# Iranian Regime Cracks Down & The Greenland Saga | EYES ON GEOPOLITICS

An episode of [The Team House](https://invisiblenetwork.ai/podcast/1492797340), 19 Jan 2026, 1 h 02 min.

Audio: https://dts.podtrac.com/redirect.mp3/pscrb.fm/rss/p/clrtpod.com/m/api.spreaker.com/download/episode/69498683/iran_greenland_eyes_on.mp3

In this episode of 'Eyes on Geopolitics,' hosts Dee and Mick Mulroy discuss a range of pressing global issues, starting with the upcoming Montana Intelligence Summit, which aims to bring together experts in national security. The conversation quickly shifts to the ongoing protests in Iran, where Mick highlights the economic factors driving unrest and the potential for regime change. He emphasizes the importance of U.S. support for the Iranian people while cautioning against military intervention, which could lead to worse outcomes. The discussion then transitions to the geopolitical implications of U.S. tariffs on NATO allies and the controversial idea of purchasing Greenland, with both hosts expressing strong disapproval of the latter. They conclude by addressing the situation in Venezuela, advocating for democratic elections and the importance of U.S. influence in the region. U.S. Elite Medical Services ⬇️ https://uselitemedicalservices.com/ use the code "team20" for 20% off Montana Security Conference ⬇️ https://mi1.suitsandspooks.com/ Support the show on Patreon:⬇️ https://www.patreon.com/TheTeamHouse Subscribe to our new newsletter!!!! https://teamhousepodcast.kit.com/join New merch, patches, and stickers! ⬇️ https://theteamhouse-shop.fourthwall.com Check out Mick's new podcast here:⬇️ Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/at/podcast/pub-and-porch-applied-stoicism/id1836955475 Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/1k3QPmkAMwnGJxMLDwUSSd?si=n6piIu8XRcag1Z0K43A3bQ Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/@UCd0Hq6QFk8CoTu5j-VU0Ong Find Mick Mulroy here: Fogbow ⬇️ https://fogbow.com/ Lobo Institute ⬇️ https://www.loboinstitute.org/ Twitter ⬇️ https://x.com/mickmulroy?s=21&t=-Ze3F_Ix2vlJ18KFvORTCA LinkedIn ⬇️ https://www.linkedin.com/in/michael-patrick-mulroy-31198b52/ Bluesky ⬇️ https://bsky.app/profile/mickmulroy.bsky.social Mick’s publications ⬇️ https://www.loboinstitute.org/publications/publications-of-michael-mick-patrick-mulroy/ Find Andy Milburn here: Twitter ⬇️ https://twitter.com/i/flow/login?redirect_after_login=%2Fandymilburn8 LinkedIn ⬇️ https://www.linkedin.com/in/andrewmilburn2023 Substack ⬇️ https://amilburn.substack.com/ Andy’s book ⬇️ https://www.amazon.com/When-Tempest-Gathers-Mogadishu-Operations Bluesky ⬇️ https://bsky.app/profile/andy-milburn.bsky.social Find Jason Lyons here: LinkedIn ⬇️ https://www.linkedin.com/in/jason-lyons-666873316?u Bluesky ⬇️ https://bsky.app/profile/bgsilverback73.bsky.social "Karl Casey @ White Bat Audio" 00:00 Start 05:02 Iran Protests and U.S. Response 23:38 The Greenland Controversy 42:18 Venezuela's Political Landscape Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-team-house--5960890/support.

## Transcript

[0:01] Speaker 1: Hey, welcome to another episode of Eyes on Geopolitics. I'm
[0:03] Speaker 1: here with Mick mulroy. Might be joined by Andy Milburn
[0:05] Speaker 1: Fingers crossed. I don't know if he's bicycle workouts done yet.
[0:09] Speaker 1: It's he's got to get his schedule back in order.
[0:11] Speaker 1: With his workout schedule, it's getting in in the way
[0:14] Speaker 1: of things. A lot, a lot, a lot happening in
[0:18] Speaker 1: the world. Obviously, as you guys, if you're listening to
[0:20] Speaker 1: this podcast, you know you're paying attention. But Mick, you
[0:25] Speaker 1: got something happening that's coming up near you in white Fish,
[0:29] Speaker 1: coming up in April. Let me hear about it.
[0:31] Speaker 2: Yes, yeah, thanks gee. So this is this group that
[0:34] Speaker 2: throws summits conferences related to national security all over. They
[0:41] Speaker 2: reached out to me and said, hey, would you be
[0:43] Speaker 2: interested speaking a panel. We're going to have one in Montana.
[0:47] Speaker 2: They didn't know I lived in Montana.
[0:50] Speaker 3: Uh.
[0:50] Speaker 2: And then they asked me about other people, and it
[0:52] Speaker 2: turned out most of the people are asking about we're
[0:54] Speaker 2: in Lobo. So it's like, well, two things, yes, I'd
[0:57] Speaker 2: be happy to uh. One, Two I live in Whitefish
[1:00] Speaker 2: where they wanted to have it. And three everybody you
[1:04] Speaker 2: mentioned to me is in Lobo, so we've now joined them.
[1:08] Speaker 2: So it's called right now the Montana Intelligence Summit. It's
[1:11] Speaker 2: going to be April second and third, and hopefully brother
[1:16] Speaker 2: Andy Milwurm's going to come to that as well, and
[1:18] Speaker 2: he just joined us. And then it's going to be
[1:22] Speaker 2: the intent because now Lobo Institute's completely paired with this group.
[1:26] Speaker 2: Is going to be an annual event in Whitefish. It
[1:30] Speaker 2: probably changed times of the year because you know, sometimes
[1:33] Speaker 2: it's fun to come and potentially go skiing when you're
[1:35] Speaker 2: not in the conference. Sometimes it's better to go to
[1:39] Speaker 2: Glacier National Park in the summer. But it's going to
[1:42] Speaker 2: be in Whitefish, so it's going to be tied to
[1:44] Speaker 2: the town like Aspen or Munich or Davos or something.
[1:47] Speaker 2: Not saying that or anything like that, but you know,
[1:49] Speaker 2: we have aspirations and it's going to be a security summit,
[1:53] Speaker 2: so it's going to be more than intelligence. It's going
[1:55] Speaker 2: to be diplomacy, intelligence, military, uh, all of it. So
[2:02] Speaker 2: for policy people to warriors to uh diplomats and uh so, uh,
[2:09] Speaker 2: if you're interested, I think these going to put the
[2:12] Speaker 2: current link in the description and we hope to see
[2:15] Speaker 2: you guys. Up here and uh in the lovely uh
[2:20] Speaker 2: town of Whitefish as we do these things. But thanks
[2:23] Speaker 2: for allowing me to plug that in much more to follow.
[2:28] Speaker 1: What's the weather like in white Fish in April?
[2:31] Speaker 2: Ah, So that's the end of the ski season. They
[2:35] Speaker 2: picked it without they picked the time for without asking us,
[2:38] Speaker 2: because my business partner Eric alarc I think would have said,
[2:42] Speaker 2: that's that's an iffy time to ski, right, it's about
[2:45] Speaker 2: to close. And for those that aren't tracking the you know,
[2:49] Speaker 2: the current situation out here in the Rockies. It's kind
[2:52] Speaker 2: of warm and there's a lot of snow, which is
[2:55] Speaker 2: a problem for us because we do winter warfare training
[2:58] Speaker 2: out here all winter with so communits. But so April
[3:03] Speaker 2: will be still snow, but it'd be at the end
[3:06] Speaker 2: and if you're lucky enough to be here at the
[3:08] Speaker 2: end of the last ski run is hilarious. Literally, people
[3:13] Speaker 2: come flying down there and you know, bigfoot outfits or
[3:17] Speaker 2: just no outfit at all, like like like nude drunkens
[3:21] Speaker 2: is skunk. It's crazy. The last run, everybody gets to
[3:23] Speaker 2: the top and it's it's like old school Montana. Not
[3:26] Speaker 2: that I'm saying that's a selling point. Necessarily go to
[3:29] Speaker 2: the conference. But anyway, that's that's where it is in April.
[3:33] Speaker 2: But I think people are going to have a great time.
[3:36] Speaker 2: It's a it's they build it as an anti conference conference,
[3:39] Speaker 2: isn't in that? Yes there's panels, Yes there's engagement. Of course,
[3:43] Speaker 2: that's where you're coming. But there's also like events, like
[3:46] Speaker 2: there's a reason that it's in Montana, right, so there'll
[3:50] Speaker 2: be other events that people can join in and and do.
[3:53] Speaker 2: But again, thanks for letting me.
[3:55] Speaker 1: Yeah cool, put that out there. That sounds awesome. The
[3:57] Speaker 1: link will be in the description. So if you guys
[3:59] Speaker 1: are interested, it's April second and third, so check that out.
[4:02] Speaker 1: The link is down there. Andy, what's up, dude? I
[4:05] Speaker 1: miss you. I haven't seen you so long. You're looking
[4:07] Speaker 1: buff as ever. Look, you're looking as buff as ever.
[4:14] Speaker 4: What do you need with the No? No, it's great
[4:17] Speaker 4: to be back. Yeah, I've been. I've been watching the
[4:21] Speaker 4: podcast without me as and as many of the as
[4:24] Speaker 4: many of the audience would agree, it's much better without me.
[4:27] Speaker 4: I've been enjoying it, and here I am without Jason.
