conflict
Col. Macgregor: Ukraine’s ‘useless’ incursion into Russia ‘cooked up at NATO’

From LifeSiteNews
By Frank Wright
In a new interview, retired U.S. Army Colonel Douglas Macgregor explains the escalation of tensions in Ukraine and in Israel as the result of deliberate attempts to destabilize Russia and the entire region of the Middle East.
In a new interview, retired U.S. Army Colonel Douglas Macgregor, one of the founders of the rapidly growing organization Our Country, Our Choice, explains the escalation of tensions in Ukraine and in Israel as the result of deliberate attempts to destabilize Russia and the entire region of the Middle East.
“Insane as that sounds to most Americans,” warns Macgregor, these actions are undertaken at a time when the “U.S. is dangerously overstretched.”
So far, he says, “we are fortunate that worse things have not happened to us.”
Yet as Macgregor explains, what has happened as a result of the actions of Western regimes is so damaging, and dangerous, that the populations of “the Western hemisphere” must consider removing their own governments in order to survive them.
Macgregor’s video analysis, released on August 20, can be seen here:
Not only are the people of the West excluded from the decisions which are destroying their world, he says, but in the case of Israel, even the U.S. government itself is not deciding American foreign policy. This, he says, has to end – before everything else does.
A global(ist) crisis
The crises faced by the U.S. have stretched it to breaking point at home – and abroad.
“Everywhere you want to look – in Europe, in the Middle East, in the Indo-Pacific – our positions are worsening by the day,” he says.
“Americans don’t have any control over their government. They’re bystanders … they’re watching other people make policy decisions, in some cases life or death decisions, in the Middle East and Eastern Europe as well as here at home with the border. They’re never consulted. They’re never asked anything. They’re just told to shut up.”
Americans, says Macgregor, have tolerated this due to domestic prosperity – which has now vanished.
Macgregor says with falling living standards as a result of this industry of permanent war and a permanent state of emergency at home, “these days are over.”
He says of the U.S, “The world is sick of us,” saying this is why a parallel system to that led by the U.S. is emerging in the Chinese and Russian-led BRICS bloc.
Yet when Macgregor moves to analysis of U.S.-Israeli politics, he says that not only are the American people not in control of their government, but the U.S. government is itself not in control of its own foreign policy.
“The truth of the matter is that Mr. Netanyahu, not Mr. Biden or his administration, is in is in charge of what’s happening in the Middle East.”
Shockingly, Macgregor, a former adviser to the Trump administration, says this means Israel directs U.S. soldiers and its military into action.
“When I say ‘in the Middle East’ I mean he controls what we will or will not do militarily – we don’t,” he says. “Netanyahu has got control of Congress and we are going to unconditionally support him until somehow or another it harms us.”
“Only when it harms us in a demonstrable way – not a way in which it can be concealed.”
This is the reason, Macgregor says, for the focus of U.S. politicians such as Lindsey Graham on promoting a war in Iran, which is “not in the U.S. national interest.”
“This business of blaming Iran or for that matter anybody else in the Middle East for everything that’s wrong is not only misguided, it’s stupid. It’s bad policy, but we’ve adopted it [because] the Israelis have insisted upon it.”
Netanyahu, says Macgregor, does not want peace. Instead, the Zionist leader sees “a once-in-a-century opportunity to annihilate everyone in the region who does not bend the knee to Israel.”
Moving to Ukraine, Macgregor bluntly explains why everything we are told about the Ukraine war is simply untrue.
“Mr. Zelensky realizes he is dealing with a lot of suckers in the West,” he said. “We are not getting the truth about Ukraine – or about anything our leadership doesn’t want us to know.”
Macgregor supports this viewpoint with reference to the recent incursion by Ukraine into the Russian region of Kursk, portrayed as a blow against Putin which could “change the direction of the war” in Western media.
“This was an idea cooked up at NATO. This made no sense. Worse than a gamble, it was a useless exercise to destroy some of your best remaining troops,” he says, adding that the British and Americans “had a big hand in pushing this.”
His remarks echo those of former U.K. Prime Minister and previous U.K. Foreign Secretary David Cameron, who stated on camera in May that Britain’s war policy on Ukraine is “fixed” and will not change with a new government.
