Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
All right, one quick comment before I get to my
special guest. These days, and not just regarding this war,
so much of our politics has become so tribal that
often what you have is that where there's anything involving
Donald Trump or a decision that Donald Trump made, you
(00:23):
end up seeing, especially on TV and on Twitter and
all this sort of thing where there's some financial motivations
involved in how people comment. But you will find people
who are either massively wildly effusively praising the president with
no real qualms or questions, and then the exact other side,
(00:46):
massively aggressively criticizing the president with no real conversation about
the potential upside. And some of the conversation about the
war has been a little higher quality than that, but
not that much. And so I think you all know
(01:08):
because one of my most frequent show guests is my
friend Leland Vittert, who hosts on Balance on NewsNation week
nights at seven pm. And so I watch a lot
of NewsNation these days. I watch it more than any
other cable news network. It's not even close, really, And
I was watching it yesterday and I heard a guest
(01:31):
on I saw and heard one of their guests. Who
I thought, of all the military folks in particular who
I heard talking about the American strikes on the Iranian
nuclear facilities, I thought he was the most well to
coin a phrase, fair and balanced, the positives, the negatives,
(01:52):
just a really sober.
Speaker 2 (01:53):
Assessment, and I thought, I want this guy on my show.
Speaker 1 (01:56):
So joining us right now is Major General Bill Enyard.
Speaker 2 (02:00):
So.
Speaker 1 (02:01):
Bill served active duty in the US Air Force and
then nearly thirty years in the Army National Guard. He
was an Adjutant General of the Illinois National Guard, and
he was a member of Congress from southern Illinois. Bill,
thanks so much for making time to be with us
here on Kowa.
Speaker 3 (02:20):
Great to be with you. And I hope the weather's
cooler in Denver than it is here and southern Illinois,
but I doubt that it is.
Speaker 1 (02:25):
It wasn't yesterday, but it is now. It's seventy something
and lovely today.
Speaker 2 (02:30):
So you can be a little jealous.
Speaker 3 (02:32):
I'm very jealous. Ninety five here.
Speaker 2 (02:35):
Yeah, that's what we had. That's what we had yesterday.
Speaker 1 (02:37):
So let me just before we get into sort of
macro stuff, I want to start with a micro thing,
just because of what's going on I'm sure you're following
the news, and there were these warnings and then apparently
a missile barrage aimed aimed at the US military base
in Cutter but it looks like nothing landed and they
were all taken out in the air. And I also
(03:00):
I thought it was interesting that the Iranian government announced
they were doing this right, And I'm wondering if you
think this could be Iran trying to have it both ways,
which is to say, we're going to say we're attacking
for domestic consumption, so that it looks like we're not
just sitting here getting beaten up, but we're not really
going to attack enough to attract a massive retaliation.
Speaker 3 (03:21):
Is that possible, Well, you know, a lot of folks
are speculating that it is. I think that's certainly a possibility.
You know, the Iranians have launched two hundred missiles at
a time against Israel, so I think it's entirely possible.
This strike evidentally was only ten and it sounds like
(03:43):
it was one at one of our bases in Iraq,
So that could well be that they're attempting to dial back,
that they're attempting to dial back the tensions here, and
of course the really He's are continuing to pound Iran,
(04:04):
so it could well be that Iran only was to
spite one war at a time.
Speaker 1 (04:10):
Okay, So I'm going to give you my sort of
thesis about this big picture thesis, and then I'd love
to know where you agree where you disagree in your
big picture thesis about this. So again, really macro from
my perspective, So I am old enough. I am old
enough to remember the mass murder of American marines and
other personnel in Lebanon in nineteen eighty three. I am
(04:34):
old enough to remember one of Ronald Reagan's few true failures,
which was to turntail and run and essentially not do anything,
not retaliate. And the Iranians have been trained for forty
years that the US is a paper tiger, and I'm
not all that surprised that we thought they thought we
(04:54):
might still be. So they challenged Donald Trump and they
realized he's a different guy. I I supported Trump's strikes
on the nuclear facilities, but I supported them while saying
this is not a no risk or maybe even not
a low risk proposition, although perhaps the lowest risk it's
(05:18):
ever been.