[4:32] Speaker 1: To Yeah, Jason's under the weather, not feeling great. So
[4:35] Speaker 1: we'll be back next week. Yeah. So let's crack right
[4:39] Speaker 1: into it. I mean, chaos seems to be happening everywhere
[4:43] Speaker 1: you look, not just around the world, but everywhere. Let's
[4:48] Speaker 1: kick it off, like you could take your pick on
[4:50] Speaker 1: what's going on. Like, there's so many things. We'll start
[4:53] Speaker 1: off with you Ron latest estimates. There are some reports
[4:56] Speaker 1: saying up to sixteen five hundred protesters have died have
[5:00] Speaker 1: been killed by the regime.
[5:02] Speaker 4: Uh.
[5:02] Speaker 1: There was a lot of talk last week about the
[5:05] Speaker 1: administration preparing strikes any Iran to see you. I don't
[5:10] Speaker 1: know what the you know, the capitation strikes possibly. Uh,
[5:14] Speaker 1: it's ongoing. Their internet's still out, it's spotty in place.
[5:17] Speaker 1: You are getting some video and it doesn't seem to
[5:20] Speaker 1: be going great. You do see. We did see the
[5:24] Speaker 1: Ayatola come out and like kind of like kind of
[5:28] Speaker 1: like trying poking prov the US a little bit, which
[5:31] Speaker 1: I don't know if that's a great idea, you know,
[5:35] Speaker 1: because we've seen you know, reports have suggested that President
[5:39] Speaker 1: Trump's thinking like if you're making fun of them, you know,
[5:42] Speaker 1: his big cyclops I will digging right onto you if
[5:46] Speaker 1: you are. And we saw what happened with Maduro. So
[5:49] Speaker 1: where are we at with that. Uh, you guys, tell
[5:51] Speaker 1: me what you're hearing in terms of the latest.
[5:55] Speaker 2: So ran this week obviously a huge topic. I'll start
[5:59] Speaker 2: with the protests themselves, because that's what the most important
[6:02] Speaker 2: part of this is. There's been other protests in the past.
[6:06] Speaker 2: They've been topical, mostly in the sense that important topics
[6:11] Speaker 2: right women's right, when Amani was was killed for not
[6:15] Speaker 2: wearing the proper headgear if you remember that. There's also
[6:19] Speaker 2: been issues uprisings related to the ethnic inequality in groups
[6:28] Speaker 2: in you know, like courage for example, in our in
[6:30] Speaker 2: our on this is economic. So this has brought all
[6:35] Speaker 2: of the groups that protest together and they're all affected.
[6:40] Speaker 2: So the person who may not have been willing because
[6:44] Speaker 2: it's it's it's much different in Iran. If you're willing
[6:46] Speaker 2: to protest, you're willing to put your life on the
[6:48] Speaker 2: line for sure. But this is the the the currency
[6:54] Speaker 2: collapsed inflations extreme they're having a horrible issue with the
[7:01] Speaker 2: governance is designed essentially just to keep itself in place,
[7:05] Speaker 2: not for the benefit of the people that live there,
[7:07] Speaker 2: and I think that has hit the head. So this
[7:11] Speaker 2: I think is a very real potential to topple the regime.
[7:15] Speaker 2: On its own. It's organic. It wasn't. You can't fabricate this, Okay,
[7:21] Speaker 2: it's just possible. I mean, as much as you want
[7:23] Speaker 2: to give the CIA olimpident powers, you can't fabricate this.
[7:29] Speaker 2: So you could help, you could support, but you can't
[7:33] Speaker 2: make it out a whole clock. So this is really happening.
[7:36] Speaker 2: And then the question now becomes what can the US
[7:40] Speaker 2: do to hopefully enhance rather than hinder what's going on
[7:46] Speaker 2: on the ground. So there is obviously COVID stuff you
[7:50] Speaker 2: can do. You can try to amplify the real messages
[7:52] Speaker 2: are coming out. You can try to increase the Internet.
[7:55] Speaker 2: You can use cyber warfare to try to defeat whatever
[7:58] Speaker 2: it is or block. Using the block the the Internet,
[8:02] Speaker 2: you can surge potentially these mesh networks like Skylink if
[8:06] Speaker 2: they can I don't know, to go straight to the
[8:10] Speaker 2: cell phone, right, because that's a capability. It appreciates the
[8:14] Speaker 2: bandwidth substantially and the amount of people. But that's that's
[8:18] Speaker 2: on the in my estimation, that's on the no brainer side, right,
[8:22] Speaker 2: like we should be doing that anyway. And then the
[8:24] Speaker 2: other question, you know, whether it's more enhanced covert you know,
[8:28] Speaker 2: like supporting the opposition with you know, with means to
[8:33] Speaker 2: actively resist all the way up to include direct military action.
[8:40] Speaker 2: So I think right now, hopefully what they're looking at
[8:44] Speaker 2: is the intelligence assessment on whether that'll help, and then
[8:47] Speaker 2: if it will, what will help. Will it be a
[8:51] Speaker 2: symbolic strike on like the IRGC, particularly the besiege element,
[8:57] Speaker 2: which is a huge paramilitary element that violently oppressence to people.
[9:02] Speaker 2: Would it be a decapitation strike like you said, d
[9:06] Speaker 2: or would it be a decapitation strike plus a sustained
[9:10] Speaker 2: military campaign to degrade the regime's security apparatus? Right, So
[9:16] Speaker 2: that's and I'll toss it over eighty year. And the
[9:19] Speaker 2: last thing I think they really need to look at
[9:21] Speaker 2: is Okay, so if we did that, what comes next? Right?
[9:29] Speaker 1: What is it going to be a.
[9:31] Speaker 2: Nobel Prize winning opposition? Is it going to be Pahlivi,
[9:35] Speaker 2: the you know, the son of the former Shaw. Is
[9:39] Speaker 2: it going to be some version of that or is
[9:40] Speaker 2: it just going to be the IRGC? Right? So, and
[9:43] Speaker 2: then if that's the case, how do we make that
[9:45] Speaker 2: not happen because that's not helping the situation for the
[9:48] Speaker 2: Iranians or the stability for the region. So that's another
[9:51] Speaker 2: part of this, le'd say, we have to consider.
[9:57] Speaker 4: Yeah, you know, there's there's obviously, I mean one part
[10:02] Speaker 4: of me, as as they're probably is most people who
[10:06] Speaker 4: are following this uh, that that wants the US to
[10:09] Speaker 4: do something right that that rather empty, empty sounding phrase,
[10:15] Speaker 4: and we we need to do something. But and and
[10:18] Speaker 4: I of course you know, of course my Ma Hartley's
[10:22] Speaker 4: Uranian people. You know, having having visited Iran, I can
[10:28] Speaker 4: tell you that the people there are just among the
[10:33] Speaker 4: the kindest, most hospitable, best educated by the way in
[10:40] Speaker 4: not just Middle East but the but the world. And uh,
[10:43] Speaker 4: and trends we've seen from the little that has come
[10:46] Speaker 4: out of Iran during these uh there's these riots uh
[10:53] Speaker 4: incredibly brave too. And when there was there were uprisings
[10:59] Speaker 4: and and make touched on these in two thousand and nine,
[11:03] Speaker 4: the Green Brient again in twenty twenty two, which was,
[11:07] Speaker 4: as Mick pointed out, it was about the suppression of women.
[11:12] Speaker 4: I mean, that was the catalyst. The revolts were put
[11:18] Speaker 4: down with incredible brutality by all accounts. The brutality being
[11:22] Speaker 4: used now exceeds that by far, and the number of
[11:25] Speaker 4: people killed, even if it's a fraction of the sixteen thousand,
[11:29] Speaker 4: five hundred is by all accounts, way more than were
[11:33] Speaker 4: killed in twenty nine twenty two. So all that having
[11:35] Speaker 4: been said, yes, I mean, I would love to see
[11:38] Speaker 4: an end of the suffering the Ranian people, and it
[11:40] Speaker 4: would be good for the world to see an end
[11:43] Speaker 4: of the Iranian regime. It's done nothing but cause instability
[11:47] Speaker 4: since Iatolis rise to power back in nineteen seventy nine.
[11:51] Speaker 4: So having set the stage for that, there is a
[11:54] Speaker 4: big butt and I understand absolutely why there is a la.
[12:00] Speaker 4: You know, they helped for all this, this very loud
[12:04] Speaker 4: posturing about what we're going to do a few reasons
[12:08] Speaker 4: for that lay one, of course, which the riots themselves
[12:11] Speaker 4: seem to have died down, so maybe you know, the
[12:13] Speaker 4: direct camp and and the and the regime. Therefore the
[12:17] Speaker 4: regime has stopped killing people and the droves that it
[12:19] Speaker 4: was killing them, so the direct catalyst, they kind of
[12:23] Speaker 4: the urge. The mandate to do something now seems to
[12:27] Speaker 4: have slackened a little bit. But you know, there are
[12:29] Speaker 4: two issues. There's one is the military problem of what
[12:32] Speaker 4: do you what exactly do?
[12:33] Speaker 2: What do you go after?
[12:34] Speaker 4: That's the easiest part of the problem, and as Mick
[12:36] Speaker 4: pointed out there's both covert and and overt action that
[12:40] Speaker 4: can take place working from within the country itself. And
[12:44] Speaker 4: then you know, an attempt at decapitation, strikes to take
[12:48] Speaker 4: out the Supreme Leader, the hell of Kods, force, the
[12:51] Speaker 4: head of busiege, you know, all the leadership that is
[12:54] Speaker 4: helping to that. They you know that is that backs
[12:59] Speaker 4: the regime. The problem is that in all of these organizations,
[13:04] Speaker 4: to include even the Supreme Leader. This is problem number one.
