‘This Is SURRENDER’ Trump Iran Ceasefire Threat As Israel Bombs Beirut | With Megyn Kelly & Joe Kent

23:42Piers Morgan:So America isn't powerless. It can exercise that power. Right. But the offensive capabilities they would need to strike a wrong, they already have. They're the second biggest air force in the world today. Even if we said we're not going to give you$4 billion a year going forward, that wouldn't stop anything. And then the second point is that this This is an unbelievably silly approach to foreign policy, because we haven't hammered out final terms with the Iranians yet. We're still in the middle of negotiations. The idea that we would restrain our ally, who, by the way, just helped us achieve one of the greatest military victories of the modern era, we would restrain them instead of trying to use the threat of continued belligerence from them to extract more punitive terms from the Iranians is silly.

24:21It's just completely antithetical to how things should work. And the idea that we need to be worried about our Gulf neighbors who would be upset if we didn't restrain the Israelis is also absurd because our Gulf neighbours are on our side and this war has not only solidified our position militarily, it solidified it diplomatically because all those countries are furious with the Iranians and are on our side and want to strengthen cooperation with both us and Israel.

24:44Piers Morgan:But what is clear from that New York Times report, it seems to be incredibly well-sourced. So somebody's been talking who was in that room. What is clear from that is that the Israelis, you know, maybe this was an honest mistake on their part, a misreading of the situation, but they certainly appear to be of the belief, if you took out the Ayatollah and some of the top people with him, that this would then lead to an uprising by the people and that amid all this chaos, there would be no ability to close the Strait of Hormuz. Well, none of that has really happened. Yes, they got rid of the Ayatollah, but he's just been replaced by other similarly-minded people.

25:26Piers Morgan:And then there's been no uprising by the Iranian people whatsoever. And, of course, the Strait of Hormuz has been held in a kind of stranglehold by the Iranians in a very powerful way. It has to be conceded, which has caused enormous damage to the global economy. They've basically controlled that strait now for four or five weeks, and it's caused hell. And none of that appears to have been predicted by the Israelis in their sales pitch to Trump to join them on this war. Well, so I think you're overstating a number of things there. First off, I mean, you know, the Iranian Navy is gone, right? They're controlling the strait by threatening to shoot at people, but they don't have any naval forces meaningfully in the area.

26:08And the idea, remember, they were thinking that card, which is their only Trump card, that's the maximum explanation.

26:14Piers Morgan:But it's a very powerful card. And it's one that the Israelis did not think they had the power, according to the New York Times report. The Israelis might have made a slight misjudgment on that effect, it's war. I think the Iranians made a much bigger misjudgment overall when you talk about the complete destruction of their military capability. Right, but if you take away the Strait of Hormuz issue, then you've got overwhelming military dominance by the Americans and Israelis. Yes, the Iranians would have still attacked their neighboring Gulf states, but that would be a military conflict part of it.

26:46Piers Morgan:The fact that the Strait of Hormuz has been SHUT PRETTY MUCH FOR FIVE WEEKS. THAT HAS BEEN AN ASYMETRIC WAR, WHICH, YOU KNOW, WITH THE BEST WILL IN THE WORLD HAS BEEN WHILE DID VERY SUCCESSFULLY BY THE IRANIANS. I DON'T THINK SO AT ALL. I THINK THAT'S ACTUALLY BEEN WHILE DID QUITE POORLY. LET ME FINISH MY POINT, JOE, AND THEN YOU CAN SPEAK. TWO WEEKS AGO, THE IRANIANS WERE SAYING WE'RE NOT GOING TO GIVE UP THE STRAIGHT OF HORMOOZ UNLESS WE GET A PERMANENT PEACE DEAL, A PERMANENT COMMITMENT TO NON-AGGRESSION AND REPARATIONS. WHAT ARE THEY TRADING IT FOR AS of yesterday, two weeks ceasefire, no promises.

27:18They can't even extract a commitment from the Israelis to stop fighting Hezbollah. That's how badly they're beaten.

27:23Piers Morgan:Okay. Well, Joe, he called you silly and incompetent, I think, earlier. So this is your chance to respond. Prior to this war, the Straits of Hormuz were transited by anybody trading oil for free. Post-war, the Iranians are going to be able to extract a fee. That's one of their negotiating THE NEGOTIATING SHIPS THEY HAVE NOW. PRIOR TO THE WAR, THE IYATOLLA THAT WE KILLED WAS ACTUALLY AT THE NEGOTIATING TABLE WITH US. THE REASON WHY NONE OF THIS WAS TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT IS BECAUSE THE ISRAELIS DIDN'T REALLY CARE ABOUT WHAT WOULD HAPPEN TO THE STRAIGHTS OF HOMEUZ. THEY DIDN'T CARE WHAT WOULD HAPPEN TO OUR GULF ALLIES.

27:59OUR GULF ALLIES RIGHT NOW STILL TECHNICALLY ARE WITH US, BUT THE FACT THAT WE WERE unable to provide them with security guarantees, lowers our status in the region, potentially could threaten the petrodollar in the region. And so right now we're in a weaker position because we listened to a foreign government that had a different strategic goal in mind than we did. So it's great that we got the ceasefire. We need to maintain that ceasefire. And we have to actually withhold things from the Israelis, which we can do. The Israelis do have a modern air force, but they rely on us for a lot of the logistics, the refueling, in order to be able to reach into Iran.

28:34So we very much are in the driver's seat of what we provide. Well, that's not true, Joe. That's just obviously false because we didn't help them with refueling. No, it's 100 percent true. They can't reach into—they cannot reach into Israel. I was actually—I've actually been in the military, man. I've been part of these operations. Then explain how they did the 12-day war without refueling. We helped them out. We weren't participating in the offensive operations of the 12-day war. Well, we helped them out a good— with logistics. They can't sustain operations without us. They wouldn't be able to continue to sustain operations all the way into Iran with conventional military forces in any meaningful way without our support.

29:11We have to pull that back. We also have to pull back their ability to go on the offense outside of their borders because it's going to interfere with the peace that we're trying to achieve. Right now, we're paying for their defense. We're paying for the offense. and also in terms of our status in the region and our ability to keep commerce and oil flow going out of the Straits of Hormuz and the Middle East, all of that is being negatively affected by us listening to a foreign government. So we have to put Israel back in the junior partner role if we're going to accomplish our strategic objectives.