Speaker 2 (05:19):
That doesn't mean, it's very low risk.
Speaker 1 (05:21):
I'll stop there and let you respond to any of
that and add anything you want.
Speaker 3 (05:27):
You know, this, this is really such a complex situation,
and of course there are points to be made on
either side. Here's what concerns me the what is our
long term strategic goal here? You know, in terms of
(05:48):
a tactical operation, this was absolutely brilliant, unquestioned the synchronization,
the planning that went into this, the the this is
this ran better than a switch watch Swiss watch.
Speaker 2 (06:00):
Okay it was.
Speaker 3 (06:02):
It was just unquestionably brilliant.
Speaker 2 (06:04):
But that's at the tactical level.
Speaker 3 (06:07):
Where are we in terms of grand strategy, if you will?
How does this play into our long term strategy for
the Middle East? How does it play into our our
long term strategy with Russia? How long does it? How
does it play into our long term strategy with the world?
(06:28):
And so I haven't heard a long term strategic plan. Uh.
You know, Donald Trump is infamous for changing his mind
from day to day, week to week, let alone months
to month. So uh, the what troubles me is where
where is this hit? You know? Sun Sou said something
(06:52):
along the lines that the the best battle is the
battle not fought. So you know, the UH I think
there well may have been better ways to take out
a Ram's nuclear capability than US bombing them. I've got
a lot of confidence in the Israelis. You know, their
(07:13):
their operation with the pagers brilliant, their their intelligence, their
military top notch. Now do they have the GVU fifty
seven bunker busters or V twos to deliver them. No,
but remember they managed to get a virus into the
Iranians introfusions a few years ago and completely destroyed them.
(07:33):
So you know, I could well have been Thatta who
has playing Donald Trump perfectly here and gotten the Americans involved,
which is to hispin. You know another thing that's crossing
my mind this morning and then really just for the
last half hours. So while I've been paying attention to
what's going on over there, the leaders in each one
(07:55):
of these nations, whether you're you're talking about the Ayatola
or you're talking about Yeah, who are you talking about Trump?
Every one of these leaders upside down in public opinion
polls with their people. None of them are are popular.
And this war, whether you're talking about the Iranians getting
pummeled by the Israelis, or the israelis getting what's going
(08:18):
on in Gaza in Trump's numbers are upside down. So
that's an interesting situation where you have every single leader
involved here and putin of course, it would be upside
down if they had any get a legitimate foll in Russia.
Speaker 1 (08:31):
So are you suggesting a sort of wag the dog
kind of effect where somebody starts a war to improve
their domestic political positions?
Speaker 3 (08:41):
You know that does come to mind, doesn't it. I mean, look, look,
he he can't afford to end the war in Ukraine
because if he does, he admits defeat. The Ayatola certainly
has to strike back against us. To do otherwise would
be to a seat. And uh, Donald Trump, his big
(09:06):
beautiful bill is is not mean anywhere in the US Congress,
which is of course controlled by the Republicans. And you know,
the National Guard in California, in Los Angeles is now
all of a sudden dropped off the radar. All the
oxygen in the room is being consumed by these attacks
and counter attacks in the Middle East, and all while
that's going on, what do we doing? What are we
(09:27):
doing in the Pacific? You know, what are we doing
with China?
Speaker 2 (09:31):
What happened to.
Speaker 3 (09:32):
Talk about tariffs?
Speaker 2 (09:33):
You know, it's all gone interesting. Yeah, So I will
slightly disagree, I think.
Speaker 1 (09:38):
I mean, I think Netan Yahoo is in a lot
more or was maybe in a lot more political trouble
than Trump. As far as Trump goes, he's upside down,
but just barely. And I think Trump feels like he's
doing fine in the polling because especially because he doesn't
believe it anyway, uh, net and Yahoo, you know, before
before the strike, when her on if there were an
election in Israel, he almost certainly.
Speaker 2 (09:58):
Would have lost his job.
