# Ukraine Is Breaking Russia’s War Machine | EYES ON GEOPOLITICS

An episode of [The Team House](https://invisiblenetwork.ai/podcast/1492797340), 29 Jun 2026, 57 min.

Audio: https://dts.podtrac.com/redirect.mp3/pscrb.fm/rss/p/clrtpod.com/m/api.spreaker.com/download/episode/72730305/ukraine_russia_spreaker.mp3

This week we break down the collapse of the Iran ceasefire talks, the escalating tit-for-tat strikes between Tehran and Washington, the fight over the Strait of Hormuz, and why the current MOU may be far more fragile than it appears. We also dive into the war in Ukraine, Russia's growing military and economic problems, the future of NATO support, and what these developments could mean for the broader geopolitical landscape GhostBed ⬇️ https://www.ghostbed.com/team FOR 10% off! Support the show on Patreon:⬇️ https://www.patreon.com/TheTeamHouse Marc's new article: https://engelsbergideas.com/author/sam-worby-marc-polymeropoulos/ Subscribe to our newsletter!!!! https://teamhousepodcast.kit.com/join Jack's news outlet:⬇️ https://thehighside.substack.com/ Find Jon Hackett here:⬇️ Jon's Twitter: https://x.com/jonathanhackett Jon's LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/thejonathanhackett Jon's books: https://www.amazon.com/stores/author/B0C5L659N5?ccs_id=e11a2062-f8d3-498e-bfd7-7d2f3869caf6 Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/thejonathanhackett Twitter: https://x.com/jonathanhackett 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/ Whitefish security summit ⬇️ https://whitefishsecuritysummit.com Find Marc P here: https://x.com/Mpolymer 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 01:13 — Iran-U.S. Strikes and the Ceasefire Falling Apart 02:43 — Israel-Lebanon Deal and Hezbollah’s Role 03:58 — CENTCOM’s Alternate Route Through Hormuz 05:20 — Why the U.S. Should Stop Giving Iran Financial Incentives 07:58 — Could an International Coalition Reopen the Strait? 09:06 — Why Any Iran Deal May Be Built on Shaky Ground 12:46 — A UN-Backed Hormuz Coalition? 17:33 — Oil Prices, Futures Markets, and the Real Risk Still Ahead 21:01 — Would the U.S. Really Pull Forces Away From Iran? 24:05 — The MOU’s Impossible Terms 25:51 — Why Public Negotiations Make the Deal Harder 27:43 — Trump’s Rhetoric and the Iran Negotiation Dynamic 32:20 — The Broken NSC Process and Bad Foreign Policy Planning 36:57 — Ukraine Starts Hitting Deeper Inside Russia 38:22 — Russia’s Meat Grinder Is Running Out of Meat 43:04 — Poland, the Baltics, and Russia’s Influence Operations 47:22 — Russia’s Fuel Shortages and Ukraine’s Oil Infrastructure Campaign 49:26 — General Donahue Pushed Out of Europe 52:35 — Final Thoughts and Closing Plugs Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-team-house--5960890/support.

## Transcript

[0:00] Speaker 1: Everybody, Welcome to another episode of Eyes on Geopolitics. I'm
[0:03] Speaker 1: here with Jonathan Hackett, Mick mulroy might be joined by
[0:06] Speaker 1: Andy Milburn.
[0:07] Speaker 2: Fingers crossed per usual, a lot.
[0:12] Speaker 1: Happening, dizzying as ever we left off yet last week,
[0:15] Speaker 1: Vance and Kushner and Wikoff were gonna meet in Switzerland
[0:19] Speaker 1: with the Iranian delegation to supposedly hammer out what comes
[0:24] Speaker 1: next during the sixty day ceasefire. Obviously that's not exactly happening.
[0:29] Speaker 1: Over the last week, there's been the Iranians hit a
[0:33] Speaker 1: couple of commercial ships with some drones. We knocked down
[0:36] Speaker 1: a drone out of the sky, and then we and
[0:39] Speaker 1: then we hit areas in southern Iran. Iran then shot
[0:46] Speaker 1: might I might begin the timeline wrong, but like Iran
[0:48] Speaker 1: shot drones and ballistic missiles like Kuwait and Bahrain. So
[0:52] Speaker 1: it very much doesn't seem like there's a ceasefire anymore.
[0:55] Speaker 1: Israel and Lebanon made a deal. I don't know if
[0:59] Speaker 1: hesbaal A is a exactly game for this deal doesn't
[1:01] Speaker 1: sound like it. So there's a lot to be, a
[1:05] Speaker 1: lot to be said. I mean, where are you guys
[1:07] Speaker 1: track and what are you guys looking at a hacket,
[1:10] Speaker 1: you can go first.
[1:12] Speaker 3: Well, it seems that the strikes back and forth between
[1:15] Speaker 3: Iran and the United States are different than they were
[1:17] Speaker 3: obviously during the war, which was you know, kind of
[1:18] Speaker 3: an unrestrained military operation at that time, and now it's
[1:21] Speaker 3: more tit for tat, which is actually very similar to
[1:24] Speaker 3: what it looked like back in twenty nineteen, twenty twenty
[1:26] Speaker 3: around the custom Solo money strike. If people remember that
[1:29] Speaker 3: time period, there's a lot of escalation in November and
[1:31] Speaker 3: December leading up to that back and forth, increasing each time,
[1:36] Speaker 3: and we kind of see something very similar right now,
[1:38] Speaker 3: which is a little bit more choreographed in my opinion,
[1:40] Speaker 3: or at least telegraphed. These are not intended to cause
[1:43] Speaker 3: wide scale damage or destruction to either side. Instead, they're
[1:46] Speaker 3: a messaging opportunity for each side to demonstrate to the
[1:50] Speaker 3: other that there is resolve. And this is a key
[1:52] Speaker 3: component of deterrence, you know. Deterrence requires that the other
[1:55] Speaker 3: side believes that the threat is credible and the threat
[1:58] Speaker 3: needs to be public believe to know the threat exists,
[2:01] Speaker 3: and so we kind of see that playing out right now.
