Edward Turzanski - National Security Analyst Joins Houston's Morning News

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Okay, as promised. Now let's get a little more analysis
of what the president did on Saturday and what it
means going forward. Edward Tarzansky is a national security analyst.
Good morning, sir, Good morning Bob. So obviously this is
something the President was being very very kloy about, played
this very very close to the chest, and in fact
used a lot of distractions and diversions before this strike happened.

(00:23):
And apparently our bombers were on their way out of
Iranian airspace before they even knew what hit them. Talk
about the operational success of this, if you would, and
then give us your analysis of what it means going
forward in the Middle East now that they have well
had their nuclear weaponry program obliterated. According to the President.

Speaker 2 (00:46):
Bob, the only thing more important than all of the
technical aspects of the operation is the fact that nothing
about it leaked. Everything was ahead fake. We're going to
give it. We're going to give it as much as
two weeks time. Well take that literally if you want.

(01:08):
That could mean it happens in two weeks. That means
it could be happening as we speak. And I think
the fact that they did not share information with members
of Congress beyond Speaker Johnson, and they were able to
keep a tight lid on This is absolutely breathtaking because

(01:31):
in recent years that's not what's happened. Somebody has always
had something to say, so that's just put that off
to the side. It's just very impressive and it is
by far the most consequential strike against the Iranian Republic,
not the Iranian people, but the republic, the Mulazan in

(01:54):
the country. It's the most spectacular thing we've done since
nineteen seventy and they have been killing our people, arming
our interests on a very consistent basis since so, I
think to all of the states in the region, the
ones who count, this is a clear sign that the

(02:17):
United States takes the Iranian threat very seriously. And I
will tell you not just the Israelis, but also the
Gulf Arabs are very pleased about that.

Speaker 1 (02:30):
We're talking with Edward Trazanski, national security analysts. So let's
talk about this now from a national security perspective. Everybody
is worried about retaliation. Question one, do you think there
will be retaliation on the part of any Iranian allies
i e. China, Russia? And two what about Iranian retaliation
from within our own borders. There were over fifteen hundred

(02:51):
Iranians who came in amongst the millions who across Joe
Biden's open border in the last four years. Could they
be planning some thing or activate something inside of our
borders now after this attack.

Speaker 2 (03:06):
I am much more concerned about the second than the first.
Russia and China have kept their powder dry, and basically
the Iyatola is on his own as for sleeper cells
and all the real danger that came our way. First
of all, when Obama sent one point seven billion in

(03:30):
cash on pallets for reasons known but the God, so
that the Iotolas could fund everything that you've seen, including
October seventh. And secondly, as you point out, all of
the Iranians allowed to come into the country along with
others from states that mean to do us harm during

(03:52):
the Biden administration. We are a vast continental nation, three
hundred and thirty million people. Sleeper cells are exactly that
they lie in slumber until they've been activated. So Homeland
Security the FBI today have a lot of very hard

(04:13):
work to do. And again, I think what's happening in
the age of Trump, A lot of things that had
happened with Biden and Obama, which people had just kind
of shrugged their shoulders because the danger wasn't imminent. Now
that the I tool that came so close to the

(04:33):
nuclear weapon, all of the bad moves by the United
States government and those two administrations are coming to the
foe and they have to be dealt with. So we're
going to have to be very clear, mature about what
the threats are. But they are there, and they would
have happened regardless. You think that just because we've set

(04:58):
the audience back in a new clear program, all of
a sudden, we're gonna have a wave of problems. We
imagine what would have happened if they had gotten the bomb.

Speaker 1 (05:11):
Oh, it would have been a catastrophic chain reaction in
the Middle East. They would have held the entire Middle
East hostage.

Speaker 2 (05:16):
And everyone knows, not just the Middle East, that's the point,
not just the Middle East.

Speaker 1 (05:22):
Well, and that obviously would directly impact our only democratic
ally in the region, and certainly would would affect us
as well. It's yeah, I mean, this is why the
President had to do what he did, and he pointed
it out, and I'm so glad you did. Every president
since nineteen seventy nine has talked about neutralizing Iran and
their abilities to you know, to wage wage war. They

(05:43):
are a different type of country. Even Van Jones on
CNN described this is a very different type of country.
These are not normal people with normal and now talking
about the Iranian people were talking about the regime, We're
talking about the mulas, talking about the Ayatola. These individuals
are different and for forty plus years people have been
talking about neutralizing.

Speaker 2 (06:00):
The boy big, big takeaway, lesson the big takeaway lesson
bad news doesn't get better with age. So if you
tick it down the road, don't be surprised it's going
to come back at you in a much more dangerous
fashion than you first thought.

Speaker 1 (06:16):
I'm gonna save that one. I'm gonna save that one
and coin you and I will make sure to credit you.
That's a great line. National security analyst Edward Tarzanski, Sir,
thank you so much for the great insight. We appreciate that.

Speaker 2 (06:27):
Thank you, Bob