Speaker 1 (09:59):
Now, I don't know, but I also think NETANYAHUO was
made for this moment, and his entire political life has
been built around trying to stop Iran.
Speaker 2 (10:08):
So I don't think it's quite fair.
Speaker 1 (10:09):
To attribute a tribute uh you know, domestic political polling
as there as being their their motive.
Speaker 2 (10:15):
Let me let me go with you to the to
the strategic question.
Speaker 1 (10:20):
Isn't it a reasonable strategic gain for the United States
of America, not just for Israel, for Iran not to have,
or at least not to have soon the capacity to
build a nuclear weapon. Does I think that advances our
interest in a lot of ways. I won't get into
all the ways.
Speaker 3 (10:42):
Oh, clearly, uh Iran not having a nuclear weapon is
in our uh best interests. It's existential for Israel. It's
not existential today for us, and it wouldn't be existential
for us for a decade or longer. Uh Iran doesn't
have to live your capability to get to us other
than putting the shoe box and the mailt X.
Speaker 2 (11:07):
But the.
Speaker 3 (11:10):
It is an existential question for Israel clearly. The you know,
but I think I think the question is is larger
just than the question of Iran having nuclear capability. The
rivalries in the Middle East go back not years or decades,
(11:37):
but centuries, and the Arab nations are standing by very
quietly while all this goes on, and and clearly the
governments that the leadership of those Arab nations very much
want to see Iran taken down more than a peg
or two. Here, the the Iranians have been fomenting trouble
(11:59):
for everyone, not just the israelis not just the US,
but indeed for for everyone in the Middle East.
Speaker 1 (12:04):
For for yeah, they attacked Saudi oil fields, remember.
Speaker 3 (12:07):
That absolutely so you know, no one uh, no one
in the Middle East fields sorry for Iran in this situation,
which is why I think that the the ideal here
would be to see the Israelis and the and the
Saudis uh uh get into a peace treaty, and then
(12:34):
Iran would would just be completely uh boxed out of
out of any scenario, right, and you know, the Putins,
Putin's talking and uh and then Trump's tweet about medd
talking about giving nukes to uh Iran yep, uh you know,
and then of course Trump turns around and threatens threatens
(12:56):
Russia with nuclear so from our submarine. So uh, you know,
this whole thing could could easily spiral out of control,
and I think I think people need to stop beating
their chests a little bit here. Yeah, Russia, Russia has
not been able to defeat a country a third its
size with with tiny military capabilities compared to Russia. Russia
(13:20):
has turned out very much to be a paper tiger
in the Ukraine situation. So what what influence they could
have with a Ran to me is questionable, all right.
Speaker 1 (13:31):
And Russia is not going to give Iran a nuclear weapon.
There's there's a zero percent chance of that.
Speaker 2 (13:37):
You know. Russia.
Speaker 1 (13:39):
Putin is particularly Medvedev as well as Putin's little little puppet.
Their professional propaganda's this is, this is what they do,
and I don't take them too seriously. Doesn't mean they
pose no risk, but it just means I don't care
what they say.
Speaker 3 (13:54):
Yeah, I don't. You know, I don't think that they would,
that Russia would give a RAN nuclear up. And after all,
Iran in Russia s a substantial border, and Iranian missiles
could reach well within Russia. But I wouldn't put it
a zero percent probability. I would put it pretty close
(14:14):
to zero.
Speaker 2 (14:15):
Very good, all right, General, I have to leave it there.
Speaker 1 (14:18):
Bill Inyert was the Adjutant General of Illinois for the
National Guard there who was also a congressman in representing
southern Illinois. Thanks so much for your time, very interesting conversation.
Look forward to having you back.
Speaker 3 (14:32):
Terrific being with you today.