29:42Why couldn't you persuade Pete Hegseth of any of this? Well, I tried. He didn't agree with you. He has better intelligence than you. You weren't privy to any of this stuff. Like, you just don't know. That's why you're now on the outside doing podcasts instead of inside the administration trying to shape policy. You don't know. You didn't persuade him. From the inside, like, look, my letter of resignation has been out there. What's important right now is that we support President Trump in getting this peace deal and making sure it actually sticks. The problem is, as confirmed by The New York Times, that was well-sourced from within the West Wing, the Israelis were in the driver's seat for all of this.

30:19Well, if you read the article, I think it's pretty evident. You know how leaks work in Washington, D.C. with the New York Times.

30:25Piers Morgan:Well, if you say it wasn't well-sourced, well, which part are you contesting? Oh, no, it was well-sourced. You guys are just mischaracterizing how much influence Israel had based on what was written in that article. What? Which was Israel gave a presentation. Did you read it? Yeah, I read it completely. And then after the Israelis were offline, right, then you had the meeting between the U.S. principals, in which John Ratcliffe and others were talking about, yeah, the Israelis are overselling their ability to achieve regime change. That's probably not going to happen. But they said, you know, on what we've and what we've thought for a while is when it comes to missiles and when it comes to their ballistic shield, when it comes to their Navy, we have the capability to do that and we should do that.

31:03And so the idea that, you know, we didn't get suckered into a regime change war from the outset. American goals did not include regime change from the from Trump's very first. Donald Trump literally talked about regime change early on.

31:16Piers Morgan:Literally, Donald Trump literally said regime change was an objective of the war. Fact check me on that after. He never did. You don't think Donald Trump ever mentioned regime change? Incorrect. I didn't say that. I said it wasn't a military objective of a war. He said it would be nice to have. Donald Trump is still claiming today that he has affected... But it's not the goal of a war. He's claiming today he's affected regime change. What are you talking about? He's affected it. That's because he's basically saying we killed all the senior leadership, which we did, by the way, in an unprecedented fashion.

31:41So who's running the country? That doesn't mean it was an original military objective of the war. Who is running Iran right now? Fact check me on this, man. Go look at his original statements. It would be nice to have, but it's not an objective of the war.

31:51Piers Morgan:Trump changed his goalposts every 10 seconds. That's been part of the thing. This has been remarkably consistent from Hegseth, Rubio on down. Go look at their public statements. What did they say? An official objective of Operation Educarious regime change. Why did America launch a preemptive strike against Iran, Will? Oh, to essentially prevent them from building up a further ballistic missile capability as a shield behind which they would be able to develop their nuclear weapons program. That was not the reason given by the Secretary of State. Marco Rubio. Go look it up, man. He said it over and over and over again.

32:21Piers Morgan:On camera, he said when he was first asked the reason the United States launched a preemptive strike against Iran was because another country, brackets Israel, had indicated they were going to attack Iran and therefore the Americans knew there would be attacks against some of their interests in the Middle East. So they got in first. Marco Rubio's own mouth on camera. That was the reason for the STRIKE, THE STRATEGIC REASON FOR THE STRIKE, WHICH RUBIO EXPLAINED IN THAT VERY SAME PRESS COMMENTS. I REMEMBER THE EXACT ONE YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT. IT'S LIKE A GAGGLE. I THINK HE'S IN CONGRESS AFTER HAVING A MEETING WITH PEOPLE.

32:58THIS IS VERY EARLY IN THE WAR. HE SAYS THE REASON FOR THE STRIKE IS TO PREVENT THEM FROM DEVELOPING THEIR BALLISTIC MISSILE SHIELD FURTHER. THE REASON FOR THE TIMING, LIKE WHY TODAY, WHY FEBRUARY 28TH, WAS THE FACT THAT THEY HAD THIS INTELLIGENCE ABOUT THE MEETING OF IYAD KAMANI AND EVERYBODY ELSE AND THAT ISRAEL WAS going to go ahead with that under any circumstances, so we should start, we should do it now. But, I mean, again, go back and look at that. I know exactly what press conference you're talking about. And I don't think your memory, you are remembering one piece of it, but you're not remembering the whole...

33:31Piers Morgan:It's a pretty significant piece when the Secretary of State of the United States on record says that the reason for the preemptive strike by the United States... For the timing. ...was because Israel was attacking Iran. And then we hear from Anthony Blinken, one of his predecessors that Netanyahu had tried to sell this to both Biden and Obama. And when they both rejected the opportunity to join him in attacking Iran, guess what? Israel didn't attack. So it looks like he got third time lucky with Trump, who went along with it. But had Trump said no, I don't think Israel would have attacked. Well, but then why did they strike in the 12-day war?

34:07The only reason the attack happened...

34:10Piers Morgan:Well, let's talk about the 12-day war. Let me bring Joe back in this. The 12-day war is fascinating because I distinctly remember, and I'm sure Will will remember it differently to me, but I remember Donald Trump at the end of a 12-day war saying that this had put back any aspirations by the Iranians to build a nuclear weapon decades, that we had obliterated their nuclear capabilities. It was done, done, gone. And here we are, nine months later, having to launch a full-fledged war in Iran because the threat remains apparently not just the same, but so imminent that America had to act immediately.

34:47Piers Morgan:Now, try and make sense of that for me, Joe. Well, this is what the Israelis do. They've always wanted this regime change war. And so they continually use their influence through official channels and then also through their echo chamber in the media to move the red line. They did this with the enrichment issue. President Trump initially said our policy is no nuclear weapons for Iran. The Iranian Supreme Leader agreed. There was a lot of space there for negotiations. There was negotiations that were taking place for several months. Then the pro-Israel lobby basically came in and convinced President Trump that the new red line was zero enrichment.

35:18Twelve-day war happens. Operation Midnight Hammer happens. We take away the ability for them to enrich. The Iranians withhold their proxies. They don't retaliate in any meaningful way. They get right back to the negotiating table. And then we're hearing basically what Will just said, oh, now we have to go in and attack Iran because of this ballistic missile capability. So the red line moves again every time Israel needs a new justification for the war and they get the outcome that they want by using their pressure network and their media echo chamber and their official engagements with the U.S.