[13:07] Speaker 4: There are people who are going to just slide into
[13:10] Speaker 4: place seamlessly, Okay, problem number one. Problem number two, there
[13:14] Speaker 4: isn't a viable opposition within the country. Mick mentioned Paulivi,
[13:19] Speaker 4: the son of the Shah, And this is really ironic,
[13:22] Speaker 4: right if those of you were ropping up, remember what
[13:26] Speaker 4: happened in nineteen seventy nine and how the entire country,
[13:31] Speaker 4: regardless of whether or not they were religiously inclined, we're
[13:36] Speaker 4: pretty much behind. I mean, it was, yes, it was
[13:39] Speaker 4: headed by originally by a group of student Marxists and
[13:45] Speaker 4: by Is fundamentalists too, had an uneasy alliance. And of
[13:53] Speaker 4: course we know what happened and who dominated that. But
[13:56] Speaker 4: the point is all the country wanted to get rid
[13:58] Speaker 4: of the Shah, and it's generalization, but no great exaggeration.
[14:03] Speaker 4: And now you see people reaching out to him, and
[14:06] Speaker 4: he's been a voice in im media in favor of
[14:10] Speaker 4: the protesters. But the point is he doesn't have a
[14:14] Speaker 4: viable government behind him. There's no movement that's going to
[14:17] Speaker 4: slide in seamlessly and take over from the current administration, right,
[14:22] Speaker 4: And that's number one. And number two, which is far
[14:28] Speaker 4: more likely, is that something worse will take the place
[14:33] Speaker 4: of the supreme leader.
[14:34] Speaker 2: You know, the biggest and.
[14:38] Speaker 4: Strongest movement organization within Iran, of course is the IRGC,
[14:45] Speaker 4: and undoubtedly they will take over, whether or not their
[14:50] Speaker 4: leadership is taken out in the process, and they may
[14:53] Speaker 4: even have the backing of the army, who to this
[14:55] Speaker 4: point has not been involved in the back then. And
[15:00] Speaker 4: I mean this is the you know, the IOGC is
[15:06] Speaker 4: it's it's hard to underestimate the control that they have
[15:11] Speaker 4: in Iran. I mean, it's everything, it's political, it's economic,
[15:14] Speaker 4: it's military. And then there's just no other viable organization. Okay,
[15:20] Speaker 4: so that is probably the most likely scenario, and we're
[15:23] Speaker 4: going to end up with the devil that we don't know,
[15:25] Speaker 4: and the devil that is far worse, and we're going
[15:27] Speaker 4: to look at you know, it's going to take more
[15:30] Speaker 4: than COVID action. It's going to take more than than
[15:34] Speaker 4: decapitation strikes to topple the rg IRGC, And in the meantime,
[15:39] Speaker 4: the people are going to suffer even worse, undoubtedly. Okay,
[15:42] Speaker 4: third prospect, And here we've got recent examples of what
[15:47] Speaker 4: happened in Iran. Sorry, what happened in Iraq. Remember after
[15:52] Speaker 4: after Saddam Hassain was was toppled and then eventually executed.
[16:00] Speaker 4: I mean, there was civil war there, and those of
[16:01] Speaker 4: us who served there, some of this is forgotten, but
[16:06] Speaker 4: remember that just the extreme level of bloodshed crossing on
[16:10] Speaker 4: that continued up until indeed almost two thousand and eight,
[16:14] Speaker 4: peaking in two thousand and five, two thousand and six.
[16:16] Speaker 4: I mean, it was most Iraqis when they talk about
[16:22] Speaker 4: the mistake of the US invasion and they called it
[16:25] Speaker 4: a mistake, have that in their memory, the memory of
[16:29] Speaker 4: that civil war that caused untold suffering for the Iraqi people,
[16:36] Speaker 4: and so does that. There's what happened before that in Yugoslavia,
[16:42] Speaker 4: after Tito was toppled and again, those of us old
[16:47] Speaker 4: enough to remember that the most until the invasion of Ukraine.
[16:51] Speaker 4: That was the bloodiest event in Europe, that dragged on
[16:54] Speaker 4: for four years, the bloodiest events since the Second War.
[16:59] Speaker 4: And of course what happened in Syria twenty eleven and afterwards.
[17:02] Speaker 4: I mean, those look like far more likely prospects than
[17:07] Speaker 4: either IOGC takeover or a civil war, Far more likely
[17:11] Speaker 4: prospects than a smooth transition to another government. You know,
[17:14] Speaker 4: you've got, Iran is not a homogeneous society, and aside
[17:19] Speaker 4: from those who support the Ayatollah, I mean, if who
[17:23] Speaker 4: support the current administration versus the people you've got. You've
[17:27] Speaker 4: got Kurdish separatists, You've got a Zeri separatists, You've got Baluchis,
[17:31] Speaker 4: all of whom want to breakaway into the separate provinces,
[17:35] Speaker 4: all of whom are represented by armed factions who are
[17:39] Speaker 4: waiting for an opportunity to go to war to twin
[17:42] Speaker 4: independence for their own states. You throw into that the
[17:46] Speaker 4: fact you've got a stock pile of enriched uranium, you've
[17:49] Speaker 4: got nuclear scientists, and you've got religious extremists, and that is,
[17:53] Speaker 4: to say the least, a volatile mix. So I'm glad
[17:58] Speaker 4: to see that that the US is just simply taking action,
[18:03] Speaker 4: dropping bombs and getting rid of your current administration, because
[18:07] Speaker 4: what follows maybe fallow less.
[18:10] Speaker 5: Thanks to our sponsor today, US Elite Medical Services dot com.
[18:15] Speaker 5: If you are a veteran and need further medical documentation
[18:18] Speaker 5: to help bolster your claims, please check out us Elitemedical
[18:22] Speaker 5: Services dot com. Not only do they help veterans with
[18:26] Speaker 5: medical nexus letters and DBQs, they offer wellness and longevity
[18:31] Speaker 5: treatments such as testosterone replacement therapy. Please go and get
[18:35] Speaker 5: checked out by one of their providers. We're all just
[18:37] Speaker 5: trying to get by, improve our families, life, business, and
[18:41] Speaker 5: our own well being. The veteran population has had enormous
[18:44] Speaker 5: amounts of stress that has led to chronic fatigue and
[18:47] Speaker 5: much more. The VA is an interesting place, and medical
[18:50] Speaker 5: evidence is the premise of your claim. You deserve what
[18:53] Speaker 5: you fought for. You deserve to feel better again, more energy,
[18:56] Speaker 5: better mood, better recovery and more. I can also say
[19:00] Speaker 5: from my own personal experience that trying to go through
[19:03] Speaker 5: VA and file disability claims is incredibly difficult, and there's
[19:07] Speaker 5: no way I would have been able to do it
[19:09] Speaker 5: without a service such as us Elite Medical Services dot com.
[19:13] Speaker 5: So please go check them out and you can use
[19:16] Speaker 5: the discount code Team twenty to get twenty percent off
[19:19] Speaker 5: when you go and use them today. So go check
[19:22] Speaker 5: them out. So go to us Elite Medical Services dot
[19:25] Speaker 5: com and use the discount code Team twenty to get
[19:28] Speaker 5: twenty percent off today.
[19:32] Speaker 1: Yeah.
[19:32] Speaker 2: Three quick points on that, if I could, going back
[19:35] Speaker 2: to the beginning of what Andy said, And I think
[19:37] Speaker 2: it's important for folks to understand. I'm sure many do,
[19:41] Speaker 2: but so might not because you only see the extremists
[19:43] Speaker 2: talk when it comes to a run, right, You only
[19:45] Speaker 2: see the zelots, the people that represent the regime. But
[19:50] Speaker 2: the Ornian people are very educated and if they are
[19:54] Speaker 2: very innovative, and if they had the opportunity to rejoin
[19:58] Speaker 2: the Community of Nations economically, everything, they would do very well.
[20:04] Speaker 2: And I think it's important that people understand that, you know,
[20:08] Speaker 2: the Ayatola or any of its his henchmen aren't what
[20:12] Speaker 2: represents the Iranian people. That's one point. The second point
[20:17] Speaker 2: is I've seen the scenario literally played out with the
[20:21] Speaker 2: US actually did try to do something like an invasion.
[20:26] Speaker 2: We don't want to do that. I mean, if you
[20:28] Speaker 2: think the Iraq war was a bad idea. I think
[20:30] Speaker 2: Andy just summed that up. This would be ten times worse.
[20:35] Speaker 2: So that's not even on the table, and it's important point.
[20:38] Speaker 2: I mean, I guess it's on the table, but it
[20:39] Speaker 2: shouldn't be. I actually don't even think it's on the table.
