America's VULNERABLE POSITION in the IRAN WAR /Lt Col Daniel Davis

I'm having a hard time sometimes deciphering when I see a lot of these videos of incoming missiles and and uh interceptors going up. Is this from the 12-day war just being recycled or is it from this one? Because they're almost identical. And that's exactly how it's playing out. So, it's exposing the weakness that we have. And that's the reason why that that's I'm telling you, we had no plan B and we are scrambling. We're not winning. We are we have more firepower still. But to to validate that, that's the reason why anyone's talking about a ground operation. That's the reason why the George W. Bush, a third aircraft carrier, is now steaming in the direction because we realize we cannot sustain this for a long time. That if all of this firepower doesn't compel a political submission on the part of Iran, then we are in a real world of hurt because Iran is this massive country. Again, it bears repeating, four times larger than the geographic territory of Iraq. And if the tiny little Gaza strip was virtually turned into a moonscape and it still didn't completely politically subordinate Hamas and they still are a viable entity to this day, why did anybody think that that's going to happen in the massively larger Iran? So, I think that we have ourselves in a situation now to where if the Iranian uh military and and civilian population say, "We're going to endure this just like the Hamas and the Palestinians did, just like the Houthis did, uh just like Hezbollah has done. We're going to maintain, we're going to endure and stand up under this, then now what are we going to do?" Because yeah, we have a lot of ordinance, but it our inventories are shrinking. And if it doesn't polit produce an outcome, it's going to have a lot of domestic problems in the United States. And it already is. And so I think that the time clock, if anybody, it's on our side that's the problem and not the Iranian side. So if the interceptors and the munitions on the American side are running low, should we expect the possibility that a lot more missiles and drones start to hit their targets in Gulf nations in Israel? Because we have various Gulf countries, including here in Dubai, they've opened their airports today. I know the UAE has, or at least Dubai has. I know I think one other Gulf country has which shows um a bit of normality in those countries. The amount of attacks by Iran in general dropped by over 90%. Do you think that was strategic or do you think that while munitions are low on the on the American side, you've got launchers that are being hit hard on the Iranian side as well? >> Yeah. Well, well, that's of course without question. That is guarant that is definitely the case and and again Iran I think had uh plans for that. Uh and and in that statement, I believe this one, if we're talking about the same one where uh the presidentes said that they're not going to be hitting the uh Gulf Arab states anymore, that probably is a a tactical uh and a political need too to say, all right, we've made our point with you guys. We're not going to hit you anymore. Uh it could also just be, hey, our our inventories of of missiles is limited. We the Iran side definitely has fewer than the United States. So uh what was also admitted I think it was by both Iraqi and Peskian is they said listen and I think this is also something you and I talked about before this broke out. They had a version of the dead hand situation so that if you lost contact uh all these different independent uh military districts around Iran would then execute their given orders without waiting for anything else. And that's what they did. So what you had in that opening round was all these people independently launching all the stuff that was on their pre-planned target list. So that means you had a a large volume of fire coming in and we certainly saw a lot of that. Well, now uh now then that whatever their standing orders were have been executed and now it's time to try and regenerate where they're going to go now. So of course as a military person I would expect that they each of those districts would then send in their reports of how much ordinance they expended, how much they still have, you know, what kind of damage and all that kind of stuff. That would then go into a central location wherever their command structure is currently located. And then they would say, "All right, we've got to have this thing spread out over time. So, we are definitely going to have to go on a sustained rate." And even in the US Army back in back in my days when I was in combat uh deployments, uh when I was an armor officer, we we had a sustained rate. We had, you know, you would go in and it's in an operation, you would hit it real heavy and real hard at first and you want to shock and all kind of thing, even at a tactical level, but then you have to if you're fighting a war as opposed to a battle, you got to have a sustained rate so that you don't use all your stuff up and then you have nothing left. So the uranian side would logically reduce the volume of fire anyway even without all the damage. Uh so you can see it sustained because they've got to be able to drag this out for months and that's their objective. So they're going to have some kind of modest sustained rate but that it's going to get