Return to Transcripts main page
Anderson Cooper 360 Degrees
Israel Ramps up Strikes on Southern Lebanon; Iran Boosting Kharg Island Defenses to Protect Against Potential U.S. Ground Attack; Interview with Rep. Seth Moulton (D-MA); Iranian Foreign Minister Says Exchange of Messages With U.S. But Denies Negotiations; CENTCOM Says U.S. Forces Have Struck More Than 10,000 Military Targets Inside Iran; House Armed Services Members, Including Republicans, Slam Briefing on Iran; About 1,000 U.S. Soldiers to Deploy to Mideast in the Coming Days; Meta, YouTube Found Liable in Social Media Addiction Trial; Cheap Drones Reshape the Battlefield in Iran. Aired 8-9p ET
Aired March 25, 2026 - 20:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
ERIN BURNETT, CNN HOST: ...the airport's ground radar system did not issue an alert warning the runway was unsafe to enter. Now, aviation officials say the runway where this happened will likely be closed until Friday morning.
The airline is expected to begin reuniting passengers with baggage and personal belongings in the coming days.
And of course, our thoughts are with those who are still, those four passengers who are still right now suffering and hoping that they recover.
Thank you so much for joining us as always. AC360 with Anderson begins now.
[20:00:36]
ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST, "ANDERSON COOPER: 360": And good evening thanks for joining us. Topping our global war coverage from our newsroom, a milestone in the air campaign against Iran.
U.S. Central Command tonight reports that American forces have now struck more than 10,000 military targets since the operation began. This is one of them hit earlier today. CENTCOM included no details, but CNN military analyst Cedric Leighton tells us it was a weapons storage facility. Israeli forces were busy as well again today.
(VIDEO CLIP PLAYS)
COOPER: That is another Israeli airstrike on Southern Lebanon today, part of what Israel's Defense Minister says is the campaign to establish a security zone about 20 miles deep inside Lebanese territory. Israeli forces today also struck in Gaza.
(VIDEO CLIP PLAYS)
COOPER: A CNN stringer caught this strike in a crowded camp for displaced persons. According to an area hospital one person was killed, six others wounded, most of them critically. We asked the Israeli military about it much earlier in the day. We have yet to get a reply.
For its part, Iran apparently tried to hit a large power station in Israel. The IDF telling CNN that the missiles fell in an open area and did not hit the plant.
Now meantime, with soldiers from the Army's 82nd Airborne Division heading to the region, along with 4,500 some Marines, Iran has been fortifying, fortifying Kharg island against any potential ground assault. That's according to multiple sources familiar with U.S. intelligence.
Preparations, they say, include bringing in more portable air defenses and mining potential amphibious beachheads. Today at the White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt was asked to reconcile the influx of ground forces with the Presidents optimism about negotiations with Iran.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REPORTER: Speaker Johnson today described the conflict as wrapping up, but the 82nd Airborne Division, they're typically deployed at the beginning of conflicts. So, does the White House consider this conflict as wrapping up, or is it changing shape?
KAROLINE LEAVITT, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: As I said, at the beginning of my remarks, we are meeting our goals of Operation Epic Fury expeditiously. The President likes to maintain options at his disposal.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COOPER: She also reiterated that the administrations timeline for the fighting is still, "approximately four to six weeks." To that end, two senior administration officials tell us the White House is working to arrange a meeting in Pakistan this weekend to discuss what an off ramp to the war might entail.
Also today, administration officials briefed members of the House Armed Services Committee, some of whom came away from the closed-door session, less than satisfied with what they heard.
South Carolina Republican Congresswoman Nancy Mace, for one, she says she stormed out of it. Writing later on social media, "The justifications presented to the American public for the war in Iran were not the same military objectives we were briefed on today in the House Armed Services Committee. This gap is deeply troubling".
She concluded by saying, "The longer this war continues, the faster it will lose the support of Congress and the American people".
Colorado Democrat and combat veteran, Jason Crow said this. , (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. JASON CROW (D-CO): We're not getting answers from the administration on the end game, on the strategy, on how they're going to protect the 50,000 troops who are in that region, how were going to de-escalate, and what our ultimate goal is, and our service members deserve better.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COOPER: His fellow Democrat on the committee, retired Marine, Seth Moulton, joins us later in the broadcast.
Just moments ago, the President weighed in on Iran's participation in talks to end the fighting.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP (R) PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: They are negotiating, by the way, and they want to make a deal so badly, but they're afraid to say it because they figure they'll be killed by their own people.
They're also afraid they'll be killed by us.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COOPER: Want to go first to Tel Aviv, check in with CNN anchor and chief National Security correspondent Jim Sciutto.
So, is it clear how Israel views negotiations direct or indirect, whatever their status may be, between the U.S. and Iran?