[20:42] Speaker 2: So I guess the question really is going to come
[20:44] Speaker 2: down to how the Iranian people would get to where
[20:47] Speaker 2: they want to be, which is not controlled by a
[20:50] Speaker 2: bunch of theocritic freaking you know, people who think their
[20:58] Speaker 2: sole goal in life is to fight other people and
[21:00] Speaker 2: not to take care of their own. I think what
[21:03] Speaker 2: the intelligence computity is going to look for, and Andy
[21:07] Speaker 2: referenced it, we haven't seen it yet is defections by
[21:10] Speaker 2: the army. That's the biggest indicator that this could change
[21:14] Speaker 2: and go into another direction. I don't know that it will,
[21:17] Speaker 2: but the best case scenario would be the other large
[21:22] Speaker 2: arm faction in Iran basically saying enough's enough. That would
[21:29] Speaker 2: be a big left But that is what I think
[21:30] Speaker 2: people are going to be looking at very closely to
[21:33] Speaker 2: see if there's any chance. And I don't think air
[21:37] Speaker 2: I mean, even if we do it, if that's the case,
[21:40] Speaker 2: I don't think it's going to make the difference to
[21:43] Speaker 2: actually turn this into a revolution, if you will. But
[21:49] Speaker 2: that's going to have to be within So we're gonna
[21:51] Speaker 2: have to see what the military actually does in that regard.
[21:55] Speaker 2: And then, of course, the other option on the table,
[21:58] Speaker 2: even though I think President Trump kind of took off
[22:00] Speaker 2: the table East for now, is they start negotiations again
[22:04] Speaker 2: and they and they capitulate to US demands, which is
[22:08] Speaker 2: obviously no nuclear weapons, uh, limitations or abandonment of their
[22:13] Speaker 2: law long range ballistic missile program, and cutting off their
[22:18] Speaker 2: support to proxy forces. I don't see them agrained all that,
[22:21] Speaker 2: but quite frankly, it's in Iran's interest. None of that
[22:25] Speaker 2: activity helps the people of Iran, and it could really
[22:28] Speaker 2: lead to substantial sanctions relief, which is one of the
[22:30] Speaker 2: reasons why their economy is so bad. So I'll have
[22:32] Speaker 2: to see what they do in that regard if those start,
[22:36] Speaker 2: those negotiations start back up with any kind of validity.
[22:42] Speaker 4: Yeah, and this's you know, there's something else that that
[22:45] Speaker 4: I didn't mention, of course, despite this, uh, you know,
[22:50] Speaker 4: the recent twelve day wall between Israel and Iran, and
[22:54] Speaker 4: which you know, iran'saw. Iran's military capability suffered significantly, but
[23:01] Speaker 4: they still have a formidable battery of short and long
[23:04] Speaker 4: range missiles and enough to do considerable damage across them
[23:09] Speaker 4: at least. And you know, there is always the concern
[23:12] Speaker 4: for US basis, but I would say that the biggest concern.
[23:19] Speaker 4: I mean, I'm not saying that we shouldn't be concerned
[23:21] Speaker 4: about US basis, but they're well protected.
[23:23] Speaker 2: Let's be honest.
[23:24] Speaker 4: It's more likely the Iranians are going to strike at
[23:28] Speaker 4: other countries within the Middle East for any for a
[23:33] Speaker 4: number of reasons, Okay, not least the witches to just
[23:36] Speaker 4: to strike at US allies. And that's not just Israel,
[23:40] Speaker 4: it's potentially Jordan's, potentially Saudi Arabia, potentially even UAE orthough
[23:45] Speaker 4: that's less likely. So there's you know, there's the threat
[23:48] Speaker 4: of regional instability. And this is why you've seen a
[23:53] Speaker 4: group of countries in the Middle East, Saudi Arabia, Turkey
[23:57] Speaker 4: being among them. And he reportedly Israel talking to Trump
[24:03] Speaker 4: and saying, hey, don't do it, at least don't do
[24:05] Speaker 4: it now.
[24:07] Speaker 1: Yep.
[24:08] Speaker 2: Yeah, that might have been the reason for the delay.
[24:11] Speaker 2: In addition to the fact that they didn't carry out
[24:13] Speaker 2: the political prisoner executions, and we are moving assets to
[24:19] Speaker 2: the region. According to media reports, the USS Abraham Lincoln
[24:24] Speaker 2: carriers straight groups moving from it's all trying to see
[24:28] Speaker 2: that direction and they should get there I think around
[24:31] Speaker 2: the twenty So a lot of factors, it's unclear, and
[24:36] Speaker 2: probably it's all the above for why we haven't strugg
[24:40] Speaker 2: but hopefully this is led by the assessment of the
[24:44] Speaker 2: intelligence community and whether those were actually be helpful and
[24:47] Speaker 2: it's not just some symbolic thing that just allows the
[24:50] Speaker 2: regime to say, look, this is all American concoct it,
[24:53] Speaker 2: because that doesn't help the protesters. That needs to be
[24:57] Speaker 2: an assessment done by people with the information at hand.
[25:08] Speaker 1: Sorry. Yeah, so obviously keep a close eye on this
[25:12] Speaker 1: who it develops in the next few days, the next
[25:14] Speaker 1: few weeks. Let's move on to uh the ship show
[25:19] Speaker 1: that is Greenland, and I'm meditorializing of course, and you know,
[25:22] Speaker 1: I can't wait to have my my winter spot in Greenland.
[25:25] Speaker 1: Montana is gonna have some competition, you know, once we
[25:28] Speaker 1: take over Greenland. Recently, uh, the Trump administration came out
[25:36] Speaker 1: and put imposing imposed tariffs on eight of our NATO allies,
[25:41] Speaker 1: and I put tarriffs in quotations because it feels kind
[25:43] Speaker 1: of punitive. It feels kind of like pseudo sanctions, to
[25:47] Speaker 1: be honest, because they don't want us to buy Greenland.
[25:52] Speaker 1: EU last week had deployed a few some assets into Greenland.
[25:58] Speaker 1: It's kind of incredible what's going on. Obviously, Denmark is
[26:02] Speaker 1: a NATO ally and a close ally of the US
[26:05] Speaker 1: for the last fucking six decades, seven decades or whatever.
[26:11] Speaker 1: Corill dimetra Off, everyone's favorite Russian guy, tweeted out that
[26:17] Speaker 1: you know, in response to this, that this is a
[26:19] Speaker 1: great thing, that something that should be talked about at Davos,
[26:22] Speaker 1: like the disintegration of the Transatlantic Union. So you know,
[26:26] Speaker 1: when a Russian guy really loves this, who's like Putin's
[26:29] Speaker 1: basic mouthpiece, you know we must be doing something right. Guys,
[26:35] Speaker 1: on a scale of one to ten, I know, Mike,
[26:37] Speaker 1: you hate this. How dumb is this Greenland thing make you?
[26:40] Speaker 2: First, I'm super not happy that we're even talking about it,
[26:45] Speaker 2: what we're talking about, and I think we have hit
[26:48] Speaker 2: on this, but to be a little bit redative, everybody
[26:51] Speaker 2: should know we have had I think we have three
[26:53] Speaker 2: treaties with Greenland to include the NATO Treaty. We have
[26:57] Speaker 2: access to seventeen bases. During the Coole War we had
[27:00] Speaker 2: forces there. We could still have access to these spaces.
[27:05] Speaker 2: If it was truly a security concern of the eminent
[27:08] Speaker 2: takeover by Russia and China, we would have our military
[27:11] Speaker 2: would be there right We have no problem projecting force
[27:14] Speaker 2: around the world. Are doing it right now, but they're
[27:16] Speaker 2: not there, so that defeats the argument. And ultimately, because
[27:21] Speaker 2: of the NATO Treaty, we're responsible for protecting it from
[27:23] Speaker 2: Russia and China anyway, so that makes no sense. There's
[27:27] Speaker 2: also an open door for industry to come in and
[27:30] Speaker 2: help exploit the rare earth minerals which are having which
[27:35] Speaker 2: were they're more access to them now because of the
[27:39] Speaker 2: melting the climate change which is happening whether you believe
[27:42] Speaker 2: it or not. We could be doing that and they're
[27:44] Speaker 2: not doing it because it's not economically viable right now,
[27:46] Speaker 2: while they'd be doing it. So I think those two
[27:50] Speaker 2: reasons just don't hold up as important. If they were,
[27:54] Speaker 2: we'd be there. The other issue, of course, is this
[27:59] Speaker 2: not taking off the table of use of military force,
[28:03] Speaker 2: and the President was pretty clear we're going to do
[28:06] Speaker 2: this either the easy way or the hard way. The
[28:09] Speaker 2: easy way would be the get greed to be bought
[28:11] Speaker 2: by almost trillion dollars, or if they don't and they
[28:15] Speaker 2: already summarily rejected that, the hard way assume everybody assumes
[28:20] Speaker 2: would be my military force. So a quick little note
[28:25] Speaker 2: on that. So under the NATO agreement, we're actually supposed
[28:30] Speaker 2: to protect them from threats, not actually be the threat.
