like no one's going to tell. We're never going to say anything like that out loud. So thank you for answering while at the same time maintaining obvious some confidentiality here in this. Appreciate it, sir. Yeah, sure, always enjoyed being with you and Kathy. Thanks, it's 817. Vince Collinaze is redefining news talk with the Vince Show. It is a reflection of your response to this program that we get to take this thing to the next level. These gigantic shows, this is going to be so much fun. It's unbelievable. In-depth interviews, live-collar interactions, and a front-row seat to the most important conversations of the day. I've got updates, I've got big stories. We'll sort through the truth of what's really going on. So buckle up, here it comes. The Vince Show, following listen on your favorite platform. This isn't your average podcast. This pod is about to be crazy. This is Full Send. It's just like a boy scrap. Join the party. We threw a spontaneous party out of nowhere. It was crazy. And we pulled off a crazy prank. Pranks, parties, and viral culture at its wildest. Just seeing the guys that you brought in and seeing their different personalities and stuff. It's been entertaining, dude. This could be the greatest content buildup of all time, bro. The Full Send podcast. Dude, let's get ready to rumble. Follow and listen on your favorite platform. Let's do it.
