April 19, 2024 • 11 mins
Israel finally retaliated against Iran. Talking to Armstrong & Getty, Military analyst Mike Lyons breaks it down for us.
Talking to A&G, military analyst Mike Lyons breaks it down for us.
Hear the entire conversation in a new episode of Armstrong & Getty's Extra Large Podcast....
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
What we now have is Iran versus Israel. Each time
one hits the other, the other feels they have to
do something. That's you know, the typical security spiral, where
one side does something that it believes it has to
do the other side can't do nothing. Then that triggers,
you know, a further one. So up goes the ratchet.
(00:22):
So far it's been calibrated and calculated, but it could
get out of hand. That's Freed Zakaria on CNN this morning.
There was a retaliatory attack by Israel in Iran, actually
attacked in Iran last night, but Israel hasn't claimed they
have and Iran hasn't claimed that they were attacked. Only
(00:44):
our pentagon has said that this happened, and so officially
it's you know, it's it's interesting. Neither neither the attacker
or the attack he's willing to admit it happened. How intriguing.
Let's discuss with CNN military analyst Mike Lions. Mike served
with various military organizations both the US and Europe throughout
his career, and I would like to talk about Europe
in a bit.
Speaker 2 (01:03):
But Mike, greetings, how are you taking one of you guys,
great to be back.
Speaker 1 (01:07):
First of all, how much damage was done in this
attack by Israel on Auran.
Speaker 2 (01:12):
Well, we don't know specifically, we haven't seen the battle
damage assessment enough to you know, create the flak. It
range decided, you know, obviously to try to shoot it down.
But the bottom line is it got through and it
was a military target in the same coincidentally a location
where Iran converts mine uranium before it figures to that
(01:35):
third stage where it gets to that enrichment stage, and
in the FURDO and the files reason in order to
create nuclear capability like we all saw Oppenheimer, right, So
that's what definitely goes down. But it's definitely close enough.
So I think there was two issues here. Number One,
they took out it was a military target. They took
out what was an air base and likely created runways,
(01:57):
and took out F fourteens you know, planes from literally
fifty years ago, and Isuel could claim that they were
part of that initial barrage that took place last week
on Sunday. But the second thing, it's just close enough
to that nuclear facility, and the message from Israel to
Iran is we could get any of these facilities we want.
Your air defense platforms are just not capable. And the
(02:18):
difference between you firing weapons and US firing weapons that
you as ours will actually hit the.
Speaker 1 (02:22):
Target well, sensor Ran seems to be really close to
a bomb at least that's what the reporting was last week.
Why didn't Israel just go ahead and take out their
nuclear facilities?
Speaker 2 (02:32):
It would be too difficult. That would be a very
serious military campaign. I'm not even sure you'd accomplish that.
You would set it back if you destroyed it, but
you would. You know, they've diversed this program through multiple
different areas up and down inside of Iran, and I
don't think you know, it would be more than one strike.
It would be an absolute campaign in order to take
(02:54):
it out. This facility in particular would be important. It's
kind of the second phase and that nuclear enrichment process,
and so you know you have to have all three.
But also, you know, the intellectual capital now is inside
of Iran to do this. It's not like when he
ISRAELI stick out Ostrich in eighty one or took up
the Syrian one in Iusozo six and sometime in thear
O seven. They you know, those are facilities built by
(03:17):
someone else, the North Koreans or the Chinese, those countries
really had no idea what was going on. They kind
of outsourced it. Iron's got this capability now that they know,
they've got scientists, they have the intellectual capital. So you're
not going as ye's out of the bottle. You know,
they're not going to ever be set back. Whether it's
now fifty years from now, Eventually they're going to want
to develop this kind of nuclear nuclear capability for power,
(03:40):
and then potentially that does lead to you know, a
potisla nical weapon.
Speaker 1 (03:43):
Well, golly, that's something to look forward to. Back to
the strike in Farid Zakaria's point there that it's the
inevitable obligatory counter strike and ratcheting up, it feels pretty
clearly to me to be a ratcheting down.