[28:33] Speaker 2: And that NATO treaty is the supreme law of the
[28:37] Speaker 2: land under sixth Amendment claw and I used to teach
[28:42] Speaker 2: conversational law on time ago the supremacy clause. I think
[28:45] Speaker 2: it's a second clause the Constitution and treaties or the
[28:51] Speaker 2: supreme law the land. So anybody planning to or executing
[28:57] Speaker 2: an attack on a NATO ally is going is an
[29:00] Speaker 2: unlawful effort by definition everyone's definition. So then you say, okay,
[29:07] Speaker 2: what if we get out of the NATO treaty. That
[29:09] Speaker 2: would be a terrible idea. But since they're not listening
[29:13] Speaker 2: to mc molroy from Montana, that is capable under I
[29:18] Speaker 2: think Article thirteen not to be walkash on you guys,
[29:22] Speaker 2: but you can, but that requires a vote of full
[29:28] Speaker 2: or super majority in the Senate to do so, not
[29:30] Speaker 2: just the president. It takes a year to get out,
[29:33] Speaker 2: and by the way, we're the keeper of that, so
[29:35] Speaker 2: we have to notify ourselves that we're getting out. It
[29:37] Speaker 2: has to be confirmed by the Senate. And there's a
[29:40] Speaker 2: law pass which was proposed by Secretary of Rubio then
[29:43] Speaker 2: Senator Rubio inside of the NBA from twenty twenty four
[29:48] Speaker 2: that says the President, can't you know how you get
[29:50] Speaker 2: out of NATO. So the chances of getting out of
[29:53] Speaker 2: NATO are zero in my estimation, So it's an unlawful
[29:58] Speaker 2: act to take to even really plan for this. So
[30:04] Speaker 2: then the question is should we buy it? And they're
[30:08] Speaker 2: not for said right, So it's just hurt. It's very
[30:12] Speaker 2: much hurting the relationship on the security front obviously with
[30:16] Speaker 2: NATO and Europe and economically you can see you can
[30:21] Speaker 2: see our longtime ally starting to look at the United
[30:25] Speaker 2: States not only as an adversary in the economic sense,
[30:30] Speaker 2: but as a threat in the in the physical threat,
[30:33] Speaker 2: and that is not what the United States should want
[30:37] Speaker 2: and it is definitely not in our interest. And to
[30:40] Speaker 2: your point, d that's why Russia is championing this entire discussion.
[30:46] Speaker 1: So at ten.
[30:48] Speaker 2: Bad idea. Yeah, really even to discuss it.
[30:51] Speaker 4: Yeah, you know, I don't honest, see day, I don't
[30:57] Speaker 4: think it's West spending a lot of time on this topic, because.
[31:02] Speaker 2: We can put it to bed pretty quickly, you.
[31:04] Speaker 4: Know, for I mean, for those of us who've worn
[31:08] Speaker 4: the uniform and served overseas and you know, in furthering
[31:15] Speaker 4: US foreign policy at the sharp end. There's a reason
[31:18] Speaker 4: why we do that, right. It wasn't for the pay,
[31:20] Speaker 4: for sure, it was because we represent, we think believe
[31:23] Speaker 4: that our country represents certain values. And those values are
[31:28] Speaker 4: broadly speaking, you know, based on a broad rather broad
[31:37] Speaker 4: preference for you know, alliances, stability, and a rules based order, right,
[31:43] Speaker 4: which are things that the United States has represented, has
[31:47] Speaker 4: championed for over one hundred years. And I'm not just
[31:50] Speaker 4: saying over one hundred years, you know, you can you
[31:52] Speaker 4: can think right back to the Treaty of Versi in
[31:56] Speaker 4: nineteen nineteen, the aftermath of the First War, which is
[32:00] Speaker 4: really when under Woodrow Wilson, the United States stepped up
[32:03] Speaker 4: to the plate and championing and I'm not going to
[32:06] Speaker 4: use the term democracy but democratic liberal democratic values across
[32:10] Speaker 4: the world. And we've been looked up to since then,
[32:13] Speaker 4: you know throughout that's what poured us in. Yes, Pearl
[32:18] Speaker 4: Harbor happened, but that's not why we got involved in
[32:21] Speaker 4: the in the war in Europe. It was it was
[32:25] Speaker 4: a catalyst for that. But what the reason why we're
[32:27] Speaker 4: fighting for the freedom of Europe had to do with
[32:31] Speaker 4: that had to do with what we stood for and
[32:33] Speaker 4: the follow on Marshall plan. What we poured, you know,
[32:37] Speaker 4: billions of dollars into Europe was again focused on stability
[32:41] Speaker 4: and because we aligned those with us interests and values,
[32:45] Speaker 4: both of which are real things. And if you don't
[32:50] Speaker 4: believe in all of those things, it's very difficult to
[32:52] Speaker 4: argue with you, right, if you don't believe in those things,
[32:55] Speaker 4: what do you believe? What do you believe that our
[32:56] Speaker 4: country stands for? And it's certainly I just you know,
[33:01] Speaker 4: that's not a frame of reference that I'm familiar with.
[33:04] Speaker 4: It's not a frame of reference any of the fellow
[33:07] Speaker 4: veterans that I know they're familiar with. And again, because
[33:10] Speaker 4: we didn't serve our country purely because we enjoyed wearing
[33:14] Speaker 4: a uniform and for the money. So I think you know,
[33:17] Speaker 4: probably uh and meck, I'm going to turn this over
[33:20] Speaker 4: to you. But I think for someone who's not swayed
[33:24] Speaker 4: by those arguments and doesn't care about any of those things,
[33:29] Speaker 4: there's a whole avalanche of very bad things that are
[33:32] Speaker 4: going to happen to the United States and US interests
[33:35] Speaker 4: that are entirely predictable if we were going to try
[33:38] Speaker 4: to force this issue.
[33:41] Speaker 2: That's right, and I totally agree with everything you just said.
[33:44] Speaker 2: And if the US doesn't stand for freedom, then what
[33:46] Speaker 2: does the US stand for?
[33:47] Speaker 3: Right?
[33:48] Speaker 2: I mean, we've modeled ourselves on that and being the
[33:50] Speaker 2: beacon of the free world, and now we're talking about
[33:53] Speaker 2: not only invading you know, you hear some of the
[33:55] Speaker 2: rhetoric is like if you can you you know you
[33:59] Speaker 2: should right, so might makes right or you know, as
[34:03] Speaker 2: Souciety said, the strong do what they will and we,
[34:07] Speaker 2: you know, what they must. That's not the world that
[34:10] Speaker 2: the United States has championed and led for, you know,
[34:14] Speaker 2: certainly since the end of the Second or before it,
[34:17] Speaker 2: as we went to the aid of democracies in Europe.
[34:21] Speaker 2: As far as like the consequences we'd be booted out
[34:26] Speaker 2: of Europe or booted out of NATO. Estentially, you can't
[34:29] Speaker 2: actually do that. But if we're going to get out,
[34:31] Speaker 2: it'll be a de facto booting. They'll just form their
[34:34] Speaker 2: own They'll also look at shifting economic tides. They do
[34:38] Speaker 2: have it, And I'm not an economist, so I won't
[34:40] Speaker 2: go past my writ if you will, But Europe could
[34:43] Speaker 2: do a lot of damage to the US economy, and
[34:45] Speaker 2: if we're actively fighting them again, I get Andy's point,
[34:49] Speaker 2: like maybe we should just stop talking about it because
[34:51] Speaker 2: it just adds fuel to this fire. But if we're
[34:56] Speaker 2: actively fighting them, then they're going to use every means available,
[34:58] Speaker 2: which includes what they can do to our economy. You know,
[35:02] Speaker 2: when it comes to the bond market and all of that,
[35:05] Speaker 2: it's it's gonna it's not gonna be America first. It's
[35:09] Speaker 2: going to be America alone. And we don't want that.
[35:12] Speaker 2: We have built alliances to the benefit of the United
[35:15] Speaker 2: States over the last four years. We created the world
[35:18] Speaker 2: order that we're now apparently against.
[35:23] Speaker 4: I mean, think about consequences for US basing all right
[35:27] Speaker 4: throughout three thousand troops at all. Yeah, think about what's
[35:32] Speaker 4: going to happen to uh U S treasuries two point
[35:36] Speaker 4: three trillion or whatever it is. Uh think about what's
[35:39] Speaker 4: going to happen to our access to global shipping, most
[35:42] Speaker 4: of which is owned within Europe by the Danes.
[35:45] Speaker 2: All right, marisk isn't mask.
[35:48] Speaker 4: Think think about how how are we going to how
[35:52] Speaker 4: are we going to uh uh defend I mean not
[35:57] Speaker 4: defend the United pin tanked further US interests if the
[36:03] Speaker 4: airspace of pretty much every country in Europe, not pretty much,
[36:09] Speaker 4: well maybe maybe not Russia, but every country in Europe
[36:12] Speaker 4: plus Canada closes their their their airspace to US. I mean,
[36:18] Speaker 4: these are all practical considerations, even if you don't care
[36:22] Speaker 4: about what the country stands for.
[36:26] Speaker 1: Guys, I think I think you should be. We should
[36:29] Speaker 1: be talking about this because it's not like we're adding
[36:31] Speaker 1: to the ridiculous rhetoric that's going on. I think guys
[36:36] Speaker 1: who have done worked in the US foreign policy, like
[36:39] Speaker 1: you two for a long time, should be calling out
[36:43] Speaker 1: how dumb of an idea this is full stop because
[36:47] Speaker 1: it's a dumb idea. It makes no sense.
[36:50] Speaker 2: I think.
[36:50] Speaker 4: Yeah, I think we have you know, I mean, and
[36:52] Speaker 4: we're just scratching the surface, right, Okay, all of us know,
[36:56] Speaker 4: all of us know what happens when you are by
[37:00] Speaker 4: a country, right, I mean, it's it doesn't matter. You
[37:06] Speaker 4: can have the most powerful military in the world, but
[37:08] Speaker 4: you are vulnerable when you occupy, when you actually put
[37:12] Speaker 4: boots on the ground. And you know, we're making a
[37:15] Speaker 4: big assumption that the Greenlanders are going to be happy
[37:17] Speaker 4: with this, and you're talking you're talking about an environment
[37:22] Speaker 4: that is just made for an insurgency, all right, and
[37:26] Speaker 4: you're talking about a population that's very highly armed. You know,
[37:29] Speaker 4: think about Russia's Russia's experience in Finland or indeed Ukraine.