JIM SCIUTTO, CNN ANCHOR AND CHIEF NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: It's in fact, quite clear, Anderson, because since the President began raising this prospect of negotiations with Iran earlier in the week, there have been two consistent points from Israeli officials. One, that Israeli attacks on Iran will continue for now, with full force, and two, that Israeli officials remain skeptical that Iran is willing or able to negotiate in good faith or make any of the concessions that the U.S. wants.
I spoke a short time ago to the foreign policy advisor for the Israeli Prime Minister, Ophir, and this is what he had to say and quite strong terms about those talks.
[20:05:12]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
OPHIR FALK, FOREIGN POLICY ADVISER FOR BENJAMIN NETANYAHU: Iran always lies, we've learned that, they always lie. But more importantly, our objective is to remove the existential threat posed by this Ayatollah regime. The best way of doing that is to remove the regime. Another way of doing that is to decimate their capabilities, decimate their military capabilities until they get to the Stone Age.
(END VIDEO CLIP) SCIUTTO: Get them to the Stone Age, that's Ophir Falk rule. So, you get quite a sense of just how skeptical Israeli officials are of the prospect for negotiations. Now, Israel says it does not oppose negotiations. In fact, they're perfectly happy with two tracks at once. That is continuing military operations and allowing the President to pursue the possibility of peace.
COOPER: We said Israel has continued to carry out strikes in Lebanon, particularly in Southern Lebanon. They have been trying to, you know, degrade, eliminate Hezbollah for a very long time. They've had a lot of success for going back years. What is the ultimate goal of the military operation right now?
SCIUTTO: Well, the Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, in his public comments, says, in effect, they want to change the situation in Lebanon for good. And when you listen to the Israeli Defense Minister as well, they're talking about destroying all connections, all bridges between Lebanon and the southern part of the country below the Litani River, to prepare the way for what seems to be a long-term Israeli military operation, perhaps even occupation there.
So, that is a further expansion of what is another front of this war, right. You know, Israel has been striking targets in Lebanon for some time since the start of this war with Iran, as they have in months and years prior. But they are stepping up that activity.
And it appears that what they're laying the groundwork for, Anderson, is a long-term Israeli military presence in Southern Lebanon. And, you know, well, having covered this region for many years, that the history of long-term Israeli occupations in Lebanon has not been a good one. It's often been bloody for both sides. But that does appear to be at least Israeli intentions in Lebanon.
COOPER: Jim Sciutto in Tel Aviv. Jim, thanks very much. Joining me right now is ambassador Richard Haass, President Emeritus of the Council on Foreign Relations and author of "Home and Away: Newsletter on Substack".
Ambassador, good to see you. Do you think the U.S. understands Iran better, or do you think Iran understands the U.S. better?
RICHARD HAASS, AMERICAN DIPLOMAT: I think it's the latter and, in some ways, it was showed by where you began tonight. We're talking about how many strikes. We're fighting a conventional war, as is Israel, against Iranian capability. Iran's fighting an unconventional war against our will.
COOPER: It's almost an insurgency in some ways.
HAAS: Absolutely, even though it represents a country, it's an insurgency. And they're going after, for example, the countries in the region. Why? Because they want to inflict economic damage on us. They're not really fighting against the U.S. militarily directly. They're fighting indirectly or in Israel going after civilian targets. Again, it's to sap the will rather than to defeat us or Israel militarily. COOPER: It is also interesting when you hear American military officers, generals talking about. They're not talking body counts as they did in Vietnam, but they're talking about 10,000 strikes. You know, a couple of weeks ago, it was 9,000 plus strikes tonight. It's 10,000 strikes. That may be one metric, but it's not, doesn't necessarily tell the story.
HAAS: No, it brings back echoes of Robert McNamara. We're measuring things. What we can measure, not necessarily. Again, what's going to bring about a conclusion on terms that are consistent with our interests.
So again, I don't think we understand the nature of this war because Iran, I think, has decided it doesn't need it to defeat, it doesn't need to defeat us. It needs to outlast us, to outwait us. So, I think they're playing for time and that's something that they could succeed at.
COOPER: Time plays into their hands.
HAAS: Absolutely, that if they can wait us out, the economic effects of a closed Strait of Hormuz that begins to mount up the political resistance to the war begins to grow in this country as gasoline prices go up, or the knock-on effects on inflation or whatever. So, they believe that if they can take the punch and I think they can. Iran --remember the Iran-Iraq war, hundreds of thousands of Iranians lost their lives over a decade of war.
This is a country that can take punches that can withstand extraordinary pain. So, the idea that were going to get them to capitulate or were going to bring about regime change, I just don't see that as in the cards.
COOPER: The potential timeline for this, I mean, as you said, if it does drag on, it does in many ways favors Iran despite there's no doubt that the U.S. is doing a lot of damage to sites all throughout Iran.
HAAS: A hundred percent, again, were winning the conventional war. We're degrading capabilities but that's not the only measure of a war. That's the battlefield, but what if you think about the battlefield, including the global economy.
COOPER: How do you think Iran sees the U.S. sending, you know, 5,500 Marines and Airborne?