Speaker 2 (03:57):
What do you think, Yeah, I think so deterrence is
based on offensive capability, and that's what we're talking about
when we say deterrence is becoming restored. You know, when
the White House tells Israel, you know, take the w
nothing got through. Defensive posture does not deter anybody in
the future. It doesn't you know that the next time
the Iranians can attack with six hundred missiles or one
(04:20):
thousand missiles or you know, whatever's in their inventory. Who's
to say that that won't get through. So so from
from a just a just a definition perspective, you know,
there's no there was no deterrence, and that's what Israel
had to do. Number one is re established the deterrence
and that's an offensive capability. And so that's what they did.
And by sending the message that the again the Iranian
air defense platforms, they went after them. The looks that
(04:42):
they took out a few of those, some radar sites
as well. I wouldn't be surprised if they took out
some along the way. They likely, if Iron is smart,
they've prepositioned radarf forward in places like Syria and these
other little locations in the Middle East, as they have
their fingerprints everywhere there. So I think that from from
Israel's perspective, they had to strike back offensively. They had
to have a target hit the ground. And oh, by
(05:03):
the way, you didn't you didn't see any Chinese or
Russian air of fence platforms going after why because Roan
doesn't have any those kind of allies. So this is
where you know, but for the United States, some of
those missiles make it, make it make it through the
other night. But this is a case where it's going
to have allies that the US has arn doesn't have
any those allies. And should Israel decide now that I
(05:25):
think de terrence has been restored, Aron now knows that
if it wants, all it's going to do is readjust
that next fire mission and instead of hitting that military
target in that town, they can hit in Istlan, they
can hit the whole nuclear facility there.
Speaker 1 (05:38):
Yeah. I got to say, I learned something last night
from your tweet. And it's obvious once it's stated, this
is probably the sort of thing they teach you at
West Point. But deterrence is restored by showing your offensive capability,
not your defensive capability. And yeah, yeah, so saying hey, hey,
I could stop you doesn't work. You got to hit
(05:58):
them so hard. Yeah, that's really interesting.
Speaker 2 (06:01):
Yeah, yeah, and that's what I think. That's why I
had to respond, And I thought it might have been
a little more covert. And who knows what else what's
going on. There could be cyber attacks going on, There
could be all kinds of other things that they're doing,
and people that I've been talking to think that it'll
go back into more of the shadows now. And you know,
if you're a scientist, keep your head on a swivel.
And I think that, or I still not to say
Israel is not going to attack inside a Syria or
(06:24):
attack military targets that Iranian hall.
Speaker 1 (06:25):
All right, as I said, as I said earlier, if
I'm a reigning nuclear scientist, I wouldn't go out for
a jog at night.
Speaker 2 (06:30):
Yeah, or have a cup of tea. Here, I have
this cup of tea. It's going to be really good.
Give us a shot.
Speaker 1 (06:35):
So, Mike, I asked this, not for political reasons, but
geo political historical reasons. Have you an answer if you'd like,
as a dad, as a coach, as a military commander, whatever.
How pathetic is it the whole don't don't when time
after time they went ahead and did.
Speaker 2 (06:58):
Did Yeah, yeah, it's you're not a sun also that
serves right now. So it is very concerning that level
of rhetoric. And I'm not sure who it's two. Is
it too Alan or is it actually to a political
body out in Michigan some place that he's trying to
gather votes for I mean somebody's size right now. Are
talking internally as opposed to externally. You used to have
(07:20):
a country where an administration, you know, there would be
a sign on the wall that says the priority is
the country, period, full stop. And anytime someone came up
with some kind of crazy hair green schemes, it wasn't.
So how did they do with that? Because if it doesn't,
we're not going to do it well. Saying things like
don't or things like take the w you're good to go,
I mean like it. It's not in the best interest
of our country. It's in the best interest frankly, that
(07:42):
Israel puts as much military spank on Iran as possible
and to beat their capability. Look, they get thousands of
these rockets. They only sent three hundred the other day.