[37:35] Speaker 2: You know, I mean, you will never be recognized. And
[37:39] Speaker 2: if you just look at the history of United States,
[37:42] Speaker 2: there's an election every four years. I mean, think about
[37:47] Speaker 2: the absurdity of violating international law, breaking a treaty, sending
[37:52] Speaker 2: military forces who would not want to go and would
[37:55] Speaker 2: be following an off or to occupy, as Edie just said,
[37:59] Speaker 2: a horrible insurgents, insurgent ridden country, and then just the
[38:04] Speaker 2: United States to say, have a new election and whoever
[38:07] Speaker 2: comes in go. That was a terrible idea. Here here
[38:10] Speaker 2: is it back. So we would gain zero and lose everything,
[38:16] Speaker 2: our reputation, our allies. And again, if it was that
[38:21] Speaker 2: big of a concern, we would have simply send troops there,
[38:25] Speaker 2: which now I'm sure they're going to be concerned if
[38:27] Speaker 2: we say out now we're going to send all these
[38:28] Speaker 2: troops there, They're going to think, Okay, this is a
[38:30] Speaker 2: slow motion occupation, right, Like what if if you're denmarket Greveland,
[38:35] Speaker 2: right Like, is this like a trojan horse kind of scenario? So,
[38:38] Speaker 2: I mean, now it's even it's even hurt. Are what
[38:42] Speaker 2: we were already allowed to do is going to be
[38:44] Speaker 2: hindered for good reason. I'm sure they're going to think, okay, now,
[38:48] Speaker 2: why do they want to send you know, all these
[38:50] Speaker 2: military forces there? And this is you know, I mean
[38:54] Speaker 2: a traditional Republican party. This is completely the opposite of
[38:59] Speaker 2: a Reagan, a walking party. And so while those that
[39:02] Speaker 2: are there that come from that era and believe they
[39:07] Speaker 2: have to show some intellectual integrity and start saying stuff now,
[39:12] Speaker 2: if you don't say anything now, then I don't even
[39:15] Speaker 2: know what you're doing up there, know what you stood for,
[39:17] Speaker 2: because I mean a lot of them in their thirty
[39:18] Speaker 2: years and this has never been on their being no
[39:21] Speaker 2: card ever, you know.
[39:25] Speaker 4: And again it gets back to the question, why, I mean,
[39:28] Speaker 4: we've got total access to Greenland. Not only that, but
[39:31] Speaker 4: Denmark funds or life support on our basis. I mean,
[39:34] Speaker 4: it's a similar deal to aladed work does the same
[39:38] Speaker 4: thing for us, you know, the electricity water, I mean,
[39:45] Speaker 4: you name it. We're not we're not paying Denmark, they're
[39:53] Speaker 4: enabling us. And you know, if even if you're not
[39:57] Speaker 4: swayed by those arguments, and this may certainly uh influenced
[40:01] Speaker 4: a number of politicians as a as a European friend
[40:03] Speaker 4: pointed out, Denmark makes a number of of I wouldn't
[40:14] Speaker 4: say medicines, but we don't they make ye, yeah, sempick, botox,
[40:22] Speaker 4: oh man Americans, right, yeah, three things that Americans are
[40:27] Speaker 4: very dependent on. Boat talks and pick and insulent.
[40:31] Speaker 1: You know what's funny though, like they don't even need
[40:33] Speaker 1: to do reciprocal tariffs on that stuff because it's already
[40:36] Speaker 1: fucking impossible to afford in America. Is just cut it off,
[40:40] Speaker 1: just medic medical anything, my joke.
[40:44] Speaker 4: Yeah, So that's why people go to Canada, right, Oh,
[40:47] Speaker 4: we can't do.
[40:47] Speaker 2: That Greenland Apparently Greenland's there. They've got a whole free
[40:52] Speaker 2: metal healthcare from Denmark. So try to beat that.
[40:55] Speaker 1: Yeah, and so god, I mean.
[41:00] Speaker 5: And you know the uh.
[41:04] Speaker 4: Mark mark polymel Popolis. Yeah, he will forgive us for
[41:14] Speaker 4: slightly mispronouncing his name, maybe because we're gonna we're going
[41:18] Speaker 4: to grandstand his views. And uh, you know, Mar's pointed
[41:21] Speaker 4: out that that even talk like this undermines our credibility
[41:28] Speaker 4: and our relationships with with intelligence agencies, with the UK
[41:34] Speaker 4: being among them, with whom we have a long and
[41:37] Speaker 4: supercal and valuable partnership. Valuable for us too, you know.
[41:42] Speaker 4: And if we're losing that credibility and it ceased to
[41:44] Speaker 4: be trusted in this exchange of intelligence, uh, that's that's
[41:50] Speaker 4: not good too. You know, these are intangible, unseen things,
[41:53] Speaker 4: but they're very real. Mick knows way more about this
[41:56] Speaker 4: than I do.
[41:58] Speaker 2: Well, that's where it all starts, right, So the sharing
[42:00] Speaker 2: of intelligence, if that's not happening then, and yes, the
[42:07] Speaker 2: United States does the majority of collection of intelligence. So
[42:10] Speaker 2: all these countries are going to have to start spending
[42:14] Speaker 2: their own resources on building their capacity, but they're going
[42:18] Speaker 2: to not want to share. And sometimes, you know, the
[42:21] Speaker 2: bulk might come from us, but that exquisite piece of
[42:23] Speaker 2: intelligence comes from one of our partners, and we want
[42:27] Speaker 2: to know it, right, So we could get to a
[42:30] Speaker 2: point where we don't know what we don't know, because
[42:33] Speaker 2: it's just not being shared and it's at the detriment
[42:36] Speaker 2: of the United States, and if that impacts things like
[42:39] Speaker 2: counter terrorism sharing, it could really impact the United States.
[42:44] Speaker 2: So also not good. And then you know, we're going
[42:49] Speaker 2: to get to a scenario, ironically, I'd say where Europe
[42:53] Speaker 2: finally wakes up, and I would agree with those that
[42:55] Speaker 2: said they haven't taken their security as seriously as they
[42:58] Speaker 2: should have, but they are now and they build an
[43:01] Speaker 2: army that is integrated, is capable, and an intelligence force
[43:04] Speaker 2: which would be a great partner to have in NATO.
[43:07] Speaker 2: Yet we've somehow excluded ourselves from NATO, so the very partners,
[43:11] Speaker 2: which means we have to spend more on our own ah,
[43:16] Speaker 2: you know, national security apparatus, defense intelligence, et cetera. Because
[43:20] Speaker 2: we won't have the partners that we have had, and
[43:23] Speaker 2: they will be capable, more capable they have been in
[43:25] Speaker 2: a long time. That's the irony.
[43:28] Speaker 1: There's funny something from a French news channel. Somebody sent
[43:31] Speaker 1: to me Ukraine intel services sent full strategic info to
[43:35] Speaker 1: US Intel services and observed that the information had been
[43:38] Speaker 1: relayed to Russia and was used by Russian forces. That's
[43:42] Speaker 1: from a French news channel. I mean, I don't know
[43:45] Speaker 1: if it's true, but I'm never served. Yeah, I never
[43:49] Speaker 1: served in the CIA or anything I've served like Hot
[43:52] Speaker 1: Wings when I owned the restaurant. But yeah, So my
[43:58] Speaker 1: assumption as a layman is that intelligence professionals are inherently
[44:03] Speaker 1: pretty suspicious, right, even with allies, Right, you're very cautious. Uh,
[44:09] Speaker 1: what's been happening over the last year or so, I
[44:12] Speaker 1: think it's I would say it's safe to assume that
[44:15] Speaker 1: they're already not sharing intelligence with us.
[44:19] Speaker 2: Well, I mean if that, if that's actually accurate, or
[44:22] Speaker 2: if there's stuff that we don't see that haven't been
[44:24] Speaker 2: reported it's accurate, then yes, I mean, your intelligence is
[44:26] Speaker 2: as good and at least a human as your as
[44:28] Speaker 2: your asset, and your asset ain't gonna trust you if
[44:32] Speaker 2: they compromise.
[44:32] Speaker 1: So it is.
[44:33] Speaker 4: It is.
[44:34] Speaker 2: It is like rule number one and human intelligence services,
[44:37] Speaker 2: you predict your asset at all costs, even if it's uh,
[44:40] Speaker 2: you know, detriment to you, the uh, the actual case officer. Right,
[44:47] Speaker 2: So if that's if that's the case, they're gonna stop
[44:49] Speaker 2: sharing information with us. And if it was past to
[44:51] Speaker 2: the Russians, I mean that is you want to do
[44:54] Speaker 2: a counterintelligence investigation that should be on top of your list. Again,
[44:58] Speaker 2: I don't know if it's true, sure, but you know, hypothetically.
[45:02] Speaker 1: So to speak, Micky, I mean you're I mean, I
[45:05] Speaker 1: feel like you would probably be on a short list
[45:07] Speaker 1: to be a deputy director or director of CIA at
[45:09] Speaker 1: some point. Right, You're a seasoned intelligence professional. If you
[45:13] Speaker 1: were running an intelligence agency and a partner was acting
[45:18] Speaker 1: like this, would you want to share information with them?
[45:23] Speaker 2: I wouldn't share if this is accurate under the hypothetical.