[20:10:14]
HAAS: We're sending it, obviously, to back up our words. It's implicit threat. They might see that actually as a bit of an opportunity, as crazy as that sounds, those ground forces mean casualties and they look at the history of the United States and wars, particularly wars of choice, unpopular wars, and they may say, oh yes, well lose in the narrow, traditional sense, but we can inflict casualties on the United States that will affect the debate much more than we've already seen. COOPER: The, I mean, there have been wars fought in the Middle East in which there was, there were coalitions built, you know, there was, you know, consensus built, and even though it ends up disastrously or dragged on for a very long period of time with the huge casualties.
HAAS: Look, bringing Congress and the allies on board doesn't give you an unlimited, you know, blank check, but it gives you a lot more than what we have now. When you go to war without Congress, without the public, without allies, when your objectives constantly churn and change. You basically are going to war without a cushion. And if and when things last longer or start to head south, what do you -- who do you appeal to? What do you say? And I think this administration is paying a price for the lack of preparation in every sense of the word.
COOPER: Do you think the administration basically looked at Venezuela and said, oh, let's do that again here? And it seems obviously the Iranian regime is very different than the dictatorship of Maduro.
HAAS: Can't prove it but everything I've heard suggests that they thought this was going to be easy. It was going to be quick. The United States, "succeeded" in Venezuela at a rather minimal cost. They think they could do the same thing here. They were probably also influenced by what happened in June when they bombed the three Iranian nuclear sites.
The difference here is they adopted goals that were much bigger regime change, what have you. And the idea that military means could accomplish them? Seems to me they were way off base.
COOPER: It's also interesting now to hear the President repeatedly bring up in speeches. Well, technically there has been regime change because these are different people, now, filling the seats. That's not really what regime change means.
HAAS: There's nothing systemic here. If anything, we still have the Islamic republic that's been in place since 1979. It might even be more radical, might also be more difficult to get a consensus decision on negotiations. I wonder if people who are in favor of all these targeted killings or leaders said, hold it. If we don't get regime change, will we be able then to negotiate with a rump regime? That's the problem the administration runs into now.
COOPER: Do you, when you hear the administration talking about negotiations, I mean, do you believe that?
HAAS: I do, because again, we don't have a military solution to the Iranian nuclear.
COOPER: I mean, do you believe that there are Iranians in power who whether it's direct or through others are looking for some sort of off ramp?
HAAS: I think they got to be skeptical because twice we've negotiated and we launched an attack on them. But yes, open ended war, I don't think is the Iranian goal here. You know, as always, it depends on the details. What kind of economic sanctions relief can they get? What kind of agreement would we sign on to with the, you know, with the organization or running of the of the Strait of Hormuz? So, I think they're open to a conversation. What they want to see is what they can get for it.
COOPER: Ambassador Richard Haass, always a pleasure, thank you.
HAAS: Thanks, Anderson.
COOPER: Interesting.
Coming up next, more on Kharg Island new reporting on how Iran is fortifying it against a potential assault from the sea or air, and the risks they could pose.
And later, what some are calling social medias big tobacco moment. Kara Swisher joins me on a Jury's landmark decision in that case against YouTube and Meta, which were accused of creating addictive social media products. We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[20:17:51]
COOPER: Continuing our CNN Global War coverage, more on what the mission might be for those 4,500 or so Marines and the thousand soldiers from the 82nd Airborne, beyond just giving the President more options as the White House said today.
Also, the preparations that sources tell us Iran is making to reinforce one potential target the ground forces might try to occupy Kharg Island. CNN's Natasha Bertrand joins us now with more. So, what more are you hearing on that?
NATASHA BERTRAND, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: Well, obviously, for weeks, there has been a lot of chatter about the possibility that the Trump administration might deploy troops to take Kharg Island in an attempt to kind of coerce Iran to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, because this island is such a key economic lifeline for the Iranians.
And the Iranians have taken notice, and they have begun, according to our sources, reinforcing the island with additional air defenses, with additional personnel. And they've also begun laying traps, booby traps around the island that include mines, including along the shore where U.S. troops might make an amphibious landing if they were to move forward with the ground operation there.
Now, U.S. Central Command, they did decline to comment on the Iranian preparations for Kharg, but U.S. officials and experts that we spoke to said the risks are extremely high. Given all of that, given the preparations Iran is making, given the fact that this island is so close to the Iranian coastline, they will still be susceptible to Iranian drone and missile attacks.
And, you know, the Speaker of Iran's parliament on Wednesday actually said this openly said that anyone who dares try to occupy these Iranian islands are going to be subject to relentless attack. And he said that based on the intelligence the Iranians are receiving, they understand that with the support of one of the U.S.'s regional allies, the U.S. is preparing to occupy one of Iran's islands.
We know that Kharg Island has been a fixation of President Trumps for quite some time now, and he warned that all enemy movements are under the full surveillance of our Armed Forces.