[2:03] Speaker 3: That's why these strikes are so small precise, specific on
[2:09] Speaker 3: very narrow targets, and not continuing after each one occurs.
[2:13] Speaker 3: So I think that's how the best way to probably
[2:15] Speaker 3: read that is a military extension or an operational extension
[2:19] Speaker 3: of the discussions going on in Switzerland to demonstrate both
[2:22] Speaker 3: sides to each other that they're serious in both directions,
[2:25] Speaker 3: serious about negotiating, but also serious about what happens if
[2:29] Speaker 3: negotiations fall apart, and they have to both feel that
[2:31] Speaker 3: they can keep up the reality that that's true on
[2:34] Speaker 3: both sides.
[2:34] Speaker 1: Make you there, Yeah, go ahead, go ahead, yeah yeah.
[2:40] Speaker 4: So I'll start with some positive So obviously there was
[2:46] Speaker 4: a signing of a ceasefire agreement between Israel and Lebanon.
[2:53] Speaker 4: I'd agree that Hesba is the problem here, but it
[2:58] Speaker 4: on the positive front, it does specify the need to
[3:04] Speaker 4: disarm Hezbola and get Hezbola above the Tawny River, which
[3:08] Speaker 4: is required by UN resolution anyway, And I think it
[3:12] Speaker 4: does recognize that the key factor in this is also
[3:16] Speaker 4: already in proxy. Right, So although Iran is demanding the
[3:22] Speaker 4: stabilization of the Middle East, Iran is also the biggest
[3:26] Speaker 4: destabilizing factor in the Middle East. It's kind of like,
[3:30] Speaker 4: you know, starting the fire and then demanding it be
[3:33] Speaker 4: put out, and then somehow taking credit for at least
[3:36] Speaker 4: the parts of the fire that put out. But on
[3:39] Speaker 4: the positive side, I think that was a good thing,
[3:41] Speaker 4: and that's off the Secretary of Rubio for getting it
[3:45] Speaker 4: to where it is. The other positive I would say
[3:50] Speaker 4: is there does seem to be an attempt now led
[3:53] Speaker 4: by Sadcom to create an alternative path through the Strait
[3:58] Speaker 4: of Hormuse. It's obviously closer to go on that said,
[4:02] Speaker 4: so that they can mitigate against this unwillingness by Iron
[4:08] Speaker 4: to give up control of the strait, which they clearly
[4:11] Speaker 4: are not clearly and have no intention. However, I'm told
[4:17] Speaker 4: by people who I am both served in the US
[4:21] Speaker 4: Navy and are familiar with transitting there and in a
[4:25] Speaker 4: commercial capacity that it would only be available to use
[4:30] Speaker 4: for outflow. Don't know why that's the case. If there's
[4:34] Speaker 4: somebody that knows. I had to jump off the call
[4:36] Speaker 4: with them, so I didn't get the details of why
[4:38] Speaker 4: that's the case. But he said that that path out
[4:42] Speaker 4: is could get the five hundred plus ships that are stuck,
[4:46] Speaker 4: but it can't be used I think in mass for inflow.
[4:51] Speaker 4: If that's the case, it'd be interesting to hear exactly
[4:54] Speaker 4: why maybe I'll give my friend a lot to this
[4:57] Speaker 4: I get. But anyway, so that's somewhat positive. Negative is
[5:01] Speaker 4: it looks like to me that Aron has no interest
[5:04] Speaker 4: in even doing any part of the MoU except for
[5:08] Speaker 4: take money. So I don't know how much we've given
[5:11] Speaker 4: away already, but my advocacy would be stop, don't give
[5:16] Speaker 4: them any more money, don't allow them make any more money,
[5:19] Speaker 4: don't give them any more on frozen access, and stop
[5:23] Speaker 4: talking about three hundred billion, which seems I don't even
[5:27] Speaker 4: know why that was ever the case. They need to
[5:31] Speaker 4: preserve that capacity, that carot if you will, for an ironclad, verifiable,
[5:39] Speaker 4: more restrictive JCPOA period, because if we give all this upfront,
[5:46] Speaker 4: it's just basic negotiations, right, they're going to have little
[5:50] Speaker 4: to no incentive to enter another agreement. And everything they're
[5:53] Speaker 4: saying says they're not going to enter an agreement that's
[5:56] Speaker 4: more restrictive than the JCPOA they're saying, I mean, Poseskan
[5:59] Speaker 4: came out said we are never going to give.
[6:02] Speaker 2: Up in Richmond.
[6:03] Speaker 4: Well, I'm not going to give up in Richmond. You're
[6:05] Speaker 4: not going to get a more restrictive JCPOI, because it
[6:08] Speaker 4: was already pretty restricted, you know, in there. So I
[6:11] Speaker 4: would say stop any money going to them, potentially get
[6:15] Speaker 4: ready because we still have the assets in place to blockade.