Cameron also said that attacks on Russia will be intensified “over the summer” to give the impression that Ukraine is winning.
Macgregor says NATO troops were directly involved: “We are hearing reports up to 2,000 of these troops may have been British and Americans in Ukrainian uniforms.”
Macgregor speaks of “sheep dipping” NATO troops to present them as Ukrainian soldiers.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said in a statement included in the video that Zelensky would “never have dared” to launch the Kursk incursion into Russia “unless he was instructed to do so by the United States of America.”
Indicating the colossal damage the war has wrought beyond the borders of both Russia and Ukraine, Lavrov went on: “No one now has any doubts … the USA is behind the explosions of Nord Stream, which have left Europe without cheap Russian energy and consequently without a sustainable basis for economic development.”
Western media routinely labels noticing the obvious as a form of treason. To point out that the policies of the liberal-globalist governments of the West are suicidal is to repeat “Putin’s talking points.”
Instead, the mainstream media repeats the words of Zelensky. What does Macgregor have to say about that?
“Anyone who believes anything Zelensky says needs to see a psychiatrist. There is no truth in anything that man says, or for that matter, in anything he has ever said.”
Kursk: a Western media fiasco
Macgregor explains how the Kursk incursion has been a briefly successful media event bought at the cost of total disaster for the ground troops and their tanks and armor, which he says are now encircled and will be “completely annihilated.” Yet the militarily “disastrous” operation has further galvanized the Russian public, he warns. His report was issued as a massive drone attack has been launched on Moscow, a further provocation towards full-scale war between NATO and the Russians.
The Russian population is “enraged and furious,” says Macgregor, “much more than the people in the West understand.” They are demanding Putin “march West” and smash Ukraine totally, he says.
Putin, according to Macgregor, is opposed to this idea, being only concerned with securing the ethnic Russian population in the east of Ukraine.
“We have awakened a beast,” says Macgregor, reminding viewers the Russian government “does not want to govern Ukrainians.” He also insists a chaotic end is in sight for the Zelensky regime.
Despite what Zelensky says in public, says Macgregor, “privately we know his bags are packed.” With homes from Switzerland to Florida, he will be leaving “with cartloads of U.S. cash” as was seen in the chaotic withdrawal from Afghanistan, Macgregor explained, before darkly suggesting that “it may be Ukrainian soldiers … which ‘bump him off.’”
With the end of corrupt regimes in mind, Macgregor stated that the liberal-globalist regimes in the West are so dangerous to their own people that they must be replaced.
“I think it’s time for the governments in Germany and other ‘corrupt’ European states to ‘be removed,’” he said.
Citing the escalation driven by these regimes towards full-scale conflict with Russia, he said that if they aren’t removed, European and British populations “could end up in another accident which could be disastrous for Europe.”
Western peoples are being led into Armageddon, he claims, by an elite which seeks to provoke a war which could result in a nuclear exchange.
Macgregor’s warning is bolstered by independent reports of the extraordinary degree of British involvement in the war in Ukraine. Grayzone journalist Kit Klarenberg has written of Kursk being “a British operation” entirely, saying the U.K. is announcing itself with this operation as a “formal belligerent” in the war against Russia.
In a piece titled “Britain’s Kursk Invasion Backfires,” Klarenberg counts the cost of this “clear suicide mission,” which has seen the “Biden administration distance itself from the action” and has sabotaged yet another move towards peace.
Echoing Macgregor’s warning to liberal-globalist governments across Europe, that of Germany has now dramatically reduced its support for the war, recognizing that the threat of full-scale conflict with Russia is leading populations to turn against regimes in support of escalation in Ukraine.
Klarenberg also notes the Wall Street Journal now claims Ukraine is solely responsible for the Nord Stream bombings – a framing which is unlikely to improve relations with Germans.
The Western alliance is fracturing, Macgregor suggests, as populations turn on the politicians which have led them to the brink of civilizational collapse.
Fighting back
In the service of the restoration of sanity to the political life of the West, Macgregor is promoting a network he compares to that which kept the American Revolution alive.