If the Iranians would like they could, they could fire
a thousand, and I guarantee some of them would make
their way through. They're they're dumb. You know what I
mean by that? Those ballistic missiles are travel in a
(08:03):
way that they're not you can't really aim them. They've
got all kinds of things, and that they're like those
scud missiles from the nineties, they could hit anywhere, and
so it's kind of hard to hit them down, and
so that that could still happen. So let this get
brat get back to speak softly and carry a big stick,
not to speak, you know, dumbly and carry you know,
whatever happens. Mother comes next, you.
Speaker 1 (08:20):
Know, amen to that. So you use the term flack earlier,
which trip the trigger in my head. Have you watched
Masters of the Area yet the series? Yeah, what do
you think of it?
Speaker 2 (08:30):
Yeah, terrific. I think that story has not been told,
you know, each of these different interest groups, you know,
the Army's story always gets told with you know, obviously
Banded Brothers and Saving Private Ryan the best the best
movie I've ever seen that replicates combat frankly, and then
you set the Pacific that series because each of the
you know, and the story of the Air Force pilots
has not really been told there. But it also demonstrated
(08:52):
what that life was like. I mean, they would go out,
maybe get shot down, if not, they come back, they
go up, maybe get shut down, come back, they go up,
they get shot down and become a pow and you know,
you know, that's not the same as a tactical situation
on the ground, but the courage of those crews, I mean,
deciding when to bail out at five thousand feet or
ten thousand feet in you know, non static line parachutes,
(09:13):
and it just it's incredible and the courage that they show.
So I'm glad that story was finally told for all
those those in the eighth the Air Force back at
the time, which is part of the Army, actually the
Army Air Force Corps back then. Tremendous story, I.
Speaker 1 (09:26):
Think, yeah, well you understand why for the British version
of that Churchill's quote. Have never had so many owed
so much to so few, I mean, as a hell
of a thing to do right right, exactly? A final
question for me at least, Mike, we're discussing the situation Ukraine,
Putin the funding the rest of it earlier, and we're
discussing the likelihood that certain voices are correct, that Putin
(09:50):
would continue to press forward and at the very least
grab up just a little chunk of Poland on some
pretext and just a bit of estonia. You know, Well,
Hitler in thirty eight style strategy, how concerned about that?
Do you think that's paranoia or just a pitch to
get more funding, or do you think that's a realistic possibility.
Speaker 2 (10:10):
Now, a pitch to get more funding. He's not any
position to take any of these other lands. He can
barely contain what he's got in Ukraine right now, although
from a just a grinding out perspective, he continues to
do that. But if they do take Poland or Estonia,
those are NATO countries and that trigger's Article five and
here we go. But I don't think that that that,
(10:33):
you know, Russia has that capability. You know, you go
back to the terrence. Part of that sixty billion dollar
package would be the terrence because if Russia knew that
the Ukraine's can draw on that kind of thing, that
would really, you know, potentially stop them and decide that
they're going to negotiate at that point in time. Well,
the other thing too, is we're both seeing both of
these platforms, both of these theaters. Is the importance of
(10:56):
air defense. I'll tell you right now, find the air
defense companies, invest in them, because when these flicks are over,
countries are going to really recognize the importance of protecting
their airspace. I think we've talked about that before. But
it's just more or less really come now to be
as we saw when Israel like violates the Iranian airspace
last night without without any kind of problem at all.
You're seeing even in Ukraine. Now, if Ukraine, if we'd
(11:18):
let the Ukraine take some of these offensive weapons attacking
the Russia, they would be have they'd have some real
problems too. I think they're you know the airpens platforms
that Iran has. Oh by the way, those are sic
three hundreds, those are Russian, may Chinese made systems. It's
all the same crap, and it just goes to show
the superior of the Western technology in the battlefield right now.
Speaker 1 (11:36):
Uh CNN Military analyst Major Mike Lions Mike always enlightening.
Really enjoyed the chat. Have a great weekend, looking forward
to talking again.
Speaker 2 (11:43):
Great guys. Had an aspect's looking forward to the weekend
taking Oh.