[6:18] Speaker 4: Because they have not done anything anything that they were
[6:22] Speaker 4: supposed to do under this agreement, which was very little
[6:26] Speaker 4: open the straight same statuses for the war, they have
[6:29] Speaker 4: not done. So I think we're in solid footing to say, well, well,
[6:34] Speaker 4: then you're not getting into the benefits and until we
[6:37] Speaker 4: get through this nuclear discussions and we find out whether
[6:42] Speaker 4: you're legitimately genuinely negotiating or you're just stalling to the
[6:47] Speaker 4: end of this administration, which I think many people think
[6:50] Speaker 4: they're doing. You're not getting any financial incentive. In fact,
[6:54] Speaker 4: we're going to reimpose sanctions. We're going to put more sanctions,
[6:57] Speaker 4: and then I'm in with this, and i'd be true
[7:00] Speaker 4: to hear both your comments on this. There is a
[7:02] Speaker 4: lot more discussions when I am talking, particularly on foreign media,
[7:07] Speaker 4: of other countries being willing to join a coalition to
[7:10] Speaker 4: open force open the strait. I don't know if they
[7:14] Speaker 4: necessarily in the European countries specifically, I don't know if
[7:17] Speaker 4: they necessarily mean use ground forces, but willing to contribute
[7:21] Speaker 4: mind clearing, you know capabilities. Many countries like Germany for example,
[7:28] Speaker 4: have that capability. There's two standing groups in NATO for example,
[7:32] Speaker 4: but there's more of a willingness to go. Okay, didn't
[7:35] Speaker 4: agree with the war, wasn't asked about the war. But
[7:38] Speaker 4: the Strait is international and it affects my people as
[7:42] Speaker 4: much as it affects the Americans. I have to do something.
[7:46] Speaker 4: I'm speaking as if I was a leader of one
[7:48] Speaker 4: of these countries. So I think there is I think
[7:51] Speaker 4: there's a growing potential that other countries could become involved
[7:56] Speaker 4: because of the Strait. We'll have to see what that means.
[8:02] Speaker 3: Yeah, I think Japan is actually a key you know,
[8:04] Speaker 3: non European partner in this because they have mind clearing capabilities,
[8:08] Speaker 3: and they also have operational experience not only in the
[8:10] Speaker 3: Straight Area but in the Red Sea, so from south
[8:13] Speaker 3: to north, all along the eastern part of the Arabian Peninsula.
[8:16] Speaker 3: Their ships have sailed recently on counter piracy missions in
[8:20] Speaker 3: an integrated capacity with the not only the UK Maritime Organization,
[8:24] Speaker 3: but also the Combined Maritime Task Force, which is dozens
[8:27] Speaker 3: and dozens of countries working together. So I think Japan
[8:30] Speaker 3: would definitely be a key part of that, especially because
[8:33] Speaker 3: Japan is suffering from this conflict just like everyone else obviously,
[8:36] Speaker 3: but in particular because of the energy squeeze on Japan,
[8:39] Speaker 3: on their economy, So there is an incentive for them
[8:42] Speaker 3: to want to participate, not just you know, morally, but
[8:45] Speaker 3: economically as well. For the Japanese industrial capacity that's an
[8:49] Speaker 3: acute problem for them. But also going back to the
[8:52] Speaker 3: agreement that you're talking about, Mick, there's a fundamental flaw
[8:55] Speaker 3: in this agreement. No matter how brilliant this agreement comes,
[8:59] Speaker 3: even if let's say the ideal situation happens and it
[9:01] Speaker 3: suddenly flops, it flip flops over into this overwhelmingly positive
[9:05] Speaker 3: thing for the United States and overwhelmingly negative for Iran.
[9:08] Speaker 3: It's an executive agreement, not a treaty, and that means,
[9:12] Speaker 3: just like the JCPOA, the next president could come in,
[9:15] Speaker 3: crumple it up and throw it away, and you have
[9:18] Speaker 3: to put yourself in the mind of the other side
[9:20] Speaker 3: of the table. They know that, so they're worried about
[9:24] Speaker 3: you know, even if this deal turns out and they
[9:26] Speaker 3: get the three hundred billion, everything's great for Iran. That
[9:29] Speaker 3: could all go away and get pulled away immediately. So
[9:31] Speaker 3: if you're thinking like that pragmatically, you'd have to be
[9:33] Speaker 3: setting up some kind of background structures to protect yourself
[9:37] Speaker 3: in the case that your negotiating counterpart pulls the rug
[9:40] Speaker 3: out from under you. And that goes exactly to what
[9:43] Speaker 3: Possession's talking about with the enrichment. It would be unwise
[9:47] Speaker 3: for them to stop enrichment even with this agreement, But
[9:50] Speaker 3: it'd be even more unwise knowing that the agreement itself
[9:53] Speaker 3: is on flimsy ground and will likely be changed in
[9:57] Speaker 3: the next presidency. Even if a Republican comes in, it
[9:59] Speaker 3: will still likely be changed because the current agreement is
[10:02] Speaker 3: not popular with some of the Republican party. So it's
[10:04] Speaker 3: possible that.
[10:05] Speaker 4: No matter who the Secretary of Rubio right exactly doesn't
[10:08] Speaker 4: look yeah, so no matter who comes in is yeah exactly.
[10:11] Speaker 3: No matter who comes in, it's going to get shaken
[10:13] Speaker 3: up and changed in a negative way, probably to Iran
[10:15] Speaker 3: and so in they're thinking about that. They're saying, what
[10:17] Speaker 3: structures can we set up behind the scenes so that
[10:19] Speaker 3: if and when this does happen, we're ready to survive again,
[10:23] Speaker 3: to continue surviving. They're not stupid. We've seen this. They've
[10:26] Speaker 3: demonstrated forethought, significant forethought over decades. Again we mentioned this
[10:30] Speaker 3: last episode. Some of the guys sitting at that table,
[10:33] Speaker 3: like Aragchi themselves, have sat at the table with Americans
[10:36] Speaker 3: in the last twenty years every single time. So these
[10:38] Speaker 3: are experienced negotiators. They've felt what it feels like when
[10:41] Speaker 3: the US decides to renag on a major agreement. They
[10:45] Speaker 3: won't allow themselves to be left out in the cold ever,
[10:48] Speaker 3: and I don't think they ever have. They've always been
[10:50] Speaker 3: preparing to be betrayed by the by the other side.