A new platform named “Republic,” says Macgregor, is going to be used by his organization Our Country, Our Choice, to provide real news and promote national and international cooperation across the West – along with legal and political tools for subscribers, including contact details for U.S. and European politicians and networks.
“This is like the committees of correspondents during the Revolutionary War. All of the revolutionary congresses or parliamentary bodies had committees, and these committees contacted each other kept each other informed and were part of the lifeblood that kept the American Revolution going through really hard times,” he said.
Macgregor states “this will not be canceled.” His case in defense of life, and that of the Western civilization he wishes to defend as a committed Christian soldier, is being made not only in words but in deeds
He says these measures will help to correct the deliberate exclusion of the American and Western peoples from the processes of power which threaten their very existence.
You can keep abreast of Macgregor’s initiative to “stop globalism” and “defend the U.S. from attacks on its borders, religious freedom, and from endless wars” at Our Country, Our Choice here.
conflict
US airstrike on Iran’s nuclear facilities. Was it obliteration?

A satellite image of the Isfahan nuclear research center in Iran shows visible damage to structures and nearby tunnel entrances from recent US airstrikes. / Satellite image (c) 2025 Maxar Technologies.
Seymour Hersh
The US attack on Iran may not have wiped out its nuclear ambitions but it did set them back years
I started my career in journalism during the early 1960s as a reporter for the City News Bureau of Chicago, a now long-gone local news agency that was set up by the Chicago newspapers in the 1890s to cover the police and fire departments, City Hall, the courts, the morgue, and so on. It was a training ground, and the essential message for its aspiring reporters was: “If your mother says she loves you, check it out.”
It was a message I wish our cable networks would take to heart. CNN and MSNBC, basing their reporting on an alleged Defense Intelligence Agency analysis, have consistently reported that the Air Force raids in Iran on June 22 did not accomplish their primary goal: total destruction of Iran’s nuclear-weapons capacity. US newspapers also joined in, but it was the two nominally liberal cable channels, with their dislike—make that contempt—for President Donald Trump, that drove the early coverage.
There was no DIA analysis per se. All US units that engage in combat must file an “after-action report” to the DIA after a military engagement. In this case, the report would have come from the US Central Command, located at MacDill Air Force base in Tampa, Florida. CENTCOM is responsible for all US military operations in the Middle East, Egypt, Central Asia, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. One US official involved in the process told me that “the first thing out of the box is you have to tell your boss what happened.” It was that initial report of the bombing attack that was forwarded to DIA headquarters along the Potomac River in Washington and copied or summarized by someone not authorized to do so and sent to the various media outlets.
The view of many who were involved in the planning and execution of the mission is that the report was summarized and leaked “for political purposes”—to cast immediate doubt on the success of the mission. The early reports went so far as to suggest that Iran’s nuclear program has survived incapacitation by the attack. Seven US B-2 “Spirit” bombers, each carrying two deep-penetration “bunker-busters” weighing 30,000 pounds, had flown without challenge from their base in Missouri to the primary target: Iran’s Fordo nuclear facility, concealed deep inside a mountain twenty miles north of the city of Qom.
The planning for the attack began with the knowledge that the main target—the working area of the nuclear program—was buried at least 260 feet below the rocky surface at Fordo. The gas centrifuges spinning there were repeatedly enriching uranium, in what is known as a cascade, not to weapons-grade level—uranium-235 isotopes enriched to 90 percent—but to 60 percent. Further processing to create weapons grade uranium, if Iran chose to do so, could be done in a matter of weeks, or less. The Air Force planning group had also been informed before the bombing raid, most likely by the Israelis, who have a vast spy network in Iran, that more than 450 pounds of the enriched gas stored at Fordo had been shipped to safety at another vital Iranian nuclear site at Isfahan, 215 miles south of Tehran. Isfahan was the only known facility in Iran capable of converting the Fordo gas into a highly enriched metal—a critical early stage of building the bomb. Isfahan also was a separate target of the US attack on Fordo, and was pulverized by Tomahawk missiles fired by a U.S. submarine operating in the Gulf of Aden, off Yemen.