35:48government. it, they were still worried that we were going to get a deal with the Iranians. And so therefore, they went ahead and said, hey, we're going to preemptively go into Iran and attack. And knowing that this attack would be against the regime, Iran's reaction to an attack directly against the regime would be to enact their contingency plan, which would be targeting our bases in the region. So the only actual imminent threat that Iran posed, that was posed, was the attack threat by the Israelis against Iran. There was no imminent Iranian threat attack against us.

36:17Piers Morgan:No, I don't think there was for a moment. Will Chamberlain, I mean, as we sit here today debating this, the regime remains in place. Trump wants to argue it's different people, therefore it's a new regime. But it's the same people. It's the same regime. It's just the faces of... Minus the 100 senior leaders who are all dead. OK, so a few of the leaders have gone, but they've been replaced by others. But they've been replaced by others from the same regime with the same ideology. It would be like saying, you know, you've decapitated the Trump regime, but he's replaced by a bunch of people called Trump.

36:49Piers Morgan:It's like, you know, it's kind of... I mean, that's what happened in Venezuela, right? I mean, we effectively took out one person in Venezuela and now we have a cooperative government. Well, the regime hasn't changed in Venezuela. All that's changed is the president got picked up in the middle of the night and put in a New York prison cell. But the regime's continued. His own number two is running it. So the regime is still there. So I think we should be clear about what regime change means, right? With my quaint old head on, regime change means you change the regime, not that you just take out a few people at the top of it and they get replaced by other people from the same regime.

37:23Piers Morgan:Secondly, the enriched uranium remains in Iran. None of that has been secured by either the Americans or Israelis, as we speak. Thirdly, the Straits of Hormuz remain under the control of the Iranians, which they weren't... It wasn't in control of it before this war started. And it is, despite what you say, they are now charging money. Apparently they want to charge a dollar a barrel was the last thing I read. And Trump's all for it because it's going to make everyone rich. So they've got the control of that. They've continued to fire rockets, it seems, at some of their Gulf state neighbours. So I'm looking at this historic victory and I'm thinking, well, where's the victory?

38:02Piers Morgan:What is the victory? Because I don't see it. And forgive me if I take with a pinch of salt this idea that now... Let's try this by historical analogy. Let me finish my point and you can respond. that apparently we're now supposed to believe that rather like eight, nine months ago, Iran's capability of building a nuclear weapon has been destroyed like it was nine months ago. Well, why can't they just pop up again in nine months? They've still got all the enriched uranium. What's going to stop them? So, look, I put it to you that the charge sheet against the claim of historic victory is pretty big.

38:37All right, so I'll deal first with that minor point on the enriched uranium, right, President Trump has said... On truth. No, no, no. I mean, in relation to you saying we lost the war, right?

38:47Piers Morgan:I didn't say America's lost the war. I'm disputing the claim... Oh, that we didn't win, that you didn't think it's a big victory. I'm disputing the claim to historic victory, given the checklist I just presented. Well, let's imagine, if you will, it's January 1942, a month after Hitler declared war on the United States in the aftermath of Pearl Harbor. And the current military state of affairs is the entire German Navy is at the bottom of the sea. The Luftwaffe is destroyed. with complete Allied air superiority over Germany. Hitler, Goering, Bormann and Himmler are all dead in a massive military strike.

39:19And yet the German press is claiming it managed... The Germans have managed to shut down trade via some rockets in the Danish Straits. Who's winning? Is that, like, not... I mean, people have lost context about what it means to win a war. I've lost the plot with that analogy. I'm sorry. In five weeks, we have decimated Iranian military capability. We struck 13 ,000 targets and they managed to hit a single plane and they couldn't even capture the soldiers that fell out of that plane. It's one of the most lopsided military conflicts in history. And what about all their attacks on the neighboring Gulf states?

39:48And the fact that you have a temporary restraint of trade and increasing gas by a dollar a gallon for a month does not change that in the slightest. Really? Yes, 100%. It's a massive military victory.

39:59Piers Morgan:OK, Joe, this is a great victory and I've lost the plot. The great victory is the fact that we have a ceasefire and this could have been much, much worse. However, as opposed to making some obscure World War II reference, because everything always has to be about World War II, let's just compare the situation between now and just a month ago before the war. The Straits of Hormuz, before this last iteration of war kicked off, the Straits of Hormuz were open for commerce. People and companies could transit that for free. Iran didn't have a stranglehold on that. Our GCC alliance was completely intact.

40:32There was still a guarantee of American security. That hadn't been fractured. We had a regime inside of Iran, although they were not the best. It's not exactly what we wanted. They had a prohibition on building a nuclear weapon and they were involved in active negotiations with us. They were closely adhering to a strict escalation ladder. Their proxies were not attacking us. No, that's exactly what happened. They had 60 percent in Mr. Iranian. What do you think they were using that for medical purposes? If they wanted a bomb, they had decades long before President Trump ever became the president to develop a nuclear weapon.

41:07There was a prohibition by the Ayatollah, which was a reasonable and calculated approach. They didn't want to become like Libya. They didn't want to become like Saddam. They had reached a point where they would keep the capability but not develop a nuclear weapon. They opened negotiations with Whitcoff saying you have 60 percent enriched uranium and enough for 11 bombs. And we won't give up our enrichment rights. And we won't give you up anything diplomatically you did initially. But we were at the negotiating table with them. There was a potential for a deal. The Iran nuclear archive, which is— So now fast forward to where we're at right now.

41:35Look at the Straits of Hormones.

41:37Piers Morgan:Look at the GCC. Let me ask Will a question, which is, Will, does Israel have nuclear weapons? Yes, almost certainly. I mean, they haven't officially claimed it, but almost certainly they do. Why don't we know for a fact? Because they don't want to say so, because there's American statutes. Why do they get a pass? Why do they get a pass about that? Well, because they're our ally and Iran's our enemy. Ah. See, it's because we're the good guys. OK. Iran's the bad guys. A very interesting omission. So our friends don't need to be transparent about their nuclear capability. Yeah, it's good to be America's friend.