[45:26] Speaker 1: No, no, no, I'm just saying how shared, how this
[45:30] Speaker 1: is going? Forget the French news report how it's going
[45:35] Speaker 1: generally over the last year or so. With this kind
[45:38] Speaker 1: of rhetoric, I mean, would you tell your guys be like, yo,
[45:41] Speaker 1: you have like it should be case by case in
[45:43] Speaker 1: terms of like sharing this even more you know, like
[45:46] Speaker 1: it's probably case by case anyway, But.
[45:50] Speaker 5: You know, the it's got me up.
[45:53] Speaker 2: The issue with intelligence sharing is you generally don't know
[45:55] Speaker 2: what you don't know, so they don't know what you're
[45:57] Speaker 2: not sharing. So you could will maintain a relationship with
[46:01] Speaker 2: us but still and not share, because you see, you
[46:05] Speaker 2: get my point. Yeah, the other the other is we
[46:07] Speaker 2: might be getting tested by other like long term even
[46:11] Speaker 2: five eyes, you know, the the Brits might be given
[46:14] Speaker 2: us information and then trying to see if it turns
[46:16] Speaker 2: up back where they got it. You know, if like
[46:19] Speaker 2: is it getting compromised? And if that happens, once it's over,
[46:26] Speaker 2: they're not going to share anymore. I mean, you don't
[46:28] Speaker 2: have to be half served in the agency to know
[46:30] Speaker 2: which you do. It's it's common sense. And that's a
[46:34] Speaker 2: very troubling a set of events.
[46:39] Speaker 4: It's a very fragile thing too, Isn't it make trust
[46:44] Speaker 4: is when it comes to intelligence sharing. I mean, think
[46:48] Speaker 4: about the offt them off of the second one wall,
[46:53] Speaker 4: the c I A. You know, it depends on what
[46:57] Speaker 4: accounts you read. But they they started to deliberately isolate
[47:04] Speaker 4: themselves from m I six because of I remember there
[47:10] Speaker 4: was a whole rash of of insiders within m I six,
[47:17] Speaker 4: notably four very prominent guys. But but but that had
[47:22] Speaker 4: effects that lasted for decades. And and then I imagine
[47:26] Speaker 4: too when Aldridge ames, you know, one of the I mean,
[47:30] Speaker 4: and you're you're an insider, I've just I you know,
[47:34] Speaker 4: I just read about aims from outside I can. I
[47:38] Speaker 4: can't imagine the catastrophic effect that had within the agency,
[47:43] Speaker 4: but also within the agency's partnership with you know, with allies,
[47:48] Speaker 4: and to your point that who knows what followed, but
[47:52] Speaker 4: but undoubtedly that that left a legacy that that the
[47:56] Speaker 4: agency is probably just getting over now. You know, these
[47:59] Speaker 4: things are getting A trust takes forever to build up
[48:02] Speaker 4: and it can be destroyed in a.
[48:04] Speaker 2: In a nanosecond insecond. That's that's a good rule in
[48:08] Speaker 2: life in general, but certainly in the intelligence services.
[48:14] Speaker 4: Yeah, when you know, because then Ames is a good
[48:18] Speaker 4: topic because he just died, right, I mean, the agency
[48:23] Speaker 4: isn't going to come out and say, hey, this is
[48:25] Speaker 4: how much pain he caused us. But people were executed,
[48:29] Speaker 4: agents disappeared for years. He was you know, he was
[48:34] Speaker 4: feeding the Russians information about who they were. And so
[48:38] Speaker 4: it wasn't just the fact that we lost those agents.
[48:41] Speaker 4: It's it's compounded years of false intelligence that was probably
[48:45] Speaker 4: that were fed to those guys with who knows what consequences.
[48:49] Speaker 4: The ramifications are huge, just like cancer.
[48:54] Speaker 2: Just like cancer, remember that guy that was a guy
[48:56] Speaker 2: that was actually accused of that turned out to be
[48:59] Speaker 2: hands and obviously and had to endure like just a horrible,
[49:05] Speaker 2: horrible situation until he was cleared, and a priest friend
[49:09] Speaker 2: of mine stuck by him the whole time, and his
[49:14] Speaker 2: dad in the priest friend of mine, his dad was OSS,
[49:18] Speaker 2: made the transition from OSS to CIA, but he had
[49:22] Speaker 2: total faith in him. Literally and as a side note,
[49:28] Speaker 2: he got to and then the the agency publicly acknowledged
[49:33] Speaker 2: that they were and literally brought him back into the fold.
[49:36] Speaker 2: And my friend, the padre as we call them, got
[49:40] Speaker 2: to be standing right next to him when they did so. Yeah, destroys,
[49:45] Speaker 2: it destroys, It destroys a lot of faith. It is
[49:49] Speaker 2: a it is a not just called this call to
[49:51] Speaker 2: human intelligence. It's a very human endeavor and and trust
[49:56] Speaker 2: is everything when it comes to the collection of clandestine intelligence.
[50:02] Speaker 1: Make just to call back to your point about, you know,
[50:06] Speaker 1: unlawful orders, like unlawful things. I don't think the administration
[50:13] Speaker 1: really gives a fuck about unlawful orders. Presently going to
[50:18] Speaker 1: be you are issuing unlawful orders. They're in contempt of
[50:23] Speaker 1: Congress as we speak right now. There's a bipartisan bill
[50:27] Speaker 1: that passed that they have not followed through on. It
[50:30] Speaker 1: was called the Epstein Transparency Act. So I don't think
[50:34] Speaker 1: because there's no mechanism to like, they're not going to
[50:36] Speaker 1: impeach him, they're not going to remove them. Even if
[50:41] Speaker 1: they were to go into Greenland. There were some talks
[50:43] Speaker 1: that like some Republican lawmakers would impeach and convict. It's
[50:48] Speaker 1: not happened. So there's no actual check on the executive
[50:54] Speaker 1: branch at present. So I don't think they mind about
[50:58] Speaker 1: unlawful is sure?
[51:01] Speaker 2: Right? They could do what you just said, and at
[51:04] Speaker 2: least from my understanding from media reports, there would be
[51:08] Speaker 2: a willingness to cut off all funding for any operation
[51:12] Speaker 2: and that would pass with a supermajority that he could
[51:15] Speaker 2: not veto. So there is legal mechanisms in our system,
[51:19] Speaker 2: which is based on checks and balances, separation powers to
[51:23] Speaker 2: do that. And of course the final I don't think
[51:27] Speaker 2: we get here. The final thing was the military refusing.
[51:32] Speaker 3: Yeah, you think they would if I do. It's a
[51:39] Speaker 3: toprnado ally it's great, it's bad ship.
[51:42] Speaker 4: Yeah, uh, it's theodical I posted in chat not now,
[51:49] Speaker 4: but sure, it's yeah. I mean, I you know, at
[51:55] Speaker 4: the end of the day, I mean, we've had this
[51:58] Speaker 4: is a very dark discussion, right that we have to have.
[52:01] Speaker 4: But at the end of the day, you can call
[52:03] Speaker 4: me naive, but I believe in the American system of
[52:07] Speaker 4: government and checks and balances, and I believe that you know,
[52:12] Speaker 4: the right people will, the right voices will come into prominence.
[52:18] Speaker 2: Okay.
[52:18] Speaker 4: I believe in the role of the role the Senate
[52:21] Speaker 4: is this, you know, the Senior Chamber, and the ultimate
[52:24] Speaker 4: check is a is a real one. And yes, it
[52:28] Speaker 4: comes down to the individual moral courage of each senator.
[52:31] Speaker 4: But I think there are enough good people, men and
[52:34] Speaker 4: women in that chamber that that right will triumph, common
[52:39] Speaker 4: sense will triumph, and then we won't have to get
[52:41] Speaker 4: to a point where we're talking about whether or not
[52:43] Speaker 4: the military disobeys orders.
[52:47] Speaker 2: Yeah, we don't want to get there. This isn't about
[52:50] Speaker 2: trying to pit the military against the commander and chief.
[52:52] Speaker 2: That should never even be a topic of discussion. I
[52:56] Speaker 2: don't think we'll get there.
[53:00] Speaker 1: Uh yeah, most I mean crazy stuff. We'll see what happens.
[53:05] Speaker 1: You want to touch on Venezuela real quick. Machado just
[53:08] Speaker 1: popped into the White House this last week, gave Trump
[53:11] Speaker 1: her Mobile Peace Prize. CIA director, visited of Venezuela and
[53:16] Speaker 1: met with Delsa Rodriguez, and I'm sure more higher ups
[53:20] Speaker 1: in the current you know, amalgamation of the regime. Where
[53:25] Speaker 1: do we sit with that? Do you think now we're
[53:26] Speaker 1: going to get an endorsement of Delaves of Maria Machado
[53:32] Speaker 1: from Trump because he got the Nobel Peace Prize.
[53:35] Speaker 2: Well, I don't know about the reception of the getting
[53:38] Speaker 2: the new About Peace Prize. Of course, you can't transfer that.
[53:41] Speaker 2: It's just a it's just an odd object. It's not
[53:45] Speaker 2: the actual prize.
[53:46] Speaker 4: Right.
[53:47] Speaker 2: But I would say from Machado's perspective, she just wants
[53:50] Speaker 2: to be allowed to sit for an election and lead
[53:55] Speaker 2: to people of Venezuela. Wish if it was done lawfully.
[53:58] Speaker 2: In twenty twenty four, she'd be there, right. She won
[54:00] Speaker 2: the primary like by eighty percent, and then she wasn't
[54:04] Speaker 2: allowed to run in the generals to her stand in
[54:06] Speaker 2: in Mundo, Gonzalez won by like seventy some percent. So
[54:10] Speaker 2: in the United States recognizes them as the opposition, as
[54:13] Speaker 2: the lawful government, not the remnants of the Duro regime.