through. Uh and and there's also concurrent with what you said there and totally agree with that. There has also been uh significant damage so that the capacity has been reduced. Uh I saw at least one video claiming this to have uh successfully struck one of these underground missile cities and there's massive explosions coming out of the side of a mountain. So indicating they probably got one, but there's probably scores of those things scattered around. So you're going to have to get a lot more. uh launchers have been hit. But as you've probably seen a lot of this video that the Iranians have released is that they have a lot of these uh really very clever launch sites that you can't identify underground and just come up seemingly out of sand and then after it's gone you can't tell where the launch point was. So you're not going to be able to knock those out uh because you just don't know where they are. So there is every reason to think that they can drag this out for a long time. They cannot defeat us militarily, but their their objective as I see it is to remain militarily viable and to keep some level of sustained rate of fire going in. And so far in the last three or four days, it's what we've seen. We'll see a week from today how that has stretch stretched out over time. >> Yeah, I'm going to K, if you can put something on screen. I sent it to you. I'm not sure if it's going to work, but um there's something that analysts are talking about and that's something called the sensor intruder network by the US. So you can see here the tweet, the US just activated weapon systems that existed only in Pentagon powerpoints. So the weapon is essentially multiple satellite spot multiple satellites will spot a rocket launcher very quickly because of the heat signal and then they would send they would beam the coordinates to all the fighter jets and then the closest fighter jet will target that rocket launcher. So what happened is because they had fighter jets over Iran at a continuous basis through air supremacy at least I think parts of Iran I think the west I could get it wrong um I think is the west they don't have a supremacy or they have a supremacy so one of the areas and what happens they'll they'll be in the coordinates and then the closest fighter jet will strike it so whenever the um launchers would come out of Iran because Iran had all these different launches we talked about before the war they would come out come out strike and then go back into hiding into the mountainous regions or underground But because of that system that they had, the sensor shooter network that allowed Israel and the US to be able to strike those launches relatively quickly, which turned out very effective. Now, obviously, it's very hard for us to be able to verify those things because there's a fair I like the the explanation you've done on the decentralized nature of of the Iranian military. There's I think about 30 command centers or commanders that had autonomy as soon as the command centers and the um leadership was taken out, especially Herman. and they all acted independently based on a on a a planned strategy that had drafted well in advance preparing for this day. And what's interesting as well is everyone's acting surprised including you know Trump I think was was surprised about how Iran struck all these Gulf countries but according to the Wall Street Journal Iran warned the the US about the strategy. Um so they activate they they talked about the doctrine they had in place and through Oman they warned that if they're attacked um and if leadership was struck they will no longer respond proportionally and they will drag the rest of the Gulf nations into the war and they did exactly that. So the maybe that explains why Gulf nations while maybe some people acted surprised maybe they weren't that surprised cuz they managed to intercept the majority of the attacks. I was surprised to find out Dubai, Kuwait, and one or two other Gulf countries were attacked. Each one was attacked more than Israel. I think there's uh I've got the the the graph here. Let me show it to KK as well. I've just sent it to you now. KK you can put it up. Um but number one is UAE 863 attacks as of yesterday. Kuwait 562, Qatar 162, Baharrain 129, and Israel 113. So there's 1 2 3 four Gulf nations that were attacked significantly more or some of them significantly more some of them a bit more than Israel. Um and for them to intercept everything just shows the capacity or the ability for um um maybe the preparation that the Gulf had and they weren't as surprised as they made it out to be in the press. Um but going back to the point of um American firepower, the the point that you're making is that even though militarily the US could be or may be winning, this is not considered a win, which is what I mentioned earlier. I said it's a military win, but not a strategic win because we don't know what the objective is. So then my question to you is actually I agree with you. The objective seems to clearly be regime change. And it's not it's not up to the US anymore to determine when the project the the the operation is successful. It's now up to Iran because it's up to Iran. It's up to them when they decide to surrender um and to do what Venezuela did and play ball with with the US versus fight till the end. And based on what I'm seeing um