COL DOUG MACGREGOR: WHY AMERICA GOES TO WAR скачать в хорошем качестве

COL DOUG MACGREGOR: WHY AMERICA GOES TO WAR

** NEW MERCH ** Jackets & Sweatshirts, Thermo Mugs!! Daniel Davis Deep Dive Merch: Etsy store https://www.etsy.com/shop/DanielDavis... Core warning: A war with Iran would have severe negative consequences for global financial markets, the U.S. economy, and the dollar, but Washington elites are acting as if only success is possible and risks are being ignored. Critique of pro-war rhetoric: Figures like Senator Lindsey Graham frame intervention in dramatic, Reagan-era moral terms, urging decisive military action and dismissing diplomacy. The speaker argues this mindset is reckless and historically naïve. Israel-first argument: The speakers repeatedly claim that current U.S. policy is 100% aligned with Israeli strategic interests, not American national, economic, or security interests. They argue U.S. military power in the region is effectively subordinated to Israel’s leadership. Donor influence: The discussion emphasizes that wealthy donors and political money heavily influence U.S. foreign policy, constraining presidential independence and driving decisions toward war. Strategic and moral concern: A full-scale military campaign against Iran is likened to destructive historical invasions, with the warning that such an approach would destabilize the entire Middle East, create long-term chaos, and ultimately harm Israel itself. Domestic neglect: While focusing on foreign conflicts (Iran, Ukraine, Venezuela), the U.S. government is accused of neglecting serious domestic problems—economic fragility, financial instability, erosion of federal law enforcement, and arms control failures (like abandoning the START treaty). Risk of escalation: If Iran proves more resilient than expected and can sustain missile attacks beyond a short conflict window, U.S. and Israeli military capacity could be overstretched, leading to rapid collapse of the strategy. Media and advocacy criticism: Pro-war commentators (e.g., Mark Levin) are portrayed as openly rejecting diplomacy and advocating regime-change warfare, allegedly under the guise of concern for the Iranian people. Bleak outlook: The speakers believe diplomacy is unlikely to succeed, war is increasingly probable, and if Iran is destroyed, Turkey could be the next target—suggesting this is part of a broader, ongoing regional escalation rather than a single conflict. Bottom line: The segment argues the U.S. is drifting toward a high-risk war driven by foreign interests and elite influence, while ignoring domestic instability—creating conditions for economic shock, regional chaos, and long-term strategic blowback.