[10:52] Speaker 3: I mean, it's in their ideology that you can't trust
[10:54] Speaker 3: the West, you can't trust Israel and all this like
[10:56] Speaker 3: that's built into their ideology. So even if the agreement
[10:59] Speaker 3: was pure, and they still wouldn't believe it. So you
[11:02] Speaker 3: have to expect that they're setting things up in the background,
[11:04] Speaker 3: and we, as pragmatic thinkers in the US government, especially
[11:08] Speaker 3: on the intel side, have to be thinking about what
[11:10] Speaker 3: things are just in case this agreement doesn't happen. And
[11:15] Speaker 3: a lot of those things look like surrogate forces, special
[11:18] Speaker 3: ways of using the economy to continue having access to cash,
[11:22] Speaker 3: the ability to keep the shadow Fleet going because right
[11:24] Speaker 3: now we've removed a lot of the restrictions on their
[11:27] Speaker 3: ability to ship oil, So we're allowing them to make
[11:29] Speaker 3: money off of the oil that we have said was
[11:30] Speaker 3: the terrible thing for them to do, and we're letting
[11:32] Speaker 3: them do that now. Well, they're not going to just
[11:34] Speaker 3: stop using their shadow fleet. They're going to continue using
[11:36] Speaker 3: the shadow Fleet and use regular commercial fleets. It would
[11:39] Speaker 3: not make sense for them to suddenly just pull the
[11:41] Speaker 3: plug on this elaborate system of clandestine shipping and receiving
[11:45] Speaker 3: and financial assets that they've spent blood on and treasure on.
[11:50] Speaker 3: They're not giving that up, and it would be very
[11:52] Speaker 3: naive of us on the side of the negotiating table
[11:54] Speaker 3: to think that that's true. And so there has to
[11:57] Speaker 3: be something on the west side, not just the United States,
[11:59] Speaker 3: but also European partners and as you mentioned, any you know,
[12:02] Speaker 3: international partners like Japan or South Korea coming together to
[12:05] Speaker 3: ensure that even if this agreement gets crumpled up, there
[12:08] Speaker 3: are structures on our side in place. They're going to
[12:11] Speaker 3: help preserve our position there too, because that energy value
[12:15] Speaker 3: is not going away anytime soon, even if we completely
[12:18] Speaker 3: change to electric vehicles. You still require petroleum to make plastics.
[12:22] Speaker 3: A lot of the crude oil that China was using
[12:24] Speaker 3: was not for energy, it was for producing plastics like
[12:28] Speaker 3: things you buy on Amazon. That's what that crew oil
[12:31] Speaker 3: is for. And until we find a solution to replace that,
[12:34] Speaker 3: we're kind of still dependent on that Straight until we
[12:37] Speaker 3: change otherwise.
[12:38] Speaker 4: So on that point, Jonathan, I think there is a
[12:41] Speaker 4: provision in the MoU I recall where the agreement would
[12:45] Speaker 4: be also validated with the UN Security accounts. So I
[12:53] Speaker 4: think they are concerned about the very issue that you
[12:56] Speaker 4: brought up, which is obviously the case because we tore
[13:00] Speaker 4: it up in twenty eighteen or threw it away the
[13:04] Speaker 4: other thing. And I don't know if this would work,
[13:06] Speaker 4: but if what if the UN passed a resolution specifically
[13:10] Speaker 4: calling for a coalition to open the Straight, and they
[13:15] Speaker 4: countries did contribute to a maritime coalition that simply went
[13:21] Speaker 4: went through the strait, collected all the five hundred plus
[13:25] Speaker 4: ships and left. I mean, would Iran obviously risky. And
[13:30] Speaker 4: I don't know that if this is just simply a hypothetical,
[13:33] Speaker 4: because I don't know that any countries would do it,
[13:34] Speaker 4: but say they wouldn't they're not attacking Iran, They're simply
[13:37] Speaker 4: going through an international waterway to ensure it's open so
[13:40] Speaker 4: they can get their oil that's going to go to
[13:42] Speaker 4: their country. Right, Would Iran attack where they you know,
[13:47] Speaker 4: it's coming down, it's coming down the Red Sea, it's
[13:49] Speaker 4: coming down, it's going into the Gulf of them on,
[13:50] Speaker 4: it's going getting closer to the straight Would Iran attack
[13:54] Speaker 4: a blue flagged international coalition of countries who aren't part
[13:59] Speaker 4: of the war that are simply going into the Persian
[14:03] Speaker 4: Gulf to collect and escort these ships out, and then
[14:06] Speaker 4: they just keep doing it, they keep bringing ships in
[14:08] Speaker 4: and out. Would Arom be willing to then turn its
[14:13] Speaker 4: military efforts against an international collige.
[14:18] Speaker 3: I think the only way that would be successful is
[14:20] Speaker 3: if Pakistan was a key member of that fleet. And
[14:24] Speaker 3: another point is that the UN has only done I
[14:27] Speaker 3: believe thirteen missions like this, like UNISAM and Somalia, Manusma
[14:31] Speaker 3: and Mali for example, and the Operation unifil On in
[14:36] Speaker 3: northeast Israel, Lebanon, Syria region and und Off another force
[14:40] Speaker 3: as well. I believe there have been only thirteen since
[14:42] Speaker 3: nineteen forty six, So it takes a lot of political
[14:45] Speaker 3: will first of all, to even have it structured and
[14:48] Speaker 3: then for it to function, that's a whole separate issue.