As a journalist who for decades has covered the nascent nuclear crisis in the Middle East, it seemed clear to me and to informed friends I have in Washington and Israel that if Fordo somehow survived its bunker-buster attack, as was initially suggested, and continued to enrich more uranium, Isfahan would not. No enrichment, no Iranian bomb.
I’ve been frustrated and angry at cable news coverage for years, and that includes Fox News, too, and decided to try and find the real story. If your mother says she loves you, check it out. And I checked out enough of it to share.
I was told that “the first question for the American planners was how big was the actual workspace at Fordo? Was it a structure? We had to find that out before we got rid of it.” Some of the planners estimated that the working space “was the size of two hockey rinks: 200 feet long and 85 feet wide.” It came to 34,000 square feet. The height of the underground working space was assumed to be ten-and-a-half feet—I was not told the genesis of that assumption—and the size of the target was determined to be 357,000 cubic feet.
The next step was to measure the power of the dozen or more bunker-busters that were planned to be “carefully spaced and dropped” by the US B-2 bombers, using the most advanced guidance systems. (During one high-level session in Washington, one of the Air Force planners was asked what would happen if the B-2’s guidance systems were corrupted by an outside signal. “We’d miss the target” was the answer.)
I was assured that even if the rough estimate of the working space at Fordo was far off, the bombers targeting Fordo each carried a 30,000-pound bomb with an explosive payload of as much as five thousand pounds, which was more than enough to pulverize the mythical hockey rinks, or even a much larger working space.
Some of the bombs were also outfitted with what is known as a hard target void sensing fuze, which enabled the bombs to penetrate multiple layers of a site like Fordo before detonating. This would maximize the destructive effect. Each bomb, dropped in sequence, would create a force of rubble that would cause increasing havoc in the working areas deep inside the mountain.
“The bombs made their own hole. We built a 30,000-pound steel bullet,” the official told me, referring with pride to the bunker-busters.
Most important, he said, was that there were no post-strike hints detected of radioactivity—more evidence that the 450 pounds of enriched uranium had been moved from Fordo to the reprocessing site at Isfahan prior to the US attack there, which was code-named “Midnight Hammer.” That operation included a third US strike at yet another nuclear facility at Natanz.
“The Air Force got everything on the hit list,” the official told me. “Even if Iran rebuilds some centrifuges, it will still need Isfahan. There is no conversion capability without it.”
Why not, I asked, tell the public about the success of the raid and the fact that Iran no longer has a potential nuclear weapon?
The answer: “There will be a top-secret report about all of this, but we don’t tell people how hard we work. We tell the public what we think it wants to hear.”
The US official, asked about the future of the Iranian nuclear program, quickly acknowledged that “there is a communication problem” when it comes to the fate of the program.
The intent of the strike planners, he said, “was to prevent the Iranians from building a nuclear weapon in the near term—a year or so—with the hope they would not try again. The clear understanding was that there was no expectation to ‘obliterate’ every aspect of their nuclear program. We don’t even know what that is.
“Obliteration means the glass—[eliminating] Iran’s nuclear program—is full. The planning and the results are the glass is half-full. For Trump critics, the results are the glass is half-empty—the centrifuges may have survived and four hundred pounds of 60 percent enriched uranium are missing. The bombs could not be assured to penetrate the centrifuge chamber . . . too deep, but they could cover them up [with rocks and other bomb debris] and in the process cause unknown damage to them.
“Whether the 60 percent [enriched uranium] was there or not is irrelevant because without centrifuges they cannot refine it to weapons grade. Add to this the research and refinement and conversion from gas to metal—required for a bomb—at Isfahan are also gone.
“Results? Glass is half-full . . . a couple of years of respite and uncertain future. So now Trump’s defense is Full Glass. Critics? Half-empty. Reality? Half-full. There you are.”
The immediate beneficiary of the use of US force in Iran will not be a more placid Middle East, but Israel, and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The Israeli Air Force and army are still killing massive numbers of Palestinians in Gaza.
There remains no evidence that Iran was on the cusp of becoming a nuclear power. But as the world has known for decades, Israel maintains a significant nuclear arsenal that it officially claims does not exist.