Speaker 2 (14:33):
All right, thank you, General,
All right, one quick comment before I get to my
special guest. These days, and not just regarding this war,
so much of our politics has become so tribal that
often what you have is that where there's anything involving
Donald Trump or a decision that Donald Trump made, you
(00:23):
end up seeing, especially on TV and on Twitter and
all this sort of thing where there's some financial motivations
involved in how people comment. But you will find people
who are either massively wildly effusively praising the president with
no real qualms or questions, and then the exact other side,
(00:46):
massively aggressively criticizing the president with no real conversation about
the potential upside. And some of the conversation about the
war has been a little higher quality than that, but
not that much. And so I think you all know
(01:08):
because one of my most frequent show guests is my
friend Leland Vittert, who hosts on Balance on NewsNation week
nights at seven pm. And so I watch a lot
of NewsNation these days. I watch it more than any
other cable news network. It's not even close, really, And
I was watching it yesterday and I heard a guest
(01:31):
on I saw and heard one of their guests. Who
I thought, of all the military folks in particular who
I heard talking about the American strikes on the Iranian
nuclear facilities, I thought he was the most well to
coin a phrase, fair and balanced, the positives, the negatives,
(01:52):
just a really sober.
Speaker 2 (01:53):
Assessment, and I thought, I want this guy on my show.
Speaker 1 (01:56):
So joining us right now is Major General Bill Enyard.
Speaker 2 (02:00):
So.
Speaker 1 (02:01):
Bill served active duty in the US Air Force and
then nearly thirty years in the Army National Guard. He
was an Adjutant General of the Illinois National Guard, and
he was a member of Congress from southern Illinois. Bill,
thanks so much for making time to be with us
here on Kowa.
Speaker 3 (02:20):
Great to be with you. And I hope the weather's
cooler in Denver than it is here and southern Illinois,
but I doubt that it is.
Speaker 1 (02:25):
It wasn't yesterday, but it is now. It's seventy something
and lovely today.
Speaker 2 (02:30):
So you can be a little jealous.
Speaker 3 (02:32):
I'm very jealous. Ninety five here.
Speaker 2 (02:35):
Yeah, that's what we had. That's what we had yesterday.
Speaker 1 (02:37):
So let me just before we get into sort of
macro stuff, I want to start with a micro thing,
just because of what's going on I'm sure you're following
the news, and there were these warnings and then apparently
a missile barrage aimed aimed at the US military base
in Cutter but it looks like nothing landed and they
were all taken out in the air. And I also
(03:00):
I thought it was interesting that the Iranian government announced
they were doing this right, And I'm wondering if you
think this could be Iran trying to have it both ways,
which is to say, we're going to say we're attacking
for domestic consumption, so that it looks like we're not
just sitting here getting beaten up, but we're not really
going to attack enough to attract a massive retaliation.
Speaker 3 (03:21):
Is that possible, Well, you know, a lot of folks
are speculating that it is. I think that's certainly a possibility.
You know, the Iranians have launched two hundred missiles at
a time against Israel, so I think it's entirely possible.
This strike evidentally was only ten and it sounds like
(03:43):
it was one at one of our bases in Iraq,
So that could well be that they're attempting to dial back,
that they're attempting to dial back the tensions here, and
of course the really He's are continuing to pound Iran,
(04:04):
so it could well be that Iran only was to
spite one war at a time.
Speaker 1 (04:10):
Okay, So I'm going to give you my sort of
thesis about this big picture thesis, and then I'd love
to know where you agree where you disagree in your
big picture thesis about this. So again, really macro from
my perspective, So I am old enough. I am old
enough to remember the mass murder of American marines and
other personnel in Lebanon in nineteen eighty three. I am
(04:34):
old enough to remember one of Ronald Reagan's few true failures,
which was to turntail and run and essentially not do anything,
not retaliate. And the Iranians have been trained for forty
years that the US is a paper tiger, and I'm
not all that surprised that we thought they thought we
(04:54):
might still be. So they challenged Donald Trump and they
realized he's a different guy. I I supported Trump's strikes
on the nuclear facilities, but I supported them while saying
this is not a no risk or maybe even not
a low risk proposition, although perhaps the lowest risk it's
(05:18):
ever been.
Speaker 2 (05:19):
That doesn't mean, it's very low risk.
Speaker 1 (05:21):
I'll stop there and let you respond to any of
that and add anything you want.