42:06Piers Morgan:But our enemies do? Yes. Wow. That's exactly how it works. Well, that's just brazen hypocrisy, isn't it? No, it's only hypocrisy if you don't have a normative view of whether the United States is good and Iran is bad. I don't think there's a single... If you have a normative view of that, it's a very simple question. There is no single good reason why Israel should be allowed to refuse to admit whether it has nuclear weapons. There's no reason. They should be... We'll call the international law police. They should be... Again, they're a core ally of the United States and the United States is the most powerful country in the world.

42:37This whole multipolarity talk is just silly. There's a unipolar hegemon in the world. It's the United States. And we're also very benevolent. And so Israel, our friend, doesn't, you know, gets to do things that the Iranians don't. And that's the way the world is.

42:49Piers Morgan:When you say America is benevolent, how does that sit with the president of the United States two days ago talking about the imminent destruction of an entire civilization? Oh, you mean like death to America, death to Israel, right? Like we've dealt with it for 30 years. Trump throws one post out and everybody loses their crap in the middle of a negotiation and signs a ceasefire within eight hours? I'm talking about Donald Trump threatening to annihilate 90 million people in his own words. McFarland had it right yesterday. You guys all took the bait on that. Do you not care about that? I just see it as negotiating bluster.

43:21Trump's been doing this stuff for 40 years.

43:23Piers Morgan:It's a threatened genocide. I mean, that's exactly what the Iranians have been doing to us. They had a clock in the middle of their downtown saying that they were going to destroy the entire country of Israel. America should be amoral, if not as immoral as its enemies. Is that what you're saying? We should be sufficiently ruthless to get our, like, negotiated pieces that actually make sense, which we seem to have done here. Apparently this focused the Iranians' mind and made them realise they should come to the table. Are you aware that threatening to commit an act of genocide in itself could be presented as a war crime?

43:52I think that would be frivolous. Really? Again, send the international law of police to the White House if you want.

43:58Piers Morgan:Joe Kent, what's remarkable is there's a kind of arrogance to the way Will is talking. None of this matters. I think it does matter. I've known Trump a long time. I consider him a friend. But on this, I think he's lost the plot. And I think the idea that from the White House, you issue a statement, in your own words, threatening the annihilation of an entire civilization, an entire country of 90 million Iranians, I thought was disgraceful, absolutely disgraceful, and could well be a crime. Well, I'm glad that President Trump's tactic worked out and we have a ceasefire. I think what's critical is that we make sure that we keep the straights where we're moving open, get the negotiating table.

44:40We have to hold back Israel to make that happen. If our goal was to make sure that Iran didn't get a nuclear weapon or that other states that we're adversarial with get a nuclear weapon, we just set a horrible example here because Iran showed that they were going to play ball with us, that they were in the negotiation process, that they just wanted some enrichment. And yet we came in and we killed the leader that put that prohibition on. The lesson that the other people who are coming up in the ranks in the Iranian regime have learned is that they better get a nuclear weapon. Otherwise, this is going to happen to them, too.

45:10Actually, one of the most vindicated countries in this whole exchange has been North Korea, who obtained a nuclear weapon for this very reason. So if we want to make sure that countries that we're adversarial with or rogue countries don't try to develop a nuclear weapon, the second one of them gets to the negotiating table, the last thing that we should do is go and launch a regime change war, a decapitation strike against that leadership. So I think the lesson learned here is that now this galvanized, harder generation of IRGC officers and ayatollahs are going to take over Iran, they better get a nuclear weapon.

45:41And that's going to be a major problem for us going forward. So that's why we need to take this round of negotiations very seriously. I hope President Trump used that talk, that bolster, that bluster to get them to the negotiating table. But there's only so many different times that you can use that. So the next time if these negotiations don't go well and President Trump says, like, I'm going to annihilate you, that might not have the exact same effect. So I think we have to be very careful with our language.

46:04Piers Morgan:That's the point, Will. You know, I made the point yesterday, you become the boy that cried wolf, the emperor with no clothes. If you say we're going to wipe out an entire civilization and then nothing happens, well, you know, you become a bit of a lame duck in terms of your threats. I mean, I would put to you this... Did you want him to follow through? No, of course not. OK, good, just checking. Of course not. But here's what's interesting. Trump welcomed the 10-point plan, as if it was somehow brand new, which it wasn't. But the 10-point plan, which he says is very workable in terms of the negotiations...

46:37Piers Morgan:Let's just go through this, and I'll ask you, how many of these do you think are acceptable? Number one, the Iranians want commitment to non-aggression. Number two, Iran's control over the... This is just totally misconceived. Like, from the outset, he said that the 10 points... He just truthed about this. The 10 points that the reporters are saying, the ones you're quoting from, are not the basis on which he said... Well, these are the 10 points, according to the Iranian media. It's not what Trump has agreed to, and that's been... He's repeatedly said this is not the thing he's workable. And he put out a slew of truth today saying he's going to continue to insist, full dismantlement of the Iranian nuclear program, return of the highly enriched uranium, which, again, this whole idea that there was a peaceful fatwa.

47:14Remember, they had 60 % enriched uranium, 11 kilograms, or 450 kilograms worth of it, enough for 11 bombs. So when Trump says he welcomes a 10-point plan,

47:23Piers Morgan:in fact, he doesn't at all? What? He's looking for... I think the basis for the negotiations is something that's much more favourable to the United States. OK. So why would he say... Why would he say that he welcomes a 10-point plan? Well, I think he was thinking of a different plan in his mind. That's the simple answer. Oh, come off. But, like, future posts... You know what? The worst thing about this... Further posts have clarified that's not what he was thinking of. The worst thing about this... And I don't know why on earth he would agree to that. And it doesn't make sense. The torturous...

47:50Piers Morgan:The torturous knots that people have pulled with their own... You can literally just read his truth feed. He's like... He's not truthful. And the White House rapid response on this. They've been like, no, this isn't true. Ironically. Obviously, it's not true, because if Iran was making... getting these kind of concessions out of the United States, They'd have also been able to save Hezbollah, but they can't even do that. OK, well, actually, it turns out that right now, Iran has closed the Strait of Hormuz again and says it will not reopen as long as Israel's attacking Hezbollah in Lebanon. So who is...

48:23It sounds like they've put a new condition on the deal. Perhaps they'll get struck again. That's probably a very unwise of the Iranians.

