Blog

The Kyle Anzalone Show: COL. Douglas Macgregor on Iran, Ukraine, and the Fall of U.S. Power

The Kyle Anzalone Show: COL. Douglas Macgregor on Iran, Ukraine, and the Fall of U.S. Power

A wall of U.S. air and naval power now sits within reach of Iran, but does massed hardware equal a winning strategy? We sit down with Colonel Douglas Macgregor to map the real shape of a campaign: suppressing integrated air defenses, cracking command-and-control, and hunting Iran’s theater ballistic missiles before they launch. The outline sounds familiar; the context does not. Iran fields depth, industry, and partners willing to help, and that changes everything.

We walk through the limits that rarely make the speeches: finite interceptor stocks, exhausted carrier groups, long supply lines, and the simple physics of sortie generation. If tempo drops after a week and magazines thin by two, what choice set remains? Macgregor argues deterrence-by-buildup misreads Tehran’s will to fight. For Washington, this is leverage and signaling; for Iran, it’s survival. That gap in motivation means salvos won’t stop because a president expects them to. And if an American ship or regional base takes a serious hit, the psychological shock could matter as much as the physical damage.

External players complicate the map. China sees Iran as vital to energy security and the Belt and Road, reportedly moving hundreds of missiles and precision systems that threaten ships at sea. Russia’s experience in air defense and electronic warfare lurks in the background. Across the region, public anger grows, and Turkey weighs how and when to act. At home, elite consensus can be loud, but assumptions of quick regime change and clean outcomes echo past mistakes.

This conversation is a grounded, unsentimental look at targets, timelines, risks, and endgames. If the first days don’t deliver capitulation, what then—pause, escalate, or negotiate from a weaker hand? We don’t offer easy answers; we ask the questions leaders must face before the launch order is signed. If this deep dive challenged your assumptions, follow, share with a friend, and leave a review so more listeners can find it.

The Navy Woke Wake: Haze Gray and Raw Sewage Underway

No urinals on the USS Ford.

This is a feature and not a bug.

The main issue is breakdowns with the ship’s Vacuum Collection, Holding and Transfer (VCHT) system, which controls its toilets and sewage collection. The system is split across ten independent zones and supports more than 600 toilets on the ship. Acid flushes can clear and restore the system, but according to that 2020 GAO report, each flush costs the Navy $400,000.

Approx 15% of the crew are female.

“Nine hot dogs for every bun” as my Navy colleague would mention.

Don’t look away when you see the video footage of the toilets overflowing underway. You cannot reliably use commodes in WMO Sea State 4 (moderate and above) but you can employ water-less urinals.

This is from 2017:

https://www.navytimes.com/news/your-navy/2017/07/21/no-urinals-on-the-new-navy-aircraft-carrier/

The Kyle Anzalone Show [GUEST] PROF. Mohammad Marandi : Brink of War! – Inside Iran’s Dealmaking, Deterrence, And Doubt

PROF. Mohammad Marandi joins Kyle live from Moscow. His Internet connection is a little sketchy but the audio is fine. Be sure to comment to help us with the YT algorithm.

What if the real battlefield isn’t a border but a bottleneck? We sit down with Professor Mohammad Marandi to examine how Iran calculates risk, leverage, and legitimacy across a map defined as much by energy corridors as by military bases. From the broken promises of the JCPOA to the aftershocks of a 12-day war, we trace why Tehran insists on a narrow negotiating lane—nuclear assurances only—while locking every other door.

Marandi argues that missiles, drones, and regional alliances won’t be traded for sanctions relief, pointing to lessons from Syria and recent clashes that, in Iran’s view, validated conventional deterrence. He walks through why trust collapsed: inconsistent U.S. compliance, shifting goalposts, and the absence of automatic penalties when commitments are breached. The proposed fix is mechanical rather than symbolic—snap, balanced consequences for violations that make cheating too costly. Alongside this, we explore Iran’s stated religious and strategic opposition to nuclear weapons, paired with an explicit caveat about existential threats that functions as deterrence without overt weaponization.