[14:51] Speaker 3: In Mali in particular, which was the most recent one
[14:53] Speaker 3: that I participated in, it was a very challenging, to
[14:57] Speaker 3: say the least, operation to hold these forces together to
[15:00] Speaker 3: do something toward a shared outcome, because they kind of
[15:03] Speaker 3: don't put their individual state interests aside when they go
[15:06] Speaker 3: in there. So i'd i'd be interested to analyze that more.
[15:09] Speaker 3: But as I mentioned, with Pakistan, that's important because right
[15:11] Speaker 3: now Pakistan is really the only actor that has a
[15:14] Speaker 3: navy that can contribute, because Katar doesn't really, Bahrain doesn't
[15:18] Speaker 3: really Bahrain wouldn't pticipate anyway Katar might. But Pakistan needs
[15:22] Speaker 3: to contribute fleet forces and also put the impromatur of
[15:26] Speaker 3: an actual international force rather than a US backed force.
[15:29] Speaker 3: This is very important here, So that would need to occur.
[15:34] Speaker 3: But going again to the fundamental weakness of even this.
[15:37] Speaker 3: If this is a good idea, but look at UNSCR
[15:39] Speaker 3: seventeen oh one, which is the two thousand and six
[15:42] Speaker 3: ceasefire between Hesbola and Israel that was supposed to see
[15:45] Speaker 3: the withdrawal of Hesbola from the south. The Lebanese armed
[15:48] Speaker 3: forces were supposed to come in and replace them. Both
[15:51] Speaker 3: Israel and and Hesbola have violated different components of seventeen
[15:55] Speaker 3: oh one, and right now they're firing at each other.
[15:56] Speaker 3: I mean, this is what twenty years later, and that
[16:00] Speaker 3: UNSCR seventeen oh one is only a page long. It's
[16:03] Speaker 3: not complicated. So even if the UN did come together,
[16:06] Speaker 3: the Security Council did come together, that would be a
[16:09] Speaker 3: good show of unity, which also is something that we
[16:11] Speaker 3: do need these days. Maybe a UN General Assembly plus
[16:14] Speaker 3: Security Council joint resolution something like this would be helpful
[16:17] Speaker 3: to show unity. But in the end, beneath the political
[16:20] Speaker 3: will for it to actually be carried out, and it
[16:21] Speaker 3: seems that that will isn't there yet.
[16:25] Speaker 1: Your mattress is one of those things you don't think
[16:26] Speaker 1: about until it's too late, until you're waking up with
[16:29] Speaker 1: aches and pains and realizing you've been sleeping on a
[16:31] Speaker 1: problem for years. Today's sponsor, ghost Bed is here to
[16:34] Speaker 1: change that, and with the summer coming, there's one more
[16:37] Speaker 1: thing worth thinking about. Sleeping hot. If you ever woken
[16:40] Speaker 1: up in the middle of the night overheated and uncomfortable,
[16:43] Speaker 1: you know how much of Rexish sleep. Most mattresses trap heat.
[16:46] Speaker 1: Ghost Bed is built specifically to prevent that. It's built different.
[16:50] Speaker 1: Baby go. I've had a ghost Bed mattress now for
[16:53] Speaker 1: probably like ten months. I love it. It's freaking awesome. I
[16:58] Speaker 1: have the cooling thing definitely and keeps it cool compared
[17:01] Speaker 1: to my old mattress.
[17:02] Speaker 2: I love it.
[17:02] Speaker 1: I'm so happy I have it, and I'm so happy
[17:04] Speaker 1: that they sponsor this show. Every mattress in the ghostped
[17:07] Speaker 1: lineup comes with cooling technology built right in, not an
[17:10] Speaker 1: upgrade you pay extra for. It's part of how every
[17:12] Speaker 1: mattress is designed, from their entry level comfort all the
[17:16] Speaker 1: way up to the LUs. I have the Lux by
[17:17] Speaker 1: the way, because I'm fancy, which features their most and
[17:21] Speaker 1: the Lux features their most advanced cooling system. And if
[17:24] Speaker 1: you're not sure which one is right for you, head
[17:26] Speaker 1: to go sped dot com slash team and take their
[17:29] Speaker 1: mattress quiz. A few questions and you get a personalized
[17:31] Speaker 1: mattress recommendation, fast free shipping, and one hundred and one
[17:35] Speaker 1: nights to try it out. If it's not the right fit,
[17:38] Speaker 1: you get your money back, simple easypsy baby. Right now,
[17:41] Speaker 1: you can take advantage of a mary pricing and Code
[17:43] Speaker 1: Team gets you an extra ten percent off when you
[17:46] Speaker 1: upgrade your sleep and go spread the makers of the
[17:48] Speaker 1: coolest beds in the world. Go get some I love
[17:52] Speaker 1: Go spread. That's gosped dot com slash team and use
[17:55] Speaker 1: the Code Team team for an extra ten percent off
[17:59] Speaker 1: side wide. Thank you guys for supporting the show, and
[18:01] Speaker 1: thanks ghost Better for supporting the show.
[18:03] Speaker 2: Love you bye.
[18:05] Speaker 4: Yeah. I don't think it's a magic bullet, but the
[18:08] Speaker 4: current situation isn't working. So if it's not working, it's
[18:11] Speaker 4: time for other ideas in my opinion. And if that's
[18:15] Speaker 4: even if the resolution itself set a message and then
[18:18] Speaker 4: there was an armada that went down there, I'd just
[18:20] Speaker 4: be interesting to see. Because they're already shooting at commercial ships, right,
[18:24] Speaker 4: so it can't get much worse than that. They're shooting
[18:26] Speaker 4: at unarmed civilians and somebody's gonna get I mean, we're
[18:31] Speaker 4: gonna have a mass cashally event here pretty soon.