48:28Piers Morgan:Is it? Or is it wielding the most powerful tool in this whole war, which turns out to be a little piece of waterway, which they can exercise control over and strangle and paralyze the global economy. That didn't stop the United States from striking 13 ,000 targets over a period of five weeks, completely decimating the American military, the Iranian military. If it was that powerful, it should have been able to stop that from happening and force an earlier ceasefire. It wasn't. OK, but the Strait of Hormuz remains closed. So how successful is it? I mean, honestly, you guys, everybody's just overblowing the Strait of Hormuz closure vis-a-vis the United States.

49:04We're the largest oil producer in the world. It's good for us if oil prices go up.

49:06Piers Morgan:Just to be clear, Will, the closure of the strait of foremost, by most experts' analysis, has been the single greatest shock in a negative way to the global economy ever. Ever. Well, that can't be true because oil prices were higher in the beginning of the Ukraine-Russia war. No, no. This has had a greater negative impact on the global economy specific to energy of anything we've seen ever. And it's going to get worse. And again, then why did the price spike even more at the beginning of the Ukraine? I know you're a facts guy. Go and check the facts. OK. I mean, I'm sure somebody said that. I'm just saying, like, if you can't explain the discrepancy, I think you're overstating things.

49:47Piers Morgan:All the economic analysts have said the same thing. This has been the worst energy shock that we've ever seen, ever. But look, I'm sure you're right. I'm sure it's kind of a trivial detail. The complete destruction of the Iranian military. All right. I've got to leave it there. Joe, last word to you. in a stronger position. Joe, last word to you. I'm just saying, yeah, now the Iranians are in even a stronger position than they were prior to this war. The last 20 plus years of GWAT has shown us that we can basically take out targets, we can strike targets all day, and our enemies will endure simply by not losing.

50:20And they will use the leverage of the geography that they have at their disposal to have an effect that we can't sustain. And that's the position that we're in right now. You sound like the Black Knight, the Money Python. That's why exactly I hope that President Trump loses this opportunity. They can be as mad as they want. If they're throwing rocks, it doesn't matter. Yeah, but if they're closing the straights— Well, actually, all they have to do is be able to affect the straights, and they can have a strategic effect. They understand that now. They probably didn't understand that or weren't willing to use it prior to this iteration of war.

50:48And that's why President Trump is at the negotiating table right now, because he realizes the effect that was having on the American economy. And he made the right decision. I think President Trump made the right decision to get to the negotiating table. So now we have to pursue our objective, which is getting the straits open and maintaining the ceasefire and holding together the alliances that we have in the Gulf. And so to do that, we've got to restrain our junior partner, the Israelis.

51:10Piers Morgan:OK, I've got to leave it there. Thank you both very much for your time. I appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you. The U.S. could not be clearer. Pete Hegseth, the secretary of state for war, says Iran begged for a ceasefire under overwhelming pressure. My next guest may have a different interpretation with a view from Tehran. I'm joined again by Professor Mohamed Morandi. Professor Miranda, welcome back to Uncensored. Thank you very much for inviting me. So the United States claiming overwhelming victory, but with a slight caveat on the battlefield. My take on this is that I think the United States and Israel have had overwhelming military success on the battlefield, but there's been an asymmetric war going on, which has involved the Straits of Hormuz and also the neighbouring Gulf countries, Gulf states, where Iran could legitimately lay claim to have been very successful in responding to the military threat by effectively paralysing the globe economically in terms of the energy coming through that strait.

52:15Piers Morgan:What is your take on this? My take is somewhat different. I don't think the United States won militarily, and of course the Israeli regime has a much smaller military, the United States focused mostly on civilian targets. And since it failed to destroy any of Iran's underground missile bases, and it failed to destroy its underground drone bases or the factories that produced them, and that's why for 40 days Iran's missiles and drones were being fired 24 hours a day. Because of that, they were frustrated, and they were constantly bombing civilian targets. In fact, yesterday, they bombed a synagogue.

53:00And I think that that has not been reported anywhere in the Western media, but they completely demolished the synagogue in Tehran. And that's just one of thousands of places that have been targeted. very near my home. They destroyed a building with a bank, just apartment buildings above a branch of a bank. And they've been doing that across the city and across the country. So I think it's a military failure. I think it's a political failure. And of course, they forced Iran to shut down the Strait of Hormuz, because those Arab family dictatorships in the Persian Gulf, they were complicit in this war.

53:38They provided the United States with bases. They They allowed them to use their airspace. They allowed them to use areas outside the bases to attack Iran. So Iran obviously would not allow their ships to go through the Strait of Hormuz. And when Iranian oil and gas and critical infrastructure was struck, they'd be hit in response. And, of course, Iran was striking the Israeli regime 24 hours a day, as we all know. So I think that the United States and the Israelis, the Israeli regime, failed catastrophically. It was they who changed their position. Trump said initially that he wanted unconditional surrender.

54:20Then, after evolving his position, he gave a 15-point plan. Iran rejected it. And then he ultimately, last night, accepted that framework, the 10-point plan that Iran gave as a framework for negotiations. That doesn't mean we'll have a deal. Iran is not naive. And Trump already attacked this twice as we were negotiating. So Iran is prepared for renewed war. But it is a major achievement.

54:49Piers Morgan:I mean, the major achievement is that the regime that rules in Iran remains intact. And the issue I would certainly have with Pete Hegseth and the others, including President Trump, when they say that it's a different regime because it's different people at the top, I would imagine it's crystal clear that it's IRGC, they remain the regime. It is just a question of different people. but they're all part of the same regime. Would you agree with that? No, I think the Islamic Republic of Iran is quite clearly a... It has a constitution. The leader is the person in charge. In fact, he was the person who made changes to Iran's proposal and ultimately turned out to be the 10-point plan.

55:40We have a president. We have a chair for the Supreme National Security Council. All of these institutions are very important. And I think the most important thing, though, Pierce, which will ruffle your feathers, is that the Islamic Republic of Iran, whether you like it or not, has a high degree of popular legitimacy. And during the first week of the war, after Ayatollah Khamenei was martyred, it was basically the people who were on the streets who kept everything running. It took a week for us to elect a new leader. Of course, during that week, the Constitution provided us with a three-man leadership, but it was the people who were holding things together.

56:20There are no skews or lines at the gas station. No one went and rushed into—none of the people rushed into supermarkets. Everything was as normal. And every night, we've seen millions of people on the streets throughout the country, on the streets, defending the armed forces, defending the leadership against this aggression.

