United States, Iran, President Trump discussed on Red Eye Radio


This is Red Eye Radio. All across America. Eight six six ninety redeye. He is air cutting. I'm Gary McNamara. Welcome. And good morning. Breaking news overnight here just in the last. Our looking at five we've, we've been looking at a variety of different news sources, but just looking at Fox News right now US navy drone shot down by Iranian missile over the strait of Hormuz, a source telling Fox News, Associated Press telling Reuters latest that we have a US high altitude drone which shot down Thursday by an Iranian surface to air missile over the strait of Hormuz amid heightened tensions in the region after last week's attack onto oil tankers, a source told Fox News. A commander for rans, Revolutionary Guards said the shooting sends a clear message to the US that while Iran has no intention of war with anyone. It's ready for war. The US navy's m q foresee drone, which has the same wingspan as a Boeing seven thirty-seven was over international airspace, at the time according to the source about seventeen miles off the shore of. Veran captain, Bill urban US central command spokesperson declined to comment on the reported attack when reached by the Associated Press. But he said the drone no drone was over Iranian territory. Now, just so you know, we've gone over this last half hour, but just for new listeners, this is a huge drought. This has the wingspan of a seven thirty seven yes. And more information coming out and other senior US official told Fox News last week. That I'm Q nine reaper drone was fired on by the Iranian shortly after it arrived at the scene, where the tanker where the tanker sent out, one of the tankers sent out a distress signal that wasn't in early articles, by the way was. No, it was not NBC news, pretty much having the same thing. Central command said this week that on June thirteenth a modified Iranian essay, seven surface to air missile attempted to shoot down a different drone of the same type that had arrived to monitor one of the ships in the Gulf of Oman in the incident involving those tankers last week. So you're right. We didn't get that in in maybe because it was insignificant. Actually, I wouldn't consider that to be insignificant. That attempt would be, I think would be the same kind of action, just unsuccessful. This one was according to all reports successful in downing that, that Trump that, that is a direct attack on the US on a US asset in internet over international waters. The report is that it happened this morning over the strait of Hormuz and the, the, the one thing and you and I found this breaking story just as we were about to talk about the fact that the house of Representative on a straight line vote democrat vote voted to. Rescind the two thousand one war authorisation act, which, again, has been in effect since two thousand one we had gone over the war authorization act, many times before when people would call and say, well, what's going on in Iran, and everything else is unconstitutional because congress did not declare war, and we said, well, actually, wore authorization act, his congress declaring war, they might have not used the word this is a declaration of war, but it is the approval of congress and that approval of congress really gave the, the any president, whether it was Bush Obama or the reason that Obama was able to shoot drones, excuse me, not drones, but shoot cruise missiles as much as he did that was all based on the two thousand one war authorization act, right? And the secretary of state, Mike Pompeo has made it clear to congress even before the tankers were shot at that. If we went to a war with Iran, the president was going to use the two thousand one war, authorisation act as his authority to do so which came from congress and remember, members of congress, rand Paul. For example, the disagreed with the secretary of state on that particular issue as did many Democrats, therefore Democrats, passing to resend it, it wouldn't have passed the Senate. So the war authorisation act would have stayed in effect. But now that's mood. It doesn't matter now that Iran, according to the source has directly attacked a US aircraft drone or manned. It doesn't matter over international waters changes completely the president's legal authority to respond now the two thousand one more authorisation act when it comes to responding is moot. The president has at absolute authority to do so. It will be interesting to see how Democrats respond to this, and, how Republicans and Democrats respond to this as we go through the morning today. And get more information on it. We will know without question and the world will know without question. If the drone was over international waters. Because there are many of the world's militaries that will be able to track that missile and precisely where it came from and where it hit, not just the United States. All right. So I it's interesting because something else we didn't fold into this just yet. But the Wall Street Journal did in covering this breaking news this morning. The drones downing was announced hours after the Iranian aligned who fee rebels in Yemen claimed responsibility for firing a missile that struck. This album is aviation plant instead. Arabia US ally, of course on Wednesday. A