Speaker 3 (05:27):
You know, this, this is really such a complex situation,
and of course there are points to be made on
either side. Here's what concerns me the what is our
long term strategic goal here? You know, in terms of
(05:48):
a tactical operation, this was absolutely brilliant, unquestioned the synchronization,
the planning that went into this, the the this is
this ran better than a switch watch Swiss watch.
Speaker 2 (06:00):
Okay it was.
Speaker 3 (06:02):
It was just unquestionably brilliant.
Speaker 2 (06:04):
But that's at the tactical level.
Speaker 3 (06:07):
Where are we in terms of grand strategy, if you will?
How does this play into our long term strategy for
the Middle East? How does it play into our our
long term strategy with Russia? How long does it? How
does it play into our long term strategy with the world?
(06:28):
And so I haven't heard a long term strategic plan. Uh.
You know, Donald Trump is infamous for changing his mind
from day to day, week to week, let alone months
to month. So uh, the what troubles me is where
where is this hit? You know? Sun Sou said something
(06:52):
along the lines that the the best battle is the
battle not fought. So you know, the UH I think
there well may have been better ways to take out
a Ram's nuclear capability than US bombing them. I've got
a lot of confidence in the Israelis. You know, their
(07:13):
their operation with the pagers brilliant, their their intelligence, their
military top notch. Now do they have the GVU fifty
seven bunker busters or V twos to deliver them. No,
but remember they managed to get a virus into the
Iranians introfusions a few years ago and completely destroyed them.
(07:33):
So you know, I could well have been Thatta who
has playing Donald Trump perfectly here and gotten the Americans involved,
which is to hispin. You know another thing that's crossing
my mind this morning and then really just for the
last half hours. So while I've been paying attention to
what's going on over there, the leaders in each one
(07:55):
of these nations, whether you're you're talking about the Ayatola
or you're talking about Yeah, who are you talking about Trump?
Every one of these leaders upside down in public opinion
polls with their people. None of them are are popular.
And this war, whether you're talking about the Iranians getting
pummeled by the Israelis, or the israelis getting what's going
(08:18):
on in Gaza in Trump's numbers are upside down. So
that's an interesting situation where you have every single leader
involved here and putin of course, it would be upside
down if they had any get a legitimate foll in Russia.
Speaker 1 (08:31):
So are you suggesting a sort of wag the dog
kind of effect where somebody starts a war to improve
their domestic political positions?
Speaker 3 (08:41):
You know that does come to mind, doesn't it. I mean, look, look,
he he can't afford to end the war in Ukraine
because if he does, he admits defeat. The Ayatola certainly
has to strike back against us. To do otherwise would
be to a seat. And uh, Donald Trump, his big
(09:06):
beautiful bill is is not mean anywhere in the US Congress,
which is of course controlled by the Republicans. And you know,
the National Guard in California, in Los Angeles is now
all of a sudden dropped off the radar. All the
oxygen in the room is being consumed by these attacks
and counter attacks in the Middle East, and all while
that's going on, what do we doing? What are we
(09:27):
doing in the Pacific? You know, what are we doing
with China?
Speaker 2 (09:31):
What happened to.
Speaker 3 (09:32):
Talk about tariffs?
Speaker 2 (09:33):
You know, it's all gone interesting. Yeah, So I will
slightly disagree, I think.
Speaker 1 (09:38):
I mean, I think Netan Yahoo is in a lot
more or was maybe in a lot more political trouble
than Trump. As far as Trump goes, he's upside down,
but just barely. And I think Trump feels like he's
doing fine in the polling because especially because he doesn't
believe it anyway, uh, net and Yahoo, you know, before
before the strike, when her on if there were an
election in Israel, he almost certainly.
Speaker 2 (09:58):
Would have lost his job.
Speaker 1 (09:59):
Now, I don't know, but I also think NETANYAHUO was
made for this moment, and his entire political life has
been built around trying to stop Iran.
Speaker 2 (10:08):
So I don't think it's quite fair.