So, it's worth noting that the U.S. does have the forces available to do this if it wants to. Two Marine expeditionary units. They are enroute to the Middle East, and they would specialize in this kind of operation. But still, the risks and the casualty possibilities, the risks are really high, U.S. casualties are there.
The Trump administration is taking note of that and weighing whether the risk is worth it -- Anderson.
COOPER: And what about U.S. Allies, are they saying anything about the possibility of a ground operation on Kharg?
[20:20:13]
BERTRAND: Yes, interestingly, we're learning that U.S. Gulf allies in the Gulf region, they are warning the U.S. against carrying out this kind of ground operation. A senior Gulf official told us that the risk of U.S. casualties is very high. Many could be killed or wounded. And they say that it's likely to prompt serious Iranian retaliation against those countries in the region. And they have urged the administration to instead focus on the Iranian ballistic missile capabilities and taking those out, rather than launch a ground operation -- Anderson.
COOPER: All right, Natasha Bertrand, appreciate it.
Joining us now is Massachusetts Democratic Congressman, Seth Moulton. He's a Marine Corps veteran who served four tours during the Iraq War. He also sits on the House Armed Services Committee, which was briefed by administration officials. As we mentioned today on Capitol Hill.
I want to get to the briefing in a minute. But first, I'm wondering what your reaction is to the reporting that Iran has been building up defenses on Kharg Island in preparation for any possible U.S. ground operation?
REP. SETH MOULTON (D-MA): Well, I mean, the President has been talking about this for years. Lindsey Graham is braggadocious talking about how the Marines are going to take this over. So, of course, our enemy is making preparations. Of course they are. They'd be dumb if they wouldn't.
COOPER: As for the services, the House Armed Services briefing today. Did you get any clarity or answers that you were satisfied with about the war the administration is waging because many of your colleagues on the committee, both sides of the aisle, said they were unsatisfied, frustrated, specifically on the objectives and timeline. MOULTON: I would say disillusioned, Anderson. And I didn't think I could be more disillusioned than I already was. There is absolutely no plan. The administration clearly can't even understand why they're in this war, what their strategy is to get out of it.
If you look every step of the way, they're doing things, they're changing their goals. They're doing things that don't even necessarily contribute to their goals. Apparently now, their primary goal is reopening the Strait of Hormuz, which, let's be clear, was open before Trump started this war of choice.
So, the reality is, at this moment, we are losing this war. If Trump were to stop the war tonight, he would have to negotiate with the Iranians to reopen the strait that they have closed. That's why he's begging, he's begging, our greatest adversary, the People's Republic of China. The Chinese communist party.
He's asking to come and bail him out to reopen this Strait. It's an unmitigated disaster. It's very clear they don't have a plan going forward.
COOPER: So, I mean, even though CENTCOM today is saying 10,000 targets in Iran have been hit and we have seen endless videos of large explosions. You're saying the U.S. is losing this war?
MOULTON: As of right now, I think we are. And no matter how many targets are hit, let's say they hit another 10,000. They've hit 20,000 targets. At the end of the day, what matters is what Iran does next. Will they rebuild and will they project more power? Because another thing the administration says is, hey, we don't want Iran to project power. Well, guess what? They're projecting a lot of power right now. They weren't projecting much power before this war began.
Now, they're shooting drones and missiles all across the Gulf. So, it's really gotten worse. And even for even to give them credit for the targets that they've taken out, what have we achieved? What have we achieved? What have we achieved if every few years we just have to go back there again at the cost of apparently $200 billion to just keep doing this because we have no strategic plan to get out.
I mean, Anderson, this is the difference between Iran and Vietnam. Trump had a plan to get out of Vietnam.
COOPER: Do you do you think there is a comparison to Vietnam? I was just talking about that with Ambassador Richard Haass. I mean, you here again today, CENTCOM giving these 10,000 figure, he was saying, you know, it's like McNamara making pronouncements and U.S. Military in Vietnam, you know, giving a daily body count assessment.
MOULTON: He has no plan to end this war. And that's what happened in Vietnam. There was no plan to end it. And every time we did a little bit more and took a few more casualties, we were dug more deeply in. And that's' the fundamental risk here. I mean, we've taken 13 casualties already, and the only thing that we've essentially achieved is closing down the Strait of Hormuz, which is Iran's goal, not our own. So, how many more casualties are we going to take? And if you send Marines into Kharg Island and a bunch of them, get killed, is he really going to quit then? So, the risk of escalation because of Trump's idiocy is very severe. And coming out of this briefing today, I don't have any confidence whatsoever that they have a plan, a strategy, even very clear goals for what they want to do next.
One more point, Anderson, Kharg Island is not even in the Strait of Hormuz. So, what do we actually achieve by occupying Kharg Island. I don't understand why if we take Kharg Island, the Iranians would change their mind about closing the Strait.
So, they just clearly have no plan here. And that's got to be incredibly frightening for the young men and women on those ships headed to the Persian Gulf right now.