This is a story not about the bigger picture, which is muddled, but about a successful US mission that was the subject of a lot of sloppy reporting because of a reviled president. It would have been a breakthrough had anyone in the mainstream press spoken or written about the double standard that benefits Israel and its nuclear umbrella, but in America that remains a taboo.
conflict
Obama Dropped Over 26K Bombs Without Congressional Approval

@miss_stacey_ Biden, Clinton, Obama & Harris on Iran #biden #clinton #obama #harris #trump #iran #nuclear
Iran has been the target for decades. Biden, Harris, and Clinton—all the Democrats have said that they would attack Iran if given the opportunity. It appears that Donald Trump is attempting to mitigate a potentially irresolvable situation. As he bluntly told reporters: We basically — we have two countries that have been fighting so long and so hard that they don’t know what the f‑‑‑ they’re doing.”
A portion of the nation believes Trump acted like a dictator by attacking Iran without Congressional approval. I explained how former President Barack Obama decimated the War Powers Resolution Act when he decided Libya was overdue for a regime change. The War Powers Act, or War Powers Resolution of 1973, grants the POTUS the ability to send American troops into battle if Congress receives a 48-hour notice. The stipulation here is that troops cannot remain in battle for over 60 days unless Congress authorizes a declaration of war. Congress could also remove US forces at any time by passing a resolution.
Libya is one of seven nations that Obama bombed without Congressional approval, yet no one remembers him as a wartime president, as the United States was not technically at war. Over 26,000 bombs were deployed across 7 nations under his command in 2016 alone. Libya, Afghanistan, Syria, Yemen, Somalia, Iraq, and Pakistan were attacked without a single vote. Donald Trump’s recent orders saw 36 bombs deployed in Iran.
The majority of those bombings happened in Syria, Libya, and Iraq under the premise of targeting extremist groups like ISIS. Drone strikes were carried out across Somalia, Yemen, and Pakistan as the Obama Administration accused those nations of hosting al-Qaeda affiliated groups. Coincidentally, USAID was also providing funding to those groups.
The 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) was initially implemented to hunt down the Taliban and al-Qaeda after the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Obama broadened his interpretation of the AUMF and incorporated newly formed militant groups that were allegedly expanding across the entire Middle East. The Bureau of Investigative Journalism believes there were up to 1,100 civilian casualties in Pakistan, Yemen, and Somalia. Thousands of civilians died in Syria and Iraq but the death toll was never calculated. At least 100 innocent people died in the 2016 attacks in Afghanistan alone.
The government will always augment the law for their personal agenda. The War Powers Resolution was ignored and the AUMF was altered. Congress was, however, successful in preventing Obama from putting US troops on the ground and fighting a full-scale war. In 2013, Obama sought congressional approval for military action in Syria but was denied. Obama again attempted to deploy troops in 2015 but was denied. Congress has to redraft the AUMF to specifically prevent Obama from deploying troops in the Middle East. “The authorization… does not authorize the use of the United States Armed Forces on the ground in Syria for the purpose of combat operations.” Obama attempted to redraft the AUMF on his own by insisting he would prohibit “enduring offensive ground combat operations” or long-term deployment of troops. He was met with bipartisan disapproval as both sides believed he was attempting to drag the United States into another unnecessary war.
The United States should not be involved in any of these battles, but here we are. Those living in fear that Donald Trump is a dictator fail to recognize that past leadership had every intention of sending American men and women into battle unilaterally without a single vote cast.
-
Agriculture2 days ago
Canada’s supply management system is failing consumers
-
Economy2 days ago
Trump opens door to Iranian oil exports
-
Alberta1 day ago
COVID mandates protester in Canada released on bail after over 2 years in jail
-
Crime1 day ago
Project Sleeping Giant: Inside the Chinese Mercantile Machine Linking Beijing’s Underground Banks and the Sinaloa Cartel
-
Business1 day ago
Canada’s loyalty to globalism is bleeding our economy dry
-
armed forces24 hours ago
Canada’s Military Can’t Be Fixed With Cash Alone
-
Alberta1 day ago
Alberta uncorks new rules for liquor and cannabis
-
International1 day ago
Trump transportation secretary tells governors to remove ‘rainbow crosswalks’