The most provocative claim centers on geography and economics. Iran’s core deterrent, he says, is aimed at the Persian Gulf, not Israel: dense, vulnerable infrastructure, U.S. bases within range, and shipping lanes that tie oil and gas to global stability. A major war would rupture supply chains, spike markets, and outpace neat military outcomes. That logic, combined with a domestic pivot toward BRICS and the SCO, sets the political price for any new deal. Expect discussions to focus on recognition of enrichment rights, rigorous but bounded inspections, and automatic reciprocity for noncompliance—nothing more on missiles or allies.

We close by testing media narratives of Iranian fragility against mass mobilizations at home and a wider global mood swing on Israel-Palestine. Agree or challenge these assessments, the takeaway is the same: any agreement that lasts must align with how power, risk, and credibility are actually distributed on the ground and at sea. If this conversation sharpened your view, follow the show, share it with a friend, and leave a review with the one clause you believe any durable deal must include.

The Kyle Anzalone Show: [GUEST] LtCOL. Karen Kwiatkowski : Netanyahu Arrives in Washington to Plot Iran War

Headlines keep colliding: sudden airspace closures, a foreign leader urging new wars, and a deluge of Epstein revelations that raise more questions than answers. We cut through the noise to map the pattern—who benefits from distraction, why certain names stay hidden, and how selective secrecy corrodes the rule of law and our shared sense of justice.

With Lt. Col. Karen Kwiatkowski, we examine the stakes of the Epstein files beyond the horror of child sex trafficking: alleged blackmail, influence peddling, insider trading, and a culture of impunity for elites. We contrast how local law enforcement handles similar crimes with how federal power seems to shield the well-connected, and we explore what that double standard does to public trust. On the domestic front, we look at job-market friction, surging applicant pools, and why rising gold and silver hint at dollar risk and policy uncertainty—economic signals that don’t match the official happy talk.

Abroad, we confront the moral and strategic costs of Gaza, U.S. complicity in escalating violence, and renewed talk of strikes on Iran. “Limited” actions rarely stay limited; supply routes, oil flows, and regional deterrence hang in the balance. We discuss the very real risk of miscalculation and what it would take to step back from the brink. Finally, we outline a path that could actually restore confidence: protect victims but fully name co-conspirators, fire officials who misled Congress, prosecute crimes without fear or favor, and prioritize diplomacy over performative force.

If you’re tired of euphemisms and ready for clarity, this conversation connects the dots and offers a concrete checklist for accountability at home and restraint abroad. Listen, share with someone who cares about justice, and leave a review telling us the one action you most want leaders to take now.

Update February 2025: The Pause That Refreshes

image(1) copy

I have not published an episode for a month which is unusual to those of you used to my fortnightly cadence.

Well, I am moving and that has caused some difficulties in time management. We have relocated and now we are looking for a house while in temporary arrangements.

Then, I happened to have what is best described as a Transient Ischemic Attack (TIA) which may be related to TBI[s] that were discovered in 2019 most likely related to my proximity to three IED explosions.

This was sort of a mini-stroke and caused some articulation/elocution problems that made my speaking voice rather drunken.

It is on the mend and I should be good as new soonest.

I am not trolling for sympathy but simply provisioning an explanation for my lack of podcasting activity. I will be back to our regularly scheduled programming in the near future.

“Few and Defined,” Really?

The takings clause of the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution places a limit (just compensation) on an implied power (eminent domain) that is not listed in Article I, Section 8. Thus, James Madison was less than candid when he said the national government’s powers were “few and defined.” A constitution containing “powers by implication” (another Madisonian phrase) cannot be a constitution of few powers. (See my America’s Counter-Revolution: The Constitution Revisited.)

Podcasts

scotthortonshow logosq

coi banner sq2@0.5x

liberty weekly thumbnail

Don't Tread on Anyone Logo

313x0w (1)

313x0w (1)

313x0w (1)

Pin It on Pinterest