[18:34] Speaker 3: And these civilians are just these are mariners. These are
[18:36] Speaker 3: guys from the Philippines, you know, from to say shells. Yeah,
[18:41] Speaker 3: they're in a tough spot anyway, and they're stuck on
[18:44] Speaker 3: this giant vessel. If any of the listeners have ever
[18:45] Speaker 3: been on one of these huge container ships, it's very lonely.
[18:48] Speaker 3: There's like thirteen people on this giant, giant object at sea.
[18:53] Speaker 3: It's it's terrible. And imagine also living under the threat
[18:56] Speaker 3: that you might get bombed any day just for being
[18:58] Speaker 3: in the water and you have nothing to do with it.
[18:59] Speaker 3: You know, it's got to be tough for them.
[19:02] Speaker 1: John, let me ask you. We've seen like oil prices
[19:05] Speaker 1: go down, so somewhere around seventy seventy five bucks. Is
[19:08] Speaker 1: that sowing up in like Japan, South Korea, like where
[19:12] Speaker 1: they're really affected, because I remember we were talking about
[19:14] Speaker 1: it there price per oil back when this was really
[19:17] Speaker 1: going hot, was you know, one hundred and sixty bucks
[19:20] Speaker 1: a barrel or something like that. Are they seeing relief
[19:22] Speaker 1: in terms of prices or is that just like the
[19:25] Speaker 1: market being the market and not really you know, showing
[19:30] Speaker 1: like what the reality is and like on the ground.
[19:34] Speaker 3: Well, you have to remember that oil is a commodity,
[19:36] Speaker 3: so it's sold down futures, not on current value. So
[19:40] Speaker 3: what you're seeing is the future assumptions about the market
[19:43] Speaker 3: that these people purchasing these futures are making so they
[19:46] Speaker 3: think that for example, in sixty days or a year,
[19:48] Speaker 3: and it's actually the one year Brent crude benchmark you
[19:51] Speaker 3: should look at, like what what do people think will
[19:52] Speaker 3: be going on one year from now? And it's slightly higher,
[19:56] Speaker 3: I think than current futures of like normal oil futures
[19:58] Speaker 3: that everyone's looking at, which means people are not pricing
[20:01] Speaker 3: their risk out as much as we might feel like
[20:04] Speaker 3: they are. The other thing is that as summer goes through,
[20:07] Speaker 3: oil prices will decrease just because the blends for summer
[20:11] Speaker 3: crew change and we're kind of coming up on that period.
[20:14] Speaker 3: Another very important economic component to match up to these
[20:17] Speaker 3: futures pricing is we're about to end a quarter fiscal quarter,
[20:21] Speaker 3: we're about to enter the summertime, and we're about to
[20:23] Speaker 3: see some huge earnings on tech get released and there
[20:26] Speaker 3: was just massive sell offs on tech the past month
[20:28] Speaker 3: and a half that look like kind of a downward
[20:31] Speaker 3: trend there. Those things are all going to conspire together
[20:34] Speaker 3: because these things are all backed by energy requirements. So
[20:38] Speaker 3: if risk comes up anywhere, that energy area, the tech,
[20:43] Speaker 3: the chips, the AI area, which is massive component of
[20:47] Speaker 3: the market right now, is going to react in a
[20:49] Speaker 3: way that's higher than should be. In other words, they're
[20:52] Speaker 3: more risk sensitive currently because there are more difficult to
[20:55] Speaker 3: measure factors that are affecting these prices. And I think
[20:58] Speaker 3: there's a lot of hope right now with p They
[21:00] Speaker 3: think that we might be on the way to something.
[21:02] Speaker 3: But remember only in the first week and a half
[21:03] Speaker 3: of a sixty day negotiating window, and as we get
[21:06] Speaker 3: closer to that midpoint and toward the end point, especially
[21:09] Speaker 3: toward August, people will begin to notice more of a
[21:11] Speaker 3: reality in front of them rather than a dream. So
[21:14] Speaker 3: if the negotiations don't appear to be improving, well, I
[21:17] Speaker 3: think you'll see oil futures go back up again, obviously
[21:20] Speaker 3: even before they're over, before the negotiations are over, because
[21:23] Speaker 3: the risk will find the correct balance point within the market.
[21:27] Speaker 3: That's more likely what's going to happen. But unless something
[21:30] Speaker 3: goes on like Mick mentioned with the securing of the
[21:33] Speaker 3: Straits with a maritime organization, I don't think the oil
[21:35] Speaker 3: will be able to recover to pre war levels soon
[21:39] Speaker 3: because the new risk that's in there, even if hostilities
[21:43] Speaker 3: go away completely and sustainably, the new problem is that
[21:47] Speaker 3: Iran is going to exact tolls on vessels. That could
[21:51] Speaker 3: be direct tolls as they've been advertising, or it could
[21:53] Speaker 3: be indirect through kind of off market exchanges between Iranian
[21:57] Speaker 3: activity and other country activity where there's this kind of
[22:00] Speaker 3: in kind requirement that if you want to pass the Straits,
[22:03] Speaker 3: you have to do something for us, but it's not
[22:04] Speaker 3: going to be on the balance sheet. So there might
[22:06] Speaker 3: be some of that going on as well, which has
[22:08] Speaker 3: to get priced into that oil price, you know, So
[22:11] Speaker 3: it's all getting stacked onto that one barrel of oil
[22:14] Speaker 3: costs more because there are more things affecting that barrel
[22:16] Speaker 3: as it passes through. So that's something to think about too.