Speaker 1 (11:46):
Cool, have fun, go to the sphere. I went to
the sphere Armstrong ANDETI
What we now have is Iran versus Israel. Each time
one hits the other, the other feels they have to
do something. That's you know, the typical security spiral, where
one side does something that it believes it has to
do the other side can't do nothing. Then that triggers,
you know, a further one. So up goes the ratchet.
(00:22):
So far it's been calibrated and calculated, but it could
get out of hand. That's Freed Zakaria on CNN this morning.
There was a retaliatory attack by Israel in Iran, actually
attacked in Iran last night, but Israel hasn't claimed they
have and Iran hasn't claimed that they were attacked. Only
(00:44):
our pentagon has said that this happened, and so officially
it's you know, it's it's interesting. Neither neither the attacker
or the attack he's willing to admit it happened. How intriguing.
Let's discuss with CNN military analyst Mike Lions. Mike served
with various military organizations both the US and Europe throughout
his career, and I would like to talk about Europe
in a bit.
Speaker 2 (01:03):
But Mike, greetings, how are you taking one of you guys,
great to be back.
Speaker 1 (01:07):
First of all, how much damage was done in this
attack by Israel on Auran.
Speaker 2 (01:12):
Well, we don't know specifically, we haven't seen the battle
damage assessment enough to you know, create the flak. It
range decided, you know, obviously to try to shoot it down.
But the bottom line is it got through and it
was a military target in the same coincidentally a location
where Iran converts mine uranium before it figures to that
(01:35):
third stage where it gets to that enrichment stage, and
in the FURDO and the files reason in order to
create nuclear capability like we all saw Oppenheimer, right, So
that's what definitely goes down. But it's definitely close enough.
So I think there was two issues here. Number One,
they took out it was a military target. They took
out what was an air base and likely created runways,
(01:57):
and took out F fourteens you know, planes from literally
fifty years ago, and Isuel could claim that they were
part of that initial barrage that took place last week
on Sunday. But the second thing, it's just close enough
to that nuclear facility, and the message from Israel to
Iran is we could get any of these facilities we want.
Your air defense platforms are just not capable. And the
(02:18):
difference between you firing weapons and US firing weapons that
you as ours will actually hit the.
Speaker 1 (02:22):
Target well, sensor Ran seems to be really close to
a bomb at least that's what the reporting was last week.
Why didn't Israel just go ahead and take out their
nuclear facilities?
Speaker 2 (02:32):
It would be too difficult. That would be a very
serious military campaign. I'm not even sure you'd accomplish that.
You would set it back if you destroyed it, but
you would. You know, they've diversed this program through multiple
different areas up and down inside of Iran, and I
don't think you know, it would be more than one strike.
It would be an absolute campaign in order to take
(02:54):
it out. This facility in particular would be important. It's
kind of the second phase and that nuclear enrichment process,
and so you know you have to have all three.
But also, you know, the intellectual capital now is inside
of Iran to do this. It's not like when he
ISRAELI stick out Ostrich in eighty one or took up
the Syrian one in Iusozo six and sometime in thear
O seven. They you know, those are facilities built by
(03:17):
someone else, the North Koreans or the Chinese, those countries
really had no idea what was going on. They kind
of outsourced it. Iron's got this capability now that they know,
they've got scientists, they have the intellectual capital. So you're
not going as ye's out of the bottle. You know,
they're not going to ever be set back. Whether it's
now fifty years from now, Eventually they're going to want
to develop this kind of nuclear nuclear capability for power,
(03:40):
and then potentially that does lead to you know, a
potisla nical weapon.
Speaker 1 (03:43):
Well, golly, that's something to look forward to. Back to
the strike in Farid Zakaria's point there that it's the
inevitable obligatory counter strike and ratcheting up, it feels pretty
clearly to me to be a ratcheting down.