okay, I seem there's an attack now. Okay, there's an attack as we're speaking now in the UAE. literally came in now. I probably will get an alert on my phone. Um I'll I'll give one more context for you for you uh Daniel and I'll give you the mic is the statement that they made that they won't attack countries unless they're attacked from those countries. Some people interpreted this differently. They think that the president meant he's referring to Azabjan because all other Gulf nations house American bases that are used in this operation. Azabjan does not and Azabjan responded very aggressively um to Iranian attacks and Iran saying they weren't behind those attacks. So maybe the president's statement about not attacking their neighbors um was he didn't you know lay it out clearly but he was referring to Azabjan but to the point that I have is do you agree with the statement that it's up to Iran when this war ends now not the US? Well, it it it sort of uh because I think it actually more determines uh I think Donald Trump the individual is the is the determined. He is the central point because the Iranians can say we're just not going to surrender. I think one of the the most amazing and huge unforced errors and huge strategic blunders by President Trump was to send out that troop social yesterday demanding unconditional surrender. I mean, it's like Japanese at the USS Missouri kind of thing. That's the imagery that's put out there that that's the only outcome that he's allowing now. And and of course, all therefore to succeed for Iran, all they have to do is not get to that point. They have to just continue to maintain their viability and then by definition, Trump's issue or his his strategy will have failed. So, the question is going to be how much longer can this go? And and the fact that you're seeing talk about a ground operation of any kind of any kind, whether Kurds or some combination of Americans are trying to find some other people in there, the fact that you're seeing another aircraft carrier goes in graphically shows the truth despite what all this crap is from Secretary of War Pete Hexath and how they're talking almost popping champagne bottles, corks about how successful we're being, whatever. It doesn't matter how many bombs you can drop. It only matters what those bombs accomplish and politically. And if all you're doing is killing a lot of people and killing 150 some odd kids and teachers at a school with one errant missile or or else errant targeting, we don't know which. Uh that just hardens the resolve of the Iranian people. And you've of course assassinated their leaders when you keep blowing up all this stuff. I mean I I've I've seen reports. I've had some people on my show from from Iran. I've talked to others uh and they're saying and I'm talking people. One of them I talked to who was part of the protesters uh on the on the Iranian side. Oh wow. >> during the time uh you know in in the early January time frame. And there's a lot of people that have legitimate beefs and gripes against the regime. But they said you're crazy if you think that we're going to let another join with basically the Israeli side blowing up our country killing our people and then suddenly we're going to rise up and I don't know give fieldalty to them. He said no. This is an internal issue. There was an interview on CBS News that came out I saw last night. They interviewed somebody who was also in there saying the same thing. I've I'm sure that there are plenty of other people in Iran who would say, "Yeah, sure. Come on, bomb and we'll take advantage of it." I'm sure there are some, but all that I've seen and talked to and heard about are saying the same thing, which is that's an issue for us to decide. You coming in and bombing us is not what we're looking for. So, we're not going to rise up and help you by toppling our own government and being the ground force. So, I think that it was a grotesque miscalculation on our part. And so, now then, where does that leave Trump? Because yeah, you can keep pouring ordinance in, but as I pointed at the beginning, cannot overstate this enough. Tiny little Gaza strip endured a a conventional bombs that can't be matched here over this massive country. And if you can't do that, you can blow up a lot of buildings and kill a lot of people, but towards what end? And at some point, you're going to run out of people to kill. Well, you won't run out of people to kill. There's 90 million. You'll run out of military targets, and then you'll just be blowing up something. But it's the the people's resolve. I just don't I can't even imagine that the Iranian people are going to buckle in and just say, "Okay, enough. Uh, uncle, we'll give you whatever you ask for." That the government will say, "Okay, all right. We lay down." I I think that the more you do this, historically, looking at people's all different cultures and races and times, they almost always react the same, which is they harden their resolve, and then once you get to a certain level of suffering, there's no more suffering you can have that's going to change them. They will stay that way till death. And I think we are are in a bad position right

** NEW MERCH ** Jackets & Sweatshirts, Thermo Mugs!! Daniel Davis Deep Dive Merch: Etsy store https://www.etsy.com/shop/DanielDavisDeepDive?ref=seller-platform-mcnav