[22:19] Speaker 3: There are these exogenous or outside factors that are not
[22:22] Speaker 3: energy related and not war related that are going to
[22:25] Speaker 3: be baked into that barrel estimate. You know.
[22:29] Speaker 4: There's another thing that came up this week that I've
[22:32] Speaker 4: gotten pinged a lot about that isn't talked about as
[22:36] Speaker 4: much as say the Strait itself or you know what's
[22:39] Speaker 4: going on Elebanon is there's a component of the agreement
[22:43] Speaker 4: that says the US is going to pull their military,
[22:46] Speaker 4: our military from the proximity of Iran. Well, my friends
[22:53] Speaker 4: that are in the proximity of Iran include our friends,
[22:57] Speaker 4: I should say the UAE, Guitar, Bahrain, Kuwait, Jaddi, Rabi.
[23:02] Speaker 4: Even I suppose that's a big win for Ran, it's
[23:07] Speaker 4: a big loss for those countries. At the same time,
[23:12] Speaker 4: apparently we're asking those countries to pay to reconstruct the
[23:15] Speaker 4: very country that attack them, and then we're going to leave.
[23:18] Speaker 4: So if we go with a letter of the MoU itself,
[23:23] Speaker 4: I don't know what else will be the proximity of
[23:24] Speaker 4: or on. Maybe I'm misreading it, but I think most
[23:27] Speaker 4: people would say these countries are right across the strait, right,
[23:33] Speaker 4: u A's right there, so and then Qatar's right there,
[23:36] Speaker 4: So that's got to be the proximity. Are we really
[23:39] Speaker 4: planning to do that? And if we are, why, because
[23:43] Speaker 4: that question.
[23:44] Speaker 3: Turkey is a NATO ally and we have Injulick Base,
[23:48] Speaker 3: a US occupied NATO base that's on the like Turkeys
[23:53] Speaker 3: shares a border that it's actually Turkey's border with Iran
[23:55] Speaker 3: is the oldest border that exists in the world. That's
[23:58] Speaker 3: an interesting factoid that order is a NATO Iran border.
[24:03] Speaker 3: Are we are we thinking we're going to withdraw from Turkey?
[24:05] Speaker 3: I don't think so, and why would.
[24:08] Speaker 4: We withdraw from these places because Iran wants us to
[24:11] Speaker 4: That's why we want to be there, you know. Literally,
[24:14] Speaker 4: if they're that concerned we should go, well, then we're
[24:16] Speaker 4: definitely not doing And let's remember when it comes to
[24:20] Speaker 4: us presence overseas. Yes, it does benefit the country, nothing
[24:23] Speaker 4: wrong with that, but it's for our own purposes. It
[24:26] Speaker 4: gives us the ability to project power around the world.
[24:29] Speaker 4: If we want to be the global uh you know,
[24:34] Speaker 4: power center of the world, we have to have that ability.
[24:39] Speaker 4: Not that we want to run around starting wars, but
[24:42] Speaker 4: we want to have the capacity to surge the places.
[24:45] Speaker 4: So these these are our ben to benefit us. Same
[24:48] Speaker 4: with in Europe. Right, it's not a charity case for Europe,
[24:53] Speaker 4: it's not a charity case for the Middle East. But
[24:56] Speaker 4: it seems that we've given away our ability to stay
[25:00] Speaker 4: the proximity of Iran, and there's nobody talking about except
[25:03] Speaker 4: for the countries that assume that's means them. So this
[25:08] Speaker 4: is gonna be if we get through a lot of
[25:11] Speaker 4: these more difficult things. Say, for example, Aron just gives
[25:14] Speaker 4: up their ability control straight. I don't think they're gonna
[25:16] Speaker 4: do it, but so they do, say peace breaks out
[25:19] Speaker 4: in Lebanon. Great, we still got plenty of big hurdles
[25:23] Speaker 4: to get through, and that's a big one. And so
[25:27] Speaker 4: is the three hundred billion, which I still can't imagine
[25:30] Speaker 4: any country is going to contribute two.
[25:34] Speaker 1: Doesn't that just add to like the uh, the thinking
[25:37] Speaker 1: that are for some people My kind of myself included
[25:40] Speaker 1: that the MoU is kind of at least some of
[25:42] Speaker 1: the bits of it are kind of bullshit, like we're
[25:45] Speaker 1: now ever gonna fucking back out of like Kuwait or
[25:47] Speaker 1: any of our bases in there around the region ever,
[25:51] Speaker 1: Like that's never gonna happen, so like, and then like
[25:56] Speaker 1: you mentioned that three hundred billion dollar reconstruction fund, these
[26:01] Speaker 1: things sound like pie in the sky like nonsense. Frankly,
[26:05] Speaker 1: you know what I mean to be I mean, from
[26:07] Speaker 1: the layman at least watching this, I mean, you guys
[26:09] Speaker 1: are practitioners, you guys are experts. Like you tell me,
[26:12] Speaker 1: these things seem like tasks that are literally impossible. Are like,
[26:18] Speaker 1: are just our deal breakers from either side really, because
[26:22] Speaker 1: like you said, Iran is not going to give up
[26:24] Speaker 1: the straight.
[26:24] Speaker 4: Yeah, I mean, think about it. When a country wins
[26:27] Speaker 4: a war, they don't negotiate the terms they dictate. Right,
[26:32] Speaker 4: when a country wins the war, they don't pay to
[26:34] Speaker 4: reconstruct the other country unless they have removed their adversary.