[20:25:27]
COOPER: So, what do you think should happen right now? What would you like to see happen?
MOULTON: I mean, it's a very hard question to answer candidly, Anderson, but probably the best thing that we can do is find a way with our allies, not with China, by the way, which is not an ally of the United States, but with our allies to go back to the negotiating table, because at the end of the day, the only long-term solution here is to have a negotiated settlement so that you have some control, not just over what Iran does today, but what they do tomorrow.
And it's telling that when Pakistan, at our own urging, put forward a 15-point plan for negotiated settlement, almost all of those 15 points are the same points in Obama's nuclear deal that Trump tore up. So, this is all a problem of Trump's creation.
COOPER: Congressman, Seth Moulton, I appreciate your time, thank you.
Coming up next tonight, more on potential negotiations. The shape they may be taking and what talking with Iran could look like. We'll have more on that ahead.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[20:31:02]
ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST OF "ANDERSON COOPER 360": Iran continues to deny that negotiations with the U.S. are taking place, even as the White House says talks are proceeding. In a televised interview today, Iran's foreign minister acknowledged what he called an exchange of messages, but characterized U.S. calls for negotiations as "an admission of defeat." As we mentioned, Trump administration officials are working to arrange a meeting in Pakistan this weekend to discuss some sort of a diplomatic off-ramp to the war.
I'm joined now by Professor Kian Tajbakhsh. He's an Iranian-American who was imprisoned by the Iranian regime because of his work as a democracy and human rights advocate. He's now a Professor at New York University.
When you hear about these negotiations, it seems like there are -- something is happening.
KIAN TAJBAKHSH, FORMER POLITICAL PRISONER IN IRAN FREED AS PART OF 2015 NUCLEAR DEAL: Yeah, I mean, it's hard to tell what, but I mean --
COOPER: You were involved in negotiations with Iran in previous --
TAJBAKHSH: That's right. In the 2000s, I was involved in Track 2 negotiations, which is a sort of informal backroom negotiations between non-official members of each government but that who report to each government because there's no diplomatic relations.
And I think what's different from that time to here, to today, is that at that time, a lot of the people who were part of the Iranian delegation were Western-educated. They knew the language of Western diplomacy, and they could speak, more or less, they could translate the kinds of things that the Iranian government wanted with their American and European interlocutors.
I think now, with the situation in which the government is much more narrowly defined by hard-liners, by extremists, we don't have those kind of people. And I think that this poses a challenge, I think, to what negotiations mean. And I can --
COOPER: And the style of these new negotiators is much different.
TAJBAKHSH: Oh, much different. You know, Mr. Saeed Jalili, who is one of the remaining alive leaders of the National Security Council, I think, now in Iran, he was a presidential candidate. He's known in Iran as one of the most extreme supporters of the supreme leader type of government, the velayat-e faqih in Iran, of the Islamic type of government.
I remember, I mean, just to give you sort of an anecdote, I remember, I think, a decade ago or so, when they were negotiating the first Iran deal, he was the head of the negotiating team. And what I heard, anecdotally, was that he started a meeting with the P5+1 about the nuclear negotiations with an hour-long lecture about Quranic history, about the exploits and the bravery of the Prophet Muhammad.
COOPER: Wow.
TAJBAKHSH: And I think, you know, it must have been -- it could be very erudite, but I think, you know, the Europeans around the room were thinking, you know, why are we here? Where is this going?
COOPER: What is going on?
TAJBAKHSH: Exactly. And I think that, you know, what that expresses is that the leaders of the Islamic Republic, you know, they live in a world which for Americans would seem just upside down. They live in a parallel universe in which what they see as good is very different from what -- COOPER: It's that different. It is that, I mean, the --
TAJBAKHSH: Yes.
COOPER: -- the mindset, literally what they are seeing is different.
TAJBAKHSH: Yes, it is. And I remember for many years, I mean, from the beginning of the revolution, the Iranian government would say anything that the United States can offer us must be bad. And so this zero-sum way of looking at the world and you know, the 'Death to America' was an expression of this animosity towards the West. And you know --
COOPER: Do you feel?
TAJBAKHSH: Yeah.
COOPER: I mean, it's interesting to me that, you know, CENTCOM is putting out, oh, today 10,000 strikes, you know, it's now 10,000 strikes. That's a benchmark just like in past conflicts there have been other benchmarks. It seems like the Iranian regime has a different kind of -- they're playing a different game.
[20:35:00]
It is a different set of -- I mean, 10,000 targets is significant, and yet, the suffering that they withstood during the Iran-Iraq war was huge.
TAJBAKHSH: Yeah. Well, it was huge But you know, remember the difference for the for the Iranian government is that they don't care about civilian casualties. They don't care about what's the suffering of society. They care about the survival of the regime itself.
You know, it's sometimes a cliche and sometimes it's said as to be an exaggeration, but the Islamic mindset does see the pain and the suffering in war as a noble sign of, you know, one's worthiness. And so, even martyrdom, for example, is not considered a bad thing. So, I mean, I think we're --
COOPER: This -- I mean, it's a suicidal regime essentially.