Speaker 2 (03:57):
What do you think, Yeah, I think so deterrence is
based on offensive capability, and that's what we're talking about
when we say deterrence is becoming restored. You know, when
the White House tells Israel, you know, take the w
nothing got through. Defensive posture does not deter anybody in
the future. It doesn't you know that the next time
the Iranians can attack with six hundred missiles or one
(04:20):
thousand missiles or you know, whatever's in their inventory. Who's
to say that that won't get through. So so from
from a just a just a definition perspective, you know,
there's no there was no deterrence, and that's what Israel
had to do. Number one is re established the deterrence
and that's an offensive capability. And so that's what they did.
And by sending the message that the again the Iranian
air defense platforms, they went after them. The looks that
(04:42):
they took out a few of those, some radar sites
as well. I wouldn't be surprised if they took out
some along the way. They likely, if Iron is smart,
they've prepositioned radarf forward in places like Syria and these
other little locations in the Middle East, as they have
their fingerprints everywhere there. So I think that from from
Israel's perspective, they had to strike back offensively. They had
to have a target hit the ground. And oh, by
(05:03):
the way, you didn't you didn't see any Chinese or
Russian air of fence platforms going after why because Roan
doesn't have any those kind of allies. So this is
where you know, but for the United States, some of
those missiles make it, make it make it through the
other night. But this is a case where it's going
to have allies that the US has arn doesn't have
any those allies. And should Israel decide now that I
(05:25):
think de terrence has been restored, Aron now knows that
if it wants, all it's going to do is readjust
that next fire mission and instead of hitting that military
target in that town, they can hit in Istlan, they
can hit the whole nuclear facility there.
Speaker 1 (05:38):
Yeah. I got to say, I learned something last night
from your tweet. And it's obvious once it's stated, this
is probably the sort of thing they teach you at
West Point. But deterrence is restored by showing your offensive capability,
not your defensive capability. And yeah, yeah, so saying hey, hey,
I could stop you doesn't work. You got to hit
(05:58):
them so hard. Yeah, that's really interesting.
Speaker 2 (06:01):
Yeah, yeah, and that's what I think. That's why I
had to respond, And I thought it might have been
a little more covert. And who knows what else what's
going on. There could be cyber attacks going on, There
could be all kinds of other things that they're doing,
and people that I've been talking to think that it'll
go back into more of the shadows now. And you know,
if you're a scientist, keep your head on a swivel.
And I think that, or I still not to say
Israel is not going to attack inside a Syria or
(06:24):
attack military targets that Iranian hall.
Speaker 1 (06:25):
All right, as I said, as I said earlier, if
I'm a reigning nuclear scientist, I wouldn't go out for
a jog at night.
Speaker 2 (06:30):
Yeah, or have a cup of tea. Here, I have
this cup of tea. It's going to be really good.
Give us a shot.
Speaker 1 (06:35):
So, Mike, I asked this, not for political reasons, but
geo political historical reasons. Have you an answer if you'd like,
as a dad, as a coach, as a military commander, whatever.
How pathetic is it the whole don't don't when time
after time they went ahead and did.
Speaker 2 (06:58):
Did Yeah, yeah, it's you're not a sun also that
serves right now. So it is very concerning that level
of rhetoric. And I'm not sure who it's two. Is
it too Alan or is it actually to a political
body out in Michigan some place that he's trying to
gather votes for I mean somebody's size right now. Are
talking internally as opposed to externally. You used to have
(07:20):
a country where an administration, you know, there would be
a sign on the wall that says the priority is
the country, period, full stop. And anytime someone came up
with some kind of crazy hair green schemes, it wasn't.
So how did they do with that? Because if it doesn't,
we're not going to do it well. Saying things like
don't or things like take the w you're good to go,
I mean like it. It's not in the best interest
of our country. It's in the best interest frankly, that
(07:42):
Israel puts as much military spank on Iran as possible
and to beat their capability. Look, they get thousands of
these rockets. They only sent three hundred the other day.
If the Iranians would like they could, they could fire
a thousand, and I guarantee some of them would make
their way through. They're they're dumb. You know what I
mean by that? Those ballistic missiles are travel in a
(08:03):
way that they're not you can't really aim them. They've
got all kinds of things, and that they're like those
scud missiles from the nineties, they could hit anywhere, and
so it's kind of hard to hit them down, and
so that that could still happen. So let this get
brat get back to speak softly and carry a big stick,
not to speak, you know, dumbly and carry you know,
whatever happens. Mother comes next, you.
