Speaker 2: Welcome back everybody.
Speaker 1: Today we're going to be looking at uranium options, Seals, Rangers,
Speaker 1: and the iron Iran contingency. According to reporting that dropped
Speaker 1: in the last few days, US military planners examined a
Speaker 1: contingency operation that could involve the Navy Seals, possibly including
Speaker 1: elements associated with Team six Army Rangers, explosive ordnance specialists,
Speaker 1: and a whole supporting cast to go after IRAN'SI wrench
Speaker 1: enriched uranium stockpile.
Speaker 2: The idea was straightforward.
Speaker 1: If air strikes damage the facilities but left the material
Speaker 1: intact and recoverable, ground forces might have to go in
Speaker 1: and either secure it or make damn sure it.
Speaker 2: Couldn't be used.
Speaker 1: Sites like Ford Oho, Isfahan underground hardened and defended. We've
Speaker 1: seen a lot of these direct actions, sensitive sight exploitations
Speaker 1: and targets were The difference between success and a national
Speaker 1: lever disaster is measured in minutes and meters. We've talked
Speaker 1: about inserting a force into a heavily defended nuclear facility environment,
Speaker 1: possibly under fire, possibly after the facilities have already been struck,
Speaker 1: which means radiation hazards, structural collapse, booby traps, secondary explosions
Speaker 1: and an enemy that knows you're coming because the strategic
Speaker 1: warning is already out.
Speaker 2: You need engineers to open pathways. You need EOD that can.
Speaker 1: Handle both conventional and radiological threats. You need aviation that
Speaker 1: can get in you, cut you in, and more importantly,
Speaker 1: get you out with the material or after the material
Speaker 1: is denied. You need real time, real time intelligence that
Speaker 1: is better than anything most people have ever seen, and
Speaker 1: you need operators who can make decisions. The reporting mentions
Speaker 1: possible involvement of Sealed Team six, Silver Squadron, and the
Speaker 1: second Range of Battalion, along with specialized ordinance units.
Speaker 2: I can't confirm or deny.
Speaker 1: Specific unit taskings because I don't have access. What I
Speaker 1: will say is that the skill sets required and match
Speaker 1: exactly what those communities train for. This is not a
Speaker 1: rate on a compound and a failed state. This is
Speaker 1: a nation state target with strategic consequence. If you succeed,
Speaker 1: you remove or deny in nuclear breakout capability. If you fail,
Speaker 1: you leave American bodies on Iranian soil and possibly create
Speaker 1: an environmental hazard. The briefing starts with a strategic objective
Speaker 1: in these war like options. Then comes the intelligence picture.
Speaker 1: Than the force picture, then the risk to force, and
Speaker 1: the risk to mission, then the political risk. Every one
Speaker 1: of those has a number and a face behind it.
Speaker 1: For the operators, simpler and harder at the same time,
Speaker 1: you train for the worst night of your life, so
Speaker 1: that when the call comes you already know the answer.
Speaker 1: You trust the man, so you're left and right more
Speaker 1: than you trust the plan. Because plans die in the
Speaker 1: first five minutes, you accept that some of you might
Speaker 1: not come home. That's the part civilians don't always understand.
Speaker 1: The willingness is not bravado. It's a professional acceptance.
Speaker 2: Of the cost. Now, none of this means the mission
Speaker 2: was approved or ordered.
Speaker 1: Contingency planning is what professional militaries do. You plan for
Speaker 1: the options the president might need. The fact that this
Speaker 1: option was examined tells you how seriously the uranium problem
Speaker 1: is being taken. Special ops forces exist for exactly these
Speaker 1: kind of problems, the ones that sit in the gap
Speaker 1: between too hard for conventional and too important to leave alone.
Speaker 1: It's important that the American people understand something. When you
Speaker 1: hear about seals and rangers in the same sentence as
Speaker 1: a nuclear facility in a hostile country, you're hearing about
Speaker 1: young and men and women who have already decided that
Speaker 1: the mission comes first, have already done the math on
Speaker 1: their own lives. That's why the training is so hard.
Speaker 1: That's why the standards are non negotiable. That's why the
Speaker 1: community is so small. If the contingency ever moved from
Speaker 1: planning to execution would be one of the most complex
Speaker 1: special op missions in modern history. The logistics alone, insertion
Speaker 1: site security, material handling, extraction, under fire, potential contamination control
Speaker 1: would test every system we've ever had to The operator
Speaker 1: out there still on the teams, keep sharpening the blade.
Speaker 1: The world doesn't get simpler to everyone else. Understand that
Speaker 1: these options exist because the alternative is worse. Thanks for listening, everybody,