TAJBAKHSH: It is a suicidal regime because, obviously, they -- you know, they are willing to go down with the ship. They're willing to stay far beyond what any Western power would consider to be a kind of rational position where you could get to a bargain and get to yes, you know, it's like, OK, fine.
I mean, I think what the American administration is now looking for, it's trying to calculate that at what point will the Iranians come back and say, OK, we've taken these kinds of negative losses and so we're going to bargain. But in fact, for the Iranian regime, this is a sign that they're doing things right.
And I -- you know, and I really don't exaggerate. I mean, for them, I mean when I was in prison, I would hear the guards say to me, don't ever think that the Americans will come and save you or you think that the Americans are worthy or anything like that. He said we will defeat them. And so, they see themselves in a noble fight with the United States. So bombs, for example, soldiers being killed are considered signs of -- that they are on the right track.
COOPER: Wow. Professor, thank you so much. Professor, Tajbakhsh, appreciate it. Thank you.
TAJBAKHSH: You are welcome.
COOPER: Meta and YouTube ordered to pay millions in a landmark case that accused the social media giants of making addictive products. We'll talk about that. And also, the future of drone warfare as our CNN global war coverage continues.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[20:41:30]
COOPER: Tonight, with sources saying the White House is seeking an off-ramp to the war, it is also facing negative poll numbers. At least three separate national polls show that a majority of Americans oppose military action against Iran. As we reported at the top, a bipartisan group of members of the House Armed Services Committee say they're not satisfied with the briefing they received from the administration about the objectives of the war and its endgame.
I want to talk about it with Rahm Emanuel, President Obama's White House Chief of Staff, and Frank Kendall, who served as Secretary of the Air Force during the Biden administration. He's the author of an upcoming book, "Lethal Autonomy: The Future of Warfare Whether We Like It Or Not."
Rahm, I mean, you have members of Congress on both sides of the aisle saying that they were unsatisfied. You have the CENTCOM today saying we've hit 10,000 targets. Is that the roadmap to success?
RAHM EMANUEL, FORMER OBAMA WHITE HOUSE CHIEF OF STAFF: It's one measure of success, and there's no doubt in my view that there's a degradation. If you go back, Anderson, the real reason we were all involved in this was to degrade, if not eliminate, their capacity to ever develop and basically produce a nuclear weapon.
But they've discovered in this process they've got a nuclear option, and it's called the Strait of Hormuz. And so we may actually be effective in degrading, but they also now discovered something they thought they had, but they've now realized. And that's a problem that we're now caught in our own (inaudible).
(CROSSTALK)
COOPER: You think they've discovered that during this, in this --
EMANUEL: It was always on the plans. Anybody that's ever sat through this in the Situation Room, it was always on the plans, but it was never actually ever realized. And now they know it, and they have a veto, but they have what is a nuclear option. They got the nuclear option. And until we can figure out how to open it, or as Richard Haass, who you had here earlier, he has said, either it's open to everybody or it's closed to everybody.
And you've got to do an absolute 180, either side of that post. But that's what's been discovered here.
COOPER: Secretary Kendall, I mean, do you believe the administration can achieve its military objectives through air power alone? And I'm not even sure exactly -- I mean, are you -- is it clear to you exactly what the military objectives are, and if those are all of the objectives and they're achievable through air power?
FRANK KENDALL, FORMER SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE: You can achieve some of them. Destruction of some of their military is relatively straightforward, the Navy, for example, even the Air Force. But as soon as we did the first wave of strikes, the Iranians dispersed their assets.
There were probably many of them dispersed already. They're concealing them. They're able to continue these attacks, which really are harassing attacks in the region. But they're enough to keep the Straits closed. They're enough to cause big problems for ourselves and our allies.
So we're in a position right now, where the tools we have and are using are not going to accomplish the objective of defeating the Iranian military. They can suppress the attacks and they can continue to treat them. But this can go on for quite a long time at the pace that's been going on for the last few weeks.
COOPER: And in your opinion, boots on the ground, is that an actual option?
KENDALL: There are no really good options for boots on the ground other than to invade the country and actually achieve a political overthrow through invasion. The size of forces that we are moving into the region could conceivably seize Kharg Island. They could conceivably do some raids or seize some of the coastal terrain along the Straits of Hormuz. But there's a very long terrain there.
It's over 100 miles. There's very rough terrain behind the coast. And the Iranians can engage into the Straits from a long range. They don't have to be right at the coast. So there aren't good options.
[20:45:00]
I've been involved in war games that have looked at this situation before. As I think Secretary Hegseth said, we knew about the Strait of Hormuz. They knew about it, but they weren't prepared for it.
COOPER: Yeah.