rocket hit a compound in southern Iraq used by Exxon Mobil and other international oil firms, the fourth time in a week that projectiles have been fired at facilities where American personnel are stationed in that country, something that wasn't widely reported the relevance of to the US. I mean clearly with with Iran and Iraq. If you know the history, there's something there, but why go, why send them why send the missiles, why attack any asset or any any site in Iraq and the Wall Street Journal pointing out that you have US employees at those sites. And the question that we have is, is. And again, I'm, I'm sure this will be a question that will be asked tomorrow later on today. Look at the US comes out and says, look, here's the satellite imagery, here is from US intelligence here is from British intelligence here is that, you know, everybody's got satellites in the skies, boom. Everybody agrees. It was around that shot the missile and the German was over international waters. you know at that point the next question will be if you connect all the dots here about attacks on other u._s. assets or u._s. personnel be they military or not it doesn't matter if you have any type of plant where you you know that united states workers are at that is also an attack on the united states or united states asset or united states citizens and depending on if it's a combination of both right it could be it could be in another country but still be a u._s. asset with u._s. workers or it could not be a u._s. asset but could still have u._s. citizens there and u._s. citizens would be the target of a of of an attack which at that point the president also can respond but if you connect all the dots the next question would be this is what i would ask somebody in the white house or somebody in the pentagon or the state department whomever It clearly seems as if this all we can connect all these dots does ran wanna fight. Is a ran at the the, the point right now where they are pushing the US to attack because they believe that a limited US strike would benefit them. Public relations wise. Right. So let's full this end. This is very interesting because I'm going over the story coverage of from the Wall Street Journal in two thousand twelve Pentagon officials said Iran had shot shot at a US drone flying over the Persian Gulf, prompting strong protests to the Iranian government, strong protests. No, the commander in chief work to deal with Iran. Is that what you do? When you strongly protest, the actions of, of a of a nation like Iran. He go make the Iran deal. Wow. CNN now seeming to be in line with the other news sources up there. Fox, Reuters Associated Press the Wall Street Journal they seem to be a little bit behind earlier, but they have Arabian forces shot down a US military drone in international airspace, Thursday over the strait of Hormuz, a US, official told CNN and move that is likely to escalate tensions between Washington and Iran. The comments contradict an earlier report from Iran state run Press TV that said the country's elite, Revolutionary Guards fired upon intruding American spy drone, downing it over the country's southern coastal province inside of Iranian airspace. So there we are at, at, at this at this point. I'm just scanning that article. But that's what we have here at this moment. And again, when you, you see everything that happened yesterday, the multitude of attacks. And you look at the, the, the congressional move yesterday where you had members of congress, you know, and again what, what happens to the United States, the world's sees, but trying to pull the thority from the, the president to attack Iran, based on the on what happened with the oil tankers by rescinding the two thousand one authorization that every president has had. Is it a coincidence? I don't know. It wasn't going anywhere in the Senate. The president still would have had that authority. But now that takes that, that takes that controversy. There is no controversy. Now, if the president, if the president decided to retire. Palliate. On a eye for an eye where you just. They, they hit yours, you hit five of their assets somewhere, right? Yes. Congress. And the Democrats really are helpless, and the, the and this is a point that I'm trying to bring up does ran. No that does a ran wish for the president to authorize an attack because they believe that a military confrontation, even a small military confrontation with the United States because you really take away, the Democrats argument, the Democrats argument is gone debates gone US asset was attacked in international waters US aircraft. Right. Is it because they believe that it's in their best interest internally to rally the people of Iran behind them. Because ran, and the United States are at war. We've talked about Iran just in the last, I think it was Monday show, where we talked about that in Iran, that, that they're losing the population. Right. The population doesn't work, right? They're losing support of the population, especially young people. Yes. What is the way that you get that back? You on position that you as a danger, a threat to unify a country you get into a war. Yep. And what better way to do it than with this particular president? Right. The supreme leader actually mentioned it..

Coming up next