Speaker 1 (10:09):
To attribute a tribute uh you know, domestic political polling
as there as being their their motive.
Speaker 2 (10:15):
Let me let me go with you to the to
the strategic question.
Speaker 1 (10:20):
Isn't it a reasonable strategic gain for the United States
of America, not just for Israel, for Iran not to have,
or at least not to have soon the capacity to
build a nuclear weapon. Does I think that advances our
interest in a lot of ways. I won't get into
all the ways.
Speaker 3 (10:42):
Oh, clearly, uh Iran not having a nuclear weapon is
in our uh best interests. It's existential for Israel. It's
not existential today for us, and it wouldn't be existential
for us for a decade or longer. Uh Iran doesn't
have to live your capability to get to us other
than putting the shoe box and the mailt X.
Speaker 2 (11:07):
But the.
Speaker 3 (11:10):
It is an existential question for Israel clearly. The you know,
but I think I think the question is is larger
just than the question of Iran having nuclear capability. The
rivalries in the Middle East go back not years or decades,
(11:37):
but centuries, and the Arab nations are standing by very
quietly while all this goes on, and and clearly the
governments that the leadership of those Arab nations very much
want to see Iran taken down more than a peg
or two. Here, the the Iranians have been fomenting trouble
(11:59):
for everyone, not just the israelis not just the US,
but indeed for for everyone in the Middle East.
Speaker 1 (12:04):
For for yeah, they attacked Saudi oil fields, remember.
Speaker 3 (12:07):
That absolutely so you know, no one uh, no one
in the Middle East fields sorry for Iran in this situation,
which is why I think that the the ideal here
would be to see the Israelis and the and the
Saudis uh uh get into a peace treaty, and then
(12:34):
Iran would would just be completely uh boxed out of
out of any scenario, right, and you know, the Putins,
Putin's talking and uh and then Trump's tweet about medd
talking about giving nukes to uh Iran yep, uh you know,
and then of course Trump turns around and threatens threatens
(12:56):
Russia with nuclear so from our submarine. So uh, you know,
this whole thing could could easily spiral out of control,
and I think I think people need to stop beating
their chests a little bit here. Yeah, Russia, Russia has
not been able to defeat a country a third its
size with with tiny military capabilities compared to Russia. Russia
(13:20):
has turned out very much to be a paper tiger
in the Ukraine situation. So what what influence they could
have with a Ran to me is questionable, all right.
Speaker 1 (13:31):
And Russia is not going to give Iran a nuclear weapon.
There's there's a zero percent chance of that.
Speaker 2 (13:37):
You know. Russia.
Speaker 1 (13:39):
Putin is particularly Medvedev as well as Putin's little little puppet.
Their professional propaganda's this is, this is what they do,
and I don't take them too seriously. Doesn't mean they
pose no risk, but it just means I don't care
what they say.
Speaker 3 (13:54):
Yeah, I don't. You know, I don't think that they would,
that Russia would give a RAN nuclear up. And after all,
Iran in Russia s a substantial border, and Iranian missiles
could reach well within Russia. But I wouldn't put it
a zero percent probability. I would put it pretty close
(14:14):
to zero.
Speaker 2 (14:15):
Very good, all right, General, I have to leave it there.
Speaker 1 (14:18):
Bill Inyert was the Adjutant General of Illinois for the
National Guard there who was also a congressman in representing
southern Illinois. Thanks so much for your time, very interesting conversation.
Look forward to having you back.
Speaker 3 (14:32):
Terrific being with you today.
Speaker 2 (14:33):
All right, thank you, General,
The Ross Kaminsky Show News
Popular Podcasts
Cold Case Files: Miami
Joyce Sapp, 76; Bryan Herrera, 16; and Laurance Webb, 32—three Miami residents whose lives were stolen in brutal, unsolved homicides. Cold Case Files: Miami follows award‑winning radio host and City of Miami Police reserve officer Enrique Santos as he partners with the department’s Cold Case Homicide Unit, determined family members, and the advocates who spend their lives fighting for justice for the victims who can no longer fight for themselves.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.