[54:19] Speaker 2: I understand the point, like you can't just parachute miss
[54:24] Speaker 2: Machado into Venezuela. But we do have as the Secretary
[54:30] Speaker 2: of State, I think rightfully says a lot of influence
[54:32] Speaker 2: because we're control of their oil, which I like fund
[54:34] Speaker 2: the government. So we can use that same influence to say,
[54:37] Speaker 2: you're going to have a transition, You're going to have
[54:39] Speaker 2: an election, it's going to be internationally monitored, and the
[54:42] Speaker 2: winner is going to be the winner.
[54:44] Speaker 1: Right.
[54:44] Speaker 2: We could use our influence for that to get that,
[54:47] Speaker 2: and I think ultimately that will be in the interest
[54:50] Speaker 2: obviously of Venezuela to choose their government, but also in
[54:55] Speaker 2: the United States, because a democratically elected government is going
[54:58] Speaker 2: to be much more inclined and hopefully to be partnered
[55:01] Speaker 2: with the United States and not China, Russian around, right,
[55:04] Speaker 2: and it's going to be much more into the free market,
[55:07] Speaker 2: not socialists or whatever version they are, of controlling all
[55:11] Speaker 2: of the natural resources of their country for their own
[55:13] Speaker 2: benefit government benefit, not the people, and allowing private companies
[55:19] Speaker 2: US preferred. That'd be great, So I think the two
[55:23] Speaker 2: are actually aligned. I don't know. I'd want to keep
[55:26] Speaker 2: a government that we used as a reason to get
[55:29] Speaker 2: Maduro as it was illegitimate government. The legality of getting Madurea,
[55:35] Speaker 2: which I think we made a decent case for and
[55:38] Speaker 2: I have no problem with capture Maduro, but if we're
[55:41] Speaker 2: going to use the same logic, then we should want
[55:44] Speaker 2: to see his actual regime exit stage left. Understand it
[55:50] Speaker 2: has to be a transition to do that, but that
[55:53] Speaker 2: should be with the United States uses its influence and
[55:55] Speaker 2: leverage over to do nothing.
[56:02] Speaker 4: To add Nick worded it beautifully, thanks man, and brought
[56:06] Speaker 4: us very very neatly up to the top of the hour.
[56:10] Speaker 1: Yeah, just what you get.
[56:13] Speaker 4: This is what you get when you bring in a
[56:15] Speaker 4: professional media personality, seefessional yapper.
[56:22] Speaker 1: All right, so we'll see what happens. I think it's
[56:24] Speaker 1: wishful thinking. I think this administration will only go with
[56:27] Speaker 1: who gives them the better of deal. Going to be
[56:29] Speaker 1: completely frank with you, I would love to see democratic,
[56:34] Speaker 1: free elections in Venezuela and everywhere. That'd be great, But
[56:40] Speaker 1: you know, I would also liked a lot of things.
[56:42] Speaker 1: I'd like to be fifty pounds lighter and six inches taller. Sorry,
[56:50] Speaker 1: I know I'm a snarky prick. I know I apologize
[56:53] Speaker 1: height is overrated, as she Hi, thank you, Andy.
[56:57] Speaker 4: You know that's an interesting point though we say height
[57:01] Speaker 4: is over it. Make out toll of you.
[57:04] Speaker 2: I think I peaked at six to one. I think
[57:06] Speaker 2: I'm going the other directions, genuine height going on.
[57:09] Speaker 4: Yeah, yeah, but yeah, I've read an article recently that
[57:14] Speaker 4: it actually does have a greater influence on your life
[57:18] Speaker 4: trajectory than you may think and question that people are
[57:22] Speaker 4: definitely we used to say in the Marine Corps that
[57:24] Speaker 4: if you were a big, good looking guy, you know,
[57:27] Speaker 4: with a and you kept your hair within rags and
[57:31] Speaker 4: polished your boots in the days when we had boots,
[57:33] Speaker 4: you would make lieutenant colonel at least. And it didn't
[57:36] Speaker 4: matter how how ridiculously stupid you were, you were going
[57:40] Speaker 4: to move as you repeat here, Yeah.
[57:45] Speaker 1: Yeah, I'm fairly convinced if I was six three.
[57:49] Speaker 2: My homo mat.
[57:50] Speaker 4: But I've got to say that I've definitely mat short
[57:53] Speaker 4: guys that do pretty well. Yeah, but when short guys
[57:58] Speaker 4: do well, it's on the basis of talent, right and exactly.
[58:03] Speaker 4: And I've definitely met guys who are in positions of
[58:07] Speaker 4: authority where you're thinking, I mean, and they feel that
[58:11] Speaker 4: they meet all those criteria that I just described, but
[58:13] Speaker 4: they've got nothing else, you know, they are definitely CORRA
[58:19] Speaker 4: is not the only organization that promotes them beyond their capability.
[58:23] Speaker 2: So I point that way. That's Canada. It's like forty
[58:25] Speaker 2: minutes that way. So Carney is apparently just talking to
[58:28] Speaker 2: somebody about pretty small guy and that guy's crushing it. Yeah,
[58:32] Speaker 2: the Prime Minister.
[58:34] Speaker 1: Yeah, he's on a world tour, right, yeah.
[58:36] Speaker 4: Yeah, I mean I think you know, I think it.
[58:39] Speaker 4: So the flip side of that is that if you
[58:43] Speaker 4: if you are short, I don't count myself as short,
[58:46] Speaker 4: you know, I mean, I've always said average. I can't
[58:48] Speaker 4: bring myself to use that term short. But if you are,
[58:52] Speaker 4: you know, if you're if you're not getting vertigo from
[58:57] Speaker 4: always having to look down on people from a lofty height,
[58:59] Speaker 4: it does. I think it does act as a catalyst, right,
[59:03] Speaker 4: because you've got to prove yourself in other ways.
[59:07] Speaker 2: My favorite make sense.
[59:10] Speaker 1: You for this discussion on Mick doesn't know the plight
[59:14] Speaker 1: of vertically challenged people. Six foot one Captain America. All right, guys,
[59:24] Speaker 1: this is great. I want you guys to do me
[59:25] Speaker 1: a favor. Check out the Intelligent Summit that's going on
[59:29] Speaker 1: in Whitefish.
[59:31] Speaker 4: Uh.
[59:31] Speaker 1: The link is in the description if you're interested. Mick
[59:34] Speaker 1: Mulroy's got a great podcast called The pub in the
[59:36] Speaker 1: porch applied stoicism. Check that out. Those links ares in
[59:39] Speaker 1: the description as well. Andy Milburn links are all in
[59:42] Speaker 1: the description When the Tempest Gathered incredible book. More stuff
[59:46] Speaker 1: coming out soon I'm excited about. So we keep an
[59:50] Speaker 1: eye out for that. And the best place to support
[59:52] Speaker 1: the show is Patreon, Patreon dot com slash the Teamhouse.
[59:56] Speaker 1: You get both Teamhouse and eyes On episodes at free
[59:59] Speaker 1: and early and you help sport the show. Guys. As
[1:00:03] Speaker 1: always a pleasure.
[1:00:05] Speaker 2: Thanks jan Hey everyone tells yep.
[1:00:10] Speaker 5: Hey, guys. I want to tell all of you today
[1:00:11] Speaker 5: about a new newsletter that we're launching that encompasses both
[1:00:15] Speaker 5: the Teamhouse podcast, the eyes On podcast, and the high
[1:00:19] Speaker 5: Side news outlet, which I run with Sean Naylor. The
[1:00:24] Speaker 5: newsletter is gonna be once a week. It's gonna come
[1:00:26] Speaker 5: into your inbox and you're gonna get the most current
[1:00:29] Speaker 5: podcasts on eyes On and the Teamhouse and whatever's topical
[1:00:35] Speaker 5: or current on the high Side. So it's another way
[1:00:37] Speaker 5: for us to get the information out to you as
[1:00:39] Speaker 5: social media algorithms are pretty iffy and you never really
[1:00:43] Speaker 5: know what you're gonna get. So this is a once
[1:00:45] Speaker 5: a week email. It'll slide into your inbox and it
[1:00:48] Speaker 5: will have you know the greatest hits of that week.
[1:00:50] Speaker 5: It's really good. Ran checking it out. The website for
[1:00:55] Speaker 5: it is Teamhouse podcast, dot kit dot com, slash Join,
[1:00:59] Speaker 5: Teamhow Podcast dot kit dot com slash Join.
[1:01:03] Speaker 4: Uh.
[1:01:03] Speaker 5: You go there and you enter into your email list
[1:01:06] Speaker 5: or you enter your email into the little thing on
[1:01:09] Speaker 5: the website and you're good to go. And that'll be it.
[1:01:13] Speaker 5: So we really appreciate your support and I hope you'll
[1:01:15] Speaker 5: consider signing up.
[1:01:17] Speaker 2: Where's the link.
[1:01:18] Speaker 5: The link will also be down the description if you're
[1:01:21] Speaker 5: looking for it there and that's Teamhouse Podcast, dot Kit,
[1:01:25] Speaker 5: k I, t Kilo India, Tango dot com backslash Join

Shows are listed from Apple Podcasts' charts and directory, and Podcast Index where it is used. Every show and episode belongs to its publisher and plays from the publisher's own feed; this site hosts none of them.