Speaker 1 (08:20):
Know, amen to that. So you use the term flack earlier,
which trip the trigger in my head. Have you watched
Masters of the Area yet the series? Yeah, what do
you think of it?
Speaker 2 (08:30):
Yeah, terrific. I think that story has not been told,
you know, each of these different interest groups, you know,
the Army's story always gets told with you know, obviously
Banded Brothers and Saving Private Ryan the best the best
movie I've ever seen that replicates combat frankly, and then
you set the Pacific that series because each of the
you know, and the story of the Air Force pilots
has not really been told there. But it also demonstrated
(08:52):
what that life was like. I mean, they would go out,
maybe get shot down, if not, they come back, they
go up, maybe get shut down, come back, they go up,
they get shot down and become a pow and you know,
you know, that's not the same as a tactical situation
on the ground, but the courage of those crews, I mean,
deciding when to bail out at five thousand feet or
ten thousand feet in you know, non static line parachutes,
(09:13):
and it just it's incredible and the courage that they show.
So I'm glad that story was finally told for all
those those in the eighth the Air Force back at
the time, which is part of the Army, actually the
Army Air Force Corps back then. Tremendous story, I.
Speaker 1 (09:26):
Think, yeah, well you understand why for the British version
of that Churchill's quote. Have never had so many owed
so much to so few, I mean, as a hell
of a thing to do right right, exactly? A final
question for me at least, Mike, we're discussing the situation Ukraine,
Putin the funding the rest of it earlier, and we're
discussing the likelihood that certain voices are correct, that Putin
(09:50):
would continue to press forward and at the very least
grab up just a little chunk of Poland on some
pretext and just a bit of estonia. You know, Well,
Hitler in thirty eight style strategy, how concerned about that?
Do you think that's paranoia or just a pitch to
get more funding, or do you think that's a realistic possibility.
Speaker 2 (10:10):
Now, a pitch to get more funding. He's not any
position to take any of these other lands. He can
barely contain what he's got in Ukraine right now, although
from a just a grinding out perspective, he continues to
do that. But if they do take Poland or Estonia,
those are NATO countries and that trigger's Article five and
here we go. But I don't think that that that,
(10:33):
you know, Russia has that capability. You know, you go
back to the terrence. Part of that sixty billion dollar
package would be the terrence because if Russia knew that
the Ukraine's can draw on that kind of thing, that
would really, you know, potentially stop them and decide that
they're going to negotiate at that point in time. Well,
the other thing too, is we're both seeing both of
these platforms, both of these theaters. Is the importance of
(10:56):
air defense. I'll tell you right now, find the air
defense companies, invest in them, because when these flicks are over,
countries are going to really recognize the importance of protecting
their airspace. I think we've talked about that before. But
it's just more or less really come now to be
as we saw when Israel like violates the Iranian airspace
last night without without any kind of problem at all.
You're seeing even in Ukraine. Now, if Ukraine, if we'd
(11:18):
let the Ukraine take some of these offensive weapons attacking
the Russia, they would be have they'd have some real
problems too. I think they're you know the airpens platforms
that Iran has. Oh by the way, those are sic
three hundreds, those are Russian, may Chinese made systems. It's
all the same crap, and it just goes to show
the superior of the Western technology in the battlefield right now.
Speaker 1 (11:36):
Uh CNN Military analyst Major Mike Lions Mike always enlightening.
Really enjoyed the chat. Have a great weekend, looking forward
to talking again.
Speaker 2 (11:43):
Great guys. Had an aspect's looking forward to the weekend
taking Oh.
Speaker 1 (11:46):
Cool, have fun, go to the sphere. I went to
the sphere Armstrong ANDETI
Popular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
The Nikki Glaser Podcast
Every week comedian and infamous roaster Nikki Glaser provides a fun, fast-paced, and brutally honest look into current pop-culture and her own personal life.