56:40Piers Morgan:Can you envisage a situation as part of a deal where Iran voluntarily gives up all its enriched uranium and where it cedes control of the Strait of Hormuz? No, Iran will continue to enrich uranium within the framework of international law. It will be willing to have a deal. We already had a deal to have extra supervision if anyone is truly worried. But remember, Joe Kent, when he resigned, he wrote in his letter, and he wasn't a Trump appointee, a senior intelligence official. He said that Iran was no threat to the United States. He said that Iran was not developing a nuclear weapon. And he said this war is about Zionist pressure in the United States and the Israeli regime putting pressure on the United States.

57:33This is a completely and was a completely unnecessary war where the Americans murdered many, many Iranians.

57:42Piers Morgan:Donald Trump has said that these are red lines, particularly the enriched uranium. If what you say is true and the Iranian regime will not give up that enriched uranium, it sounds like there may not be a deal. So what happens then? Well, the Trump regime has said many things in the past. And we have been a victim of two wars due to the Trump regime and the Netanyahu regime. And we have come out on top on both occasions. And the world sees that. And we are prepared to defend ourselves in future again. And Trump, by carrying out this war at the behest of the Zionist and Israeli regime, they have badly damaged the global economy, and it's going to get a lot worse.

58:27And as we speak, in fact, Pierce, although Lebanon is a part of the agreement, and that is something that the Pakistani prime minister has said openly and in a tweet, Israelis have been slaughtering the people of Lebanon all morning, carpet bombing cities just out of rage. And yet Trump then goes out and says Lebanon was not a part of the deal, where in fact it was and the Pakistani prime minister said so. So we're dealing with ruthless people. We're dealing with people who are utterly immoral, who have constantly said they will destroy Iran, obliterate Iran, send Iran back to the Stone Ages, and, of course, delete or erase an entire civilization.

59:16This is what we're up against. But ultimately, the Trump regime recognized that this war is going nowhere and it is devastating the global economy and it's going to devastate the US economy if this continues.

59:28Piers Morgan:Of course, all the things you've just said, many people would apply to your own regime, the Iranian regime. But Tehran has apparently said today, in the last few hours, it will withdraw from ceasefire if attacks on the Lebanon continue. That's from Iranian state media. Can you confirm that, that if these attacks in Lebanon continue, then Iran will withdraw from this agreement on the ceasefire for two weeks? Yes, Iran has already said that it is shutting down the Strait of Hormuz and it will also punish the Israeli regime if this continues. And the talks won't go anywhere if the terms of the ceasefire are not implemented.

1:00:12You know, I invited you a few times before to come to Iran, Pearson. You rejected to come for whatever reason. Well, I've invited you to come to London. You rejected that as well. I've lived in the UK. I've been there. Maybe I'll go one day. I'll come one day. But you should come for the first time. But my advice to you and to analysts in the UK and the United States is to read a book called Going to Tehran, written by two Americans who worked in the White House. One was the head of the Middle East under Condoleezza Rice, of all people. And the other was the head of the Persian Gulf at that time.

1:00:49Flint and Hillary Leber, they wrote a book called Going to Tehran. If U.S. analysts had read books like this and dealt with Iran realistically, instead of listening to Zionists and Netanyahu, the world would be in a much better place. And probably Iran and the United States would have had normal ties. and there would be no war, obviously.

1:01:11Piers Morgan:How are relations now, do you think, going forward between Iran and the neighbouring Gulf states, given that Iran has obviously been bombarding many of them with missile attacks, using the fact that they themselves have been attacked as the excuse to do this, and that's carried on post the ceasefire. What is going to happen between these relationships going forward?

1:01:39Well, they should not have allowed their territory to be used to slaughter thousands of Iranians. They wanted to have their cake and eat it too. They wanted to be friends with the United States and allow their territory to be used to slaughter Iranians. And they probably thought that Iran would capitulate within a day or two, something that I told you would never happen. In fact, once upon a time, you told me that all the things that I was saying was bluster. But we saw during the past 40 days what happened. These family dictatorships in the Persian Gulf misread the situation, misinterpreted Iran's capabilities, and they made a major and catastrophic mistake.

1:02:20They will have to pay reparations for what happened to Iranians. And from now on, the Strait of Hormuz will be used to ensure that happens and also to ensure that the Persian Gulf will never be again used as a platform for aggression, whether it's against Iraq or Iran or Yemen or Syria. These regimes have to behave like normal countries. Across Africa, we see countries that neighbor one another. They don't have foreign bases there to be used to bomb their neighbors. These regimes have made this mistake, and they have to pay for it. We want good relations with them, but they helped wage a war against us.

1:02:58Without their territory, this war could not have happened.

1:03:02Piers Morgan:And when it comes to paying reparations, what about reparations then to countries like Israel, for example, who have been peppered with missile attacks from Hezbollah, from the Houthis, a barbaric terror attack from Hamas, all funded by Iran. Is there any accountability and responsibility at your end and your regime for the mayhem that's been wrought against Israel by those three terror proxies? I think if we look historically, Pierce, and I think you've had very good guests who can explain this better than I. But if we look historically, if there are going to be reparations, then it would have to be the UK.

1:03:45It would have to be other European countries and the United States that helped with the ethnic cleansing of Palestine, with the colonization of Palestine, with the slaughter of the Palestinians, by pushing them into the slums of Gaza, the concentration camp of Gaza, by gradually taking more and more territory from the West Bank, where the refugees from Palestine have gone to along with Gaza. and all those millions of Palestinians that are in refugee camps around the region, I think those countries are the ones who have to pay reparations to the Palestinian people. And as long as we have ethnosupremacism peers, and as long as people other than Zionists are considered to be Amalek and inferior, this problem is not going to be solved.

1:04:35The Israeli regime yesterday, as I said earlier, bombed a synagogue in Tehran. Why did they bomb these Jews? Because they are non-Zionist Jews.