KENDALL: And here we are in a situation I don't think we know how to resolve right now. COOPER: It does seem wrong. Time is on Iran's side in this. I mean, obviously, there's the Strait of Hormuz, there's that pressure, and there's public opinion in America. Iran, the timeline is different.
EMANUEL: Yeah, I mean, Iran's timeline with this is, as I said, they have a 24-second shot clock. And we do too. And they basically have that and all they got to do is, they win by not losing. And that's a different thing.
But I will say one note that people haven't looked at. Look, we have the Gulf allies and countries here that want us to now finish this off because they cannot have an empowered Persian empire here.
The second thing though, the moment there's a ceasefire or whatever, the Iranian government has a mass -- major, major political gulf between them and the public. You saw it in the protests. They are going to come face to face with the public that is tired of more of the same without any economic prosperity.
I mean, remember, for the last 20 years, the greatest thing Iran exported was their brainpower, not their oil. People fleeing -- the doctors, the lawyers, the professional class. They are going to come face to face with a country that is angry at where they are.
On the other hand, the American people are also angry at the president for taking a war of choice with no plan and no agenda.
COOPER: (Inaudible) angry populations in the streets before and they've massacred them.
EMANUEL: There's no difference. But this time, for the first time, it wasn't just students. It was the middle-class -- the people that actually own, that shook the markets. There was a coalition there that was threatening. That's why, yes, they've had protests before. They've never killed 30,000 people before.
COOPER: Secretary Kendall, I am wondering what you think about the concerns over drones. Rahm and I have talked before on the program about, he says that the U.S. has been sort of flatfooted on the development of drones and not taking -- not reaching out to Ukraine, particularly in this instance, for their expertise.
How much do you think the U.S. can achieve using traditional defensive measures and offensive weapons compared to warfare that uses -- I mean, are we behind on drones?
KENDALL: In this conflict, it doesn't really make much difference. We can deliver all the firepower that we have with almost with impunity now. My interest in drones, the reason I wrote the book that you mentioned, is some unfinished business from the Obama administration where we tried to define the next generation of military capability that would keep us ahead of China, which is our true strategic competitor.
China has fielded a force over the last 20 odd years designed specifically to defeat the American ability to protect power in the Western Pacific. And we've got to respond to that. And once again, on our own choice this time, we've been drawn back into a conflict in the Middle East, which takes us away from what are our real strategic challenges.
COOPER: What do you think, Rahm?
EMANUEL: No, look, I think our drone technology was developed for the war on terror. This is not a war on terror.
COOPER: You're talking about predators?
EMANUEL: Right. Predators that can hang up in the air for 15, 20 hours watch. And it was quite effective. I mean, it was unbelievably effective. If you wanted to take somebody, I hate to say it like this, take them out that was on a balcony, that was a target. Yes, and you could (inaudible) because a lot of people were talking about the way the Obama administration actually used the drone technology, used targeted missiles to take literally a person sitting on a balcony somewhere.
This is a different warfare. You got a drone that cost $35,000 and it cost you $1 million to hit it. It's just the -- not only is it asymmetric and you can fire and flood the zone with hundreds of them, it's asymmetric warfare. So we were not prepared. You and I've talked about this before.
A year ago, this month, I said, don't ask Ukraine for their minerals, ask them for their drone technology and create partnerships because they can produce a drone effective on the battlefield in four weeks. We cannot produce a RFP for a proposal in four years.
COOPER: Secretary Kendall, which U.S. adversary are you most concerned about when it comes to the next generation of warfare?
KENDALL: Oh, definitely China. They've figured out how we protect power, what our dependencies are, and they have fielded a force to come after them. I've never seen a military design so specifically for one purpose before. Rahm is right in a sense about the drones. The thing that we need most there is better defenses against the drones, more cost effective defenses.
China is a very different theater just because of the distances involved. Rahm knows that very well from his time in Japan. The right path for the United States is not to copy Russia or Ukraine or Iran. It is to figure out for ourselves what the best set of equipment is and move forward in a very decisive way, once we've done the analysis to figure out what the right solutions are.
Copying the people who have been doing it on a very immediate base is an existential threat and they have no time to think and to plan and to engineer careful solutions.
COOPER: Yeah.
KENDALL: We can do that. We have the time to do that. Ukraine has never had that opportunity. [20:50:00]
COOPER: Rahm?
EMANUEL: Well, Ukraine obviously is a land war. To just take, obviously in Asia, preparing for China, water. You have drones that can take off, do what they got to do, come back and land like that. Rather than have -- we have in that part of the world, in Japan, an aircraft carrier permanently based. Only country in the world that has an American aircraft.
You can turn all the other ships into basically mini aircraft carriers using drones. That changes China's calculation overnight. And it can be dispersed across a wide body of different seas and the ocean. You have the East China Sea, South China Sea, you have the Sea of Japan. You can change the asymmetry (ph) and we can become the party that's asymmetric.
One thing on behalf of our military, I'll be very quick. Obviously -- forget whether you think this was right at Venezuela. You can't replace, and the General knows this better than me, the experience that our military is getting right here.
