“2WAY” host Mark Halperin, Democratic operative Kevin Walling, and talk radio host Larry O’Connor discuss what the “next level” of escalation could be if negotiations fail to get Iran to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. “I don’t think the U.S. is going to use nuclear weapons, but Trump has now, at least twice, referred to the idea that if the Iranians don’t do what he wants, he’s going to take it ‘to 11’ — some maximum force thing that extends beyond what’s been used so far,” Halperin said. “Like the Discombobulator.” It’s something I don’t wanna…nobody else has it,” Trump told NewsNation last week. “But we have weapons nobody else knows about. And, it’s probably good not to talk about it, but we have some amazing weapons.” “In Venezuela, the U.S. military used a weapon that, as best I can tell, had never been used before and hasn’t really been explained too thoroughly-at least not in the popular media,” Halperin said. “Something that made Maduro’s guards physically ill and vomit-some kind of high-tech weapon. A microwave gun that Trump called the ‘discombobulator.'” “Does it seem to you-as it does to me-that the president has something in mind we’ve never seen used by any government or military in history before to hit the Iranians with, if they don’t come to the table and surrender?” “It’s typical Trump-he always says everything’s on the table,” O’Connor said. “But in keeping with something I’ve been hearing this week, part of what’s happening here is also demonstrating to China and others what we’re capable of.” Halperin continued: “Do you think there’s some secret weapon that could just eviscerate Tehran?” “I’d go back to the raid to take out Osama bin Laden-when we found out we had these stealth helicopters that people didn’t know about beforehand. So there’s always that possibility,” Kevin Walling added. “And this is also telegraphing to Xi Jinping and the CCP, with their eyes on Taiwan, about our capabilities. There’s a broader geopolitical element to this-not just Iran.”

MARK HALPERIN: Do you guys know what the word vig is short for? It’s [Yiddish] for kicker or commission. But it’s actually a diminutive of the word vigorish. Vigorish-there it is in the chat. Anyway, the president wants a vig. Look, the president definitively wants to wipe out their capacity for nuclear terror-naval, air, missile. He wants to, if he can, bring about regime change, but at least get a Venezuela-style government he can deal with. And he wants this vig-he wants a percentage of the gas and the oil. And the Israelis are fine with all that. I think if they don’t surrender in a conference room with Jared Kushner, then the president will destroy them. And people who say he’s edgy, he’s nudgy, he’s hearing from so many people who say he’s got to stop-he’s obsessed with the markets-I just don’t believe that’s correct based on my reporting. He’s at peace with this thing. He’s not blind to the negativity, but he’s at peace with it. And he wants to walk away with the things that he started out seeking. And there’s a great Substack I recommend to all of you by someone I hadn’t heard of-Mehdi Parpanchi. He’s an Iranian journalist, I guess. I recommend you all go read it. You don’t have to agree with it, but if you want to understand why the president did this and why he believes he’s on track to succeed, you should read it-even if you’re Adam Schiff and you’re dead set against the war. [The Coercive Sequence: How Trump’s Iran War Actually Works] The subtitle is, “Why negotiation and war are part of the same strategy and what critics still fail to see.” He says the media’s got this all wrong. He says, look, this is a risk-he’s not saying it’s going to work-but don’t confuse the fact that it may not work with whether Trump has a strategy. Because he lays out what Trump’s strategy was from the start, and how long it is going to last. So we talk about how long it could last, and Larry talked about two and a half more weeks at CPAC. I think it could go four more weeks, but I think if it got to two and a half weeks and the president needed more time, he’d find a way to do it. The one thing I would criticize about that Substack-it didn’t address the Strait of Hormuz head-on. There’s a lot going on there. How much of the focus do you think, militarily, is about the Strait right now? KEVIN WALLING: I mean, it certainly is. And obviously, the president is attuned to the markets. There’s also another strait closer to Yemen that controls some oil flow-[Ba al-Madab] has been highlighted as a choke point too, along with the Strait of Hormuz. Again, this is the only leverage the Iranians have right now. I saw this morning there are thousands of ships waiting. And part of what I’m watching this weekend is what happens to those 10 or 12 tankers the president highlighted yesterday in that cabinet meeting. I will also say, speaking of definitions, something that’s foremost in the president’s mind-going back to Iraq-is oil. That’s always been a focus of Trump going back 20 years-saying we should have gotten that. And that’s certainly going to be at play in this current conflict. MARK HALPERIN: Larry, where are you currently in terms of concern about the Strait not being open? Does it seem headed toward being open, or not? LARRY O’CONNOR: In the last 10 days, I’ve had more conversations with military people-either currently serving or recently out-and I feel more comfortable that what’s happening in the Strait was anticipated and planned for. They could be spinning me, but I feel more comfortable about it. And I agree that the Substack didn’t directly address the Strait, but the pattern of behavior going all the way back to the bombing of the nuclear sites in June of last year fits into this broader pattern. You escalate, you force a new circumstance, you apply coercion-then you stop, reset, and try to get something done. If it doesn’t work, you escalate again. So while it’s not directly addressing the Strait right now, it fits into that broader pattern of how Trump approaches this. If he doesn’t see leverage in a situation, he creates a new scenario where he has leverage. Like two weeks ago, Newt Gingrich and others were focusing on this, saying it had to be open, and now it doesn’t seem to be front and center. MARK HALPERIN: Let’s talk about the concept of the next level. In Venezuela, the U.S. military used a weapon that, as best I can tell, had never been used before and hasn’t really been explained too thoroughly-at least not in the popular media. Something that made Maduro’s guards physically ill, vomit-some kind of high-tech weapon. A microwave gun. I don’t think the U.S. is going to use nuclear weapons, but Trump has now, at least twice, referred to the idea that if the Iranians don’t do what he wants, he’s going to take it to 11. Some maximum force thing that extends beyond what’s been used so far. The “discombobulator.” Neither of you is Q from James Bond, an expert on secret military programs, but does it seem to you-as it does to me-that the president has something in mind we’ve never seen used by any government or military in history before to hit the Iranians with if they don’t come to the table and surrender? LARRY O’CONNOR: Well, first of all, it’s typical Trump-he always says everything’s on the table. But in keeping with something I’ve been hearing this week, part of what’s happening here is also demonstrating to China and others what we’re capable of. So that would fit. MARK HALPERIN: Do you think there’s some secret weapon that could just eviscerate Tehran? KEVIN WALLING: Well, I go back to the raid to take out Osama bin Laden-when we found out we had stealth helicopters that people didn’t know about beforehand. So there’s always that possibility. And I think Larry makes an excellent point-this is also telegraphing to Xi Jinping and the CCP, with their eyes still on Taiwan, about our capabilities. There’s a broader geopolitical element to this-not just Iran.
RealClearPolitics Videos