1:04:48Piers Morgan:Professor Morandi, I'm going to have to leave it there, but thank you for joining me again on Uncensored. Thank you for having me. Well, as we've been discussing, Israel's assault on Lebanon continues despite a ceasefire deal, which is supposed to cover every conflict in the region. The Iranians are warning that if Israel continues, the US-backed ceasefires in jeopardy. I'm joined now by Danny Danon. He's the Israeli ambassador to the United Nations. Danny, welcome back to Uncensored. Thank you for having me again, Peele. There's a lot going on. As we're talking, the Iranians have closed again the Strait of Hormuz and citing specifically that it's because Israel is continuing its attacks on the Lebanon, contradicting what we were told by the Pakistanis and by the Americans that as part of this ceasefire, that would also include Lebanon.

1:05:35Piers Morgan:Why is Israel continuing to bombard Lebanon when there's a ceasefire in the wider war? Well, first, I beg to differ with you about the narrative. We are not bombarding Lebanon. We are targeting Hezbollah that actually started this cycle of violence against Israel after Iran started to attack Israel. So it's not that we are bombarding Lebanon. Actually, on the opposite. You know, the Lebanese government, they are saying it in the last few weeks, that they want to get rid of Hezbollah, but they are not capable of doing it. And we are actually doing it now. We are dismantling the presence of Hezbollah next to our border, and we are making sure that they will not pose a threat to Israel anymore.

1:06:19And you know, it's interesting to see that the Iranians, they look at Lebanon like their own Lebanon. But that's not the case. Lebanon is a sovereign state. So Iran is not in a position to actually dictate what will happen. And we should look at the UN resolution that called for the Lebanese to take responsibility and to make sure that Hezbollah is not next to the border of Israel. Numerous resolutions passed on that.

1:06:45Piers Morgan:OK, but if you believe that this is not an attack on Lebanon, why is Lebanon's prime minister condemning what you're doing, saying it disregards all peace efforts and humanitarian laws in the Middle East? Nawaf Salaam said on X, Israel continues to expand its aggressions that have targeted densely populated residential neighbourhoods. These strikes were, quote, heedless of all regional and international efforts to stop the war and showed a, quote, utter disregard for the principles of international law and international humanitarian law. That's the Prime Minister of Israel directly accusing...

1:07:18Piers Morgan:Of Lebanon. The Prime Minister of Lebanon directly accusing Israel of flagrantly breaching all international laws. Well, we can agree on one issue, Piers, today, that the Lebanese government is a weak government. You know, in the morning they would call Hezbollah to get out of southern Lebanon, and in the afternoon they would call Israel to seize fire. It doesn't work that way. Who is actually going to dismantle Hezbollah? Who is going to do that? You know, the UN presence, UNIFOR, they are not capable of doing much over there. The Lebanese government, you know, despite the fact they have a military of 70 ,000 soldiers that are not deploying them to the south, and this military is a very weak one.

1:08:02So basically, you know, all the responsibility is on our shoulders. We have to send our boys and girls to fight again and again in Lebanon in order to push the threat from our border. And I want to remind you that, you know, thousands of rockets were fired from southern Lebanon into Israeli cities. We didn't attack southern Lebanon just because we wanted to. We had no choice. And now we are dismantling the presence of Hezbollah in southern Lebanon, and we hope that they will be quiet for the people of Israel and for the people of Lebanon.

1:08:35Piers Morgan:The death toll in Lebanon has reportedly now exceeded 1 ,500. That's more than the number of Israelis killed on October 7th. I don't know why you got this number, but maybe you can let me know how many of those people are Hezbollah terrorists. Well, you tell me. I think most of them. I tell you why. Do you know how many? I will tell you that most of them, and I tell you why, because we asked the population to move out north of the Litani River, and they did. It wasn't easy for them, but the population moved to the north, So actually the one who stayed in southern Lebanon are Hezbollah terrorists.

1:09:13So I would estimate that most of the numbers you just quoted are Hezbollah terrorists.

1:09:18Piers Morgan:Well, Lebanese authorities estimate that 250 are women and children. Would you dispute that? I have no knowledge of that number, but I can tell you that the fact that people move to the north, it saved their lives and we encourage them to stay up north until we finish the job. Danny, out of interest, why is it that Israel always knows exactly how many enemy combatants you've killed, but you never know how many civilians you've killed? No, I don't know to answer both questions. You know, it's hard for us to know... No, but you told me most of the dead are Hezbollah. The Lebanese authorities say 250 are women and children.

1:09:56Piers Morgan:You're now saying you don't know, but at the same time you're telling me most of them are Hezbollah. Actually, the number you just presented for my case, if it's 250 civilians, and we regret the loss of lives of every civilian. Well, 250 women and children, to be specific. Let's make it clear. We regret the loss of lives of every civilian. And out of 1 ,500 that you mentioned earlier, so the majority, the vast majority were Hezbollah terrorists. How do you know that if you say you don't actually know? You said it. You just say that 250 were civilians. No, I said the Lebanese authorities said 250 were believed to be women and children.

1:10:31Piers Morgan:That doesn't mean they're the only civilians killed, obviously. But you seem emphatic that the majority were Hezbollah, but at the same time, you admit you've no idea how many have been killed. So, you know, we have a discussion like that in the past many times about Gaza. Yes. We regret the loss of life of any civilian. You know, Israeli civilians are suffering and Lebanese civilians are suffering. I know, but the running theme in Gaza was always the same, which was always Israelis would come on the show, representing the government in some capacity, and they would know exactly how many Hamas they said they killed.

1:11:04Piers Morgan:When I said, well, how many civilians have been killed? No idea. So I'm just wondering, who does the counting? And why is it only the deaths of terrorists get counted, apparently, but not civilians? It seems weird. Actually, we don't have the exact number, not for the terrorists and not for the civilians. But we know one thing, that the overwhelming majority of civilians left south of Lebanon. It's not easy for them. Now most of them are in Beirut and they're waiting for us to finish the job so they can go back to their communities. And I would say one more point. You have Christian villages in southern Lebanon and they stayed there.

1:11:40They really stayed there because you don't have Hezbollah presence in those villages. The Shiite villages, those are the ones that evacuated and they know very good if you stay in those villages, they're in danger.

1:11:54Piers Morgan:Let's turn to Iran because we've got this ceasefire And yet there's this dispute, obviously. The Pakistanis, who seem to have facilitated this, and the US both say that their understanding was that the ceasefire included Lebanon. Clearly, Israel has taken a different view. At the same time, we have this big piece in The New York Times has come out, clearly very well sourced inside the Situation Room at the White House, where your Prime Minister Netanyahu has been there with the head of Mossad joining from remotely on the big screen. and they've laid out a four-point plan for what they believed would happen in this war, most of which has clearly not happened.