Remember, the last war China fought was the 1978 land war with Vietnam. And the capacity of what we are experiencing --
COOPER: Right.
EMANUEL: -- the knowledge, the information, it's becoming razor sharp. And they looked at what we did in Venezuela.
COOPER: Yeah.
EMANUEL: So don't -- I mean, put aside what you think of the war. There's a capacity that's getting out of this war that our military has.
COOPER: Rahm Emanuel, appreciate it. Frank Kendall as well. Thank you. Up next, echoes of Big Tobacco, major court ruling against Big Tech giants, Meta and YouTube, in a landmark case accusing them of running addictive platforms. Kara Swisher joins us with that.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[20:56:38]
COOPER: Look at our control room as our CNN coverage turns the court decision that's rocking the world of social media. Tech giants Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram and YouTube, which is owned by Google, were found liable today in a landmark case accusing them of intentionally addicting a young woman when she was a child and causing her years of severe mental distress. They've been ordered to pay millions in damages.
Her legal team convinced the jury that the companies knew the design features on the platforms were addictive and were negligent in warning of potential risks.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MARK LANIER, PLAINTIFF'S LAWYER: You will be held accountable for the features, regardless of whether the children are getting sent pornographic pictures, regardless of whether they're being sexploited, regardless of those types of issues. Just because of the features alone that drive addiction, these companies can be held accountable.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COOPER: Meta and YouTube deny that their platforms are addictive. Both companies say they will appeal. We're joined by CNN Contributor, Kara Swisher, host of the podcast "Pivot and On." So, were you surprised by the jury's decision?
KARA SWISHER, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: No. The time has come. You know, it takes about 20 years with cigarettes, with drunk driving, mothers against drunk driving, to get this kind of realization by society that these companies can be harmful. They're not always harmful, by the way. Some of it's very useful.
But that he designed them in a way that's not safe, and it's something I've been talking about for a decade, and many others even before that. They just are really sloppy in how they roll these things out, especially around young people.
COOPER: Do you think this makes a difference? I mean, do you think, you know, obviously, there's financial penalties. These companies have gazillions of dollars.
SWISHER: Yeah. Oh, it's a parking ticket. This is a couple million dollars. The one in New Mexico earlier this week was on a different type of case, was $375 million. They'll appeal. They'll run these people down as much as they can, but it just takes a drop in the ocean for these kind of things to sort of shift.
And I do think people are shifting, regular citizens, because our regulators and our political class has not done anything about this, and Donald Trump is hand in glove with these people. They were in the front row of the inaugural. I don't believe you and I were there. I mean, it's just -- you saw what the power situation was.
And so, you know, these people, these companies have trillions of dollars, you know, worth trillions of dollars. They have hundreds of millions of dollars to spend on this stuff. And now, they're doing it with A.I. So at this point, we're finally, because our legislation, our regulation has not stepped in, our liability has to step in, and I'm glad to see it.
COOPER: I mean, some have called this, you know, the big tobacco moment, which happened decades ago. Do you think it's a fair analogy?
SWISHER: I think there's going to be lots of them. I don't think it's just one. This is, again, a very small thing and Mark Zuckerberg probably has this in the drawer in his kitchen, the amount he has to pay here, because he's so wealthy. He's a multi, multi, multi- billionaire.
But I do think, I think it's all of them. You know, as you know, I've been interviewing the parents of kids who have committed suicide, and anyone who reads the transcripts of those conversations these kids are having with chatbots, it's infuriating to watch, and it's sloppy. And you know, Anderson, you have to be careful of what you put out. You have to be factual. You have to try really hard.
Fox News got dinged for almost a billion dollars for not being factual --
COOPER: Yeah.
SWISHER: -- over elections. So why aren't they liable? And I think the lawyer was saying that, accountability. Where is the accountability here for misinformation, for putting out products that are harmful for kids? And just because it's not a cigarette, it's not in your lungs, it still has harm. There are still harms here.
And lastly, they act like they're doctors. They act like they're lawyers. They act like they're financial advisors. But they are not bound by the strictures the rest of us are.
COOPER: And now, they're getting into, you know, porn and all sorts of things, which is just -- it's going to kind of --
SWISHER: Yes. Oh.
COOPER: -- reach deeper into people's brains.
SWISHER: The New Mexico case was crazy, like what they were able to do in seconds. And as Scott Galloway says, and I think correctly, we're bound by the law but not protected by it, and they are protected by the law but not bound by it.
But today, they're bound by the law.
COOPER: And you think it will make some sort of a difference in the long run?
SWISHER: I do. I think -- there's so many cases coming behind this, and finally there's some victories. Now, again, these companies have unlimited funds to run this down. They have a friend in the Trump administration who is going to try to stop this kind of stuff. But there's a movement across the globe happening right now, and it's coming here now.
It's happened in Spain, in Australia, everywhere else. It's coming here.
COOPER: Yeah. --