1:12:33Piers Morgan:It included regime change. Well, there hasn't been regime change. There's been a decapitation of the Ayatollah and some of the leaders of the country, but they've been replaced very quickly. Secondly, they believed, the Israelis, according to this report, that if that was done, then there would be an uprising from the people, which has also not happened. And thirdly, that because of the double-pronged effect of these two things, that would mean it would be highly unlikely that the Strait of Hormuz would be closed. That has obviously not happened either. So it seems from the reporting on this, from inside that situation room, as your prime minister sold this war to Donald Trump, that a lot of the intelligence, presumably from Mossad, that was presented about the likely chain of events has simply not materialised.

1:13:21Piers Morgan:So, you know, did you guys just massively miscalculate? Absolutely not. You know, everything is political. You know, I hear those voices here in the U.S. And I hear some of those voices in Israel. You know, people who want to criticize the Israeli government or Trump's administration. I choose to look at the results and the achievements of this operation. And I think we can be very proud of what we achieved so far. And the main point is that we send a lesson and a clear message to the Iranian regime that we will not allow them to achieve nuclear capability. You know, for years we spoke about it.

1:13:57We threatened and we spoke about it. But people say, yeah, you know, it's only a declaration. And we decided to be serious about it. And we learned the lesson from North Korea. When North Korea was playing the same game with the international community, you know, they were signing agreements, inspectors came in and out. One morning we all woke up, and we saw that they actually achieved the nuclear capabilities. So we decided that it's not going to happen with Iran, and that's what happened in the last month. We decapitated that capability, and I think the Iranian regime, they know very carefully that we are not going anywhere.

1:14:31If we have to go back, we'll go back against them, and we have the capability of watching what's happening in Iran.

1:14:37Piers Morgan:Okay, but look, from where I'm sitting, the regime remains intact, albeit with different people at the head, but they're all same ideology, same regime. The enriched uranium remains under the ground. None of that has been secured. The Strait of Hormuz is closed again, specifically because you guys are bombing Hezbollah in Lebanon. So I'm at a loss to understand where this claim of historic victory, which America is trying to claim this all is, is coming from. Yair Lapid, who's the leader of the opposition in Israel, said there's never been such a political disaster in all of our history. The military carried out everything that was asked of it.

1:15:14Piers Morgan:The public demonstrated amazing resilience. But Netanyahu failed politically, failed strategically and didn't meet a single one of the goals he himself set. It will take us years to repair the political and strategic damage that Netanyahu wrought due to arrogance, negligence and a lack of strategic planning. What do you say to that? Well, as I told you earlier, you know, you have a lot of politics in this game. But I would agree on one point. We haven't finished it yet. We haven't finished it yet. You still have the negotiations. You have to evaluate it when you finish the process, not in the middle of the process.

1:15:48But let me ask you one question. Do you think Iran is stronger today if you compare it to the point they were actually negotiating with the US?

1:15:56Piers Morgan:I think it's a very interesting question. Let me finish the question. They were negotiating with the US. They were very arrogant when they came to Vienna and met with Special Envoy Ritkov and Mr Kushner. I think when they will come to the negotiation room in Islamabad, on Friday, they will not be arrogant. They know the facts. It's a weakened Iran. They don't have the same capabilities. And they understand that if they will continue to lie and play games... Well, let me answer you. We need to hammer them. Okay, well, let me answer you. I would dispute your characterization of it. On this ground specifically, I think militarily, clearly they have been weakened.

1:16:33Piers Morgan:I think that's beyond any doubt. The American and Israeli forces have pulverized Iran for four or five weeks and cause a lot of damage to their military hardware. I think that's indisputable. However, there's been a serious miscalculation, I think, driven by Israel in its negotiations with Trump to join this war, in which they have miscalculated the impact of decapitating the head of the regime and then thinking that the people would rise up, which they haven't, and then not understanding, which the Iranians have clearly understood, that the closure of the Strait of Hormuz could be so disastrous to the global economy and to energy prices.

1:17:11Piers Morgan:And the fact that Iran's been able to indiscriminately attack its neighbouring Gulf states in a way that's paralysed the economies in those countries for the duration of this war, driven many people to leave, caused enormous damage to the future business model of getting tourists to go there, people to go and live there, safe, sunny, you know, tourism, sport and so on. Enormous damage to that. So if you're the Iranian regime, yeah, you've had your military hardware significantly weakened. That is beyond doubt. But you've now got a very powerful belief, because you've proven it over five weeks, that by controlling the Strait of Hormuz, you can control the global economy.

1:17:55Piers Morgan:And by attacking your neighbouring Gulf states, whether it's oil refineries or it's tourism areas, you can actually paralyze their economic business model too. And that can end up making you stronger, not weaker. I have to make two points. First, you know, when you imply that we actually dragged the US into this war, you know, with all due respect, we both know President Trump. No one can drag him anywhere. He knows exactly what he's doing. He made it very clear when he pulled out from the JCPOA more than a decade ago that he would not allow becoming a nuclear power. and I give him credit for standing behind this important position.

1:18:36And the second point about regime change, you know, we never promised a regime change. We always said we want to create the conditions for a regime change. And my personal opinion, I think it will happen. You know, maybe you want it to happen tomorrow or in a week time, and you want me to tell you when it will happen. But I think today, when the regime is weakened, it will be easier to see a regime change. But when you look back in history, in different cases of revolutions, no one can actually anticipate the exact moment that you will have the revolution. It doesn't work that way. It erupts. And I hope it will be sooner than later we will see the Iranian people rising up.

1:19:15Piers Morgan:Daniel, I always appreciate you taking time to come on Uncensored. Thank you very much. Thank you very much, Piers. Piers Morgan Uncensored is proudly independent. The only boss around here is me. If you enjoy our show, we ask for only one simple thing. Hit subscribe on YouTube and follow Piers Morgan Uncensored on Spotify and Apple Podcasts. And in return, we will continue our mission to inform, irritate and entertain. And we'll do it all for free. Independent, uncensored media has never been more critical and we couldn't do it without you.