[26:40] Speaker 4: So you could say, oh, the Marshall Plan, Yeah, that's
[26:43] Speaker 4: because we took out Nazi Germany. Right, we weren't paying
[26:48] Speaker 4: Nazis to stay in place to reconstruct the country. You
[26:52] Speaker 4: see what I mean? Like, so this is not how
[26:55] Speaker 4: and I don't think the US has to do this.
[26:57] Speaker 4: My point is not to say we lost. It's like,
[27:00] Speaker 4: we don't have an obligation to do any of this stuff.
[27:03] Speaker 4: We don't have an obligation to reconstruct their country with
[27:06] Speaker 4: the regime still in place. That's simply going to make
[27:09] Speaker 4: sure the regime stays in place forever. Don't know why
[27:13] Speaker 4: we would do that.
[27:16] Speaker 3: I think also it's a reflection of this very public
[27:19] Speaker 3: negotiation going on, where normally these kind of maximalist positions
[27:24] Speaker 3: would be the things that define the edges of what's
[27:27] Speaker 3: going to be discussed, that would happen privately in a
[27:31] Speaker 3: secret setting, could be in Switzerland like it was in
[27:34] Speaker 3: twenty fifteen, and before twenty fifteen. Leading up to that,
[27:37] Speaker 3: you know, there were days and days when John Kerrey
[27:39] Speaker 3: and Zari, the Foreign Minister of to Run at the time,
[27:42] Speaker 3: took walks together privately and discussed the terms, without notes,
[27:46] Speaker 3: without secretaries, without recording it. It was all private and
[27:50] Speaker 3: it was carefully quietly done so that they could just
[27:53] Speaker 3: speak together as representatives of their countries to their interests
[27:56] Speaker 3: without anyone noticing that, because I'm sure there were some
[27:59] Speaker 3: crazy terms in that discussion as well, but those crazy
[28:02] Speaker 3: terms kind of fall away into the background, and they're
[28:04] Speaker 3: the backdrop of what we're going to get to later.
[28:07] Speaker 3: And if you've studied, you like best alternative to a
[28:10] Speaker 3: negotiated outcome and zone of primary agreement and all these
[28:13] Speaker 3: concepts of negotiation. There's a big piece that one side
[28:17] Speaker 3: comes in with, another piece the other side comes in with,
[28:19] Speaker 3: and they don't all align together. It's not a then diagram. Instead,
[28:22] Speaker 3: there's this place in between where they're supposed to meet
[28:24] Speaker 3: at that shouldn't be public because once it's public, now
[28:27] Speaker 3: you're involving many other individuals, any other entities, who also
[28:31] Speaker 3: share opinions and beliefs, and then exert pressure on the negotiators,
[28:34] Speaker 3: which pulls away the power the negotiators are supposed to
[28:36] Speaker 3: have to clandestinely or secretly discuss the terms outside of
[28:40] Speaker 3: the public view. It's important for transparency. It's important that
[28:43] Speaker 3: we all understand like how this agreement gets reached, But
[28:46] Speaker 3: in the moment that that's happening, it's actually better to
[28:48] Speaker 3: have it quiet. Just like COVID operations. You don't need
[28:51] Speaker 3: to tell everyone what every COVID operation is. There are
[28:54] Speaker 3: transparency mechanisms built in to help make sure there is oversight,
[28:58] Speaker 3: but it shouldn't be just completely in the open all
[29:00] Speaker 3: the time, because that that takes away the power of
[29:03] Speaker 3: doing it that way. Just like negotiations between states.
[29:06] Speaker 1: Also question for you guys, what happens to those negotiations
[29:12] Speaker 1: when people show up on Sunday in Switzerland just to
[29:16] Speaker 1: continue them and like get to the next step, and
[29:19] Speaker 1: the big boss of one country tweets out or true
[29:22] Speaker 1: socials out that he's gonna he's gonna wipe everybody out,
[29:26] Speaker 1: or you know, some.
[29:27] Speaker 2: Extremely threat three.
[29:30] Speaker 1: Of course, you know this is a hypoth it's a thought.
[29:31] Speaker 1: This is a thought exercise. It didn't actually happen last week.
[29:37] Speaker 1: What what do you think happens in that like whole
[29:41] Speaker 1: like the Iranians thinking, I mean, I know I've read
[29:44] Speaker 1: that the Iranians have like psychologists to try and understand
[29:47] Speaker 1: like how Trump thinks and how he operates and stuff
[29:51] Speaker 1: like that, which if you can find it as psychologists
[29:53] Speaker 1: that can figure that out, you know they should be
[29:56] Speaker 1: you know.
[29:58] Speaker 2: You know, give them some kind of prize.
[30:00] Speaker 1: But yeah, what happens to the dynamics of the negotiation when.
[30:03] Speaker 2: Something like that happens.
[30:05] Speaker 3: I think very little happens because we are seeing the
[30:08] Speaker 3: English language things that are said that Trump says, for example,
[30:12] Speaker 3: in Iranian media they do the exact same thing, They
[30:15] Speaker 3: say very similar things. And for example, after cost some
[30:18] Speaker 3: Solomoney was assassinated, there was a lot of this like
[30:20] Speaker 3: we will punch America in the nose that they would
[30:22] Speaker 3: say in Farsi, and like they were going to bloody
[30:24] Speaker 3: America and like a lot of these statements, and it
[30:26] Speaker 3: wasn't like low level people saying that it was the president,
[30:29] Speaker 3: it was the foreign minister, it was the IRGC commander.
[30:32] Speaker 3: And they're still doing it now and you'll see this
[30:34] Speaker 3: in Farsi. They're talking as if they've defeated the US,
[30:37] Speaker 3: they've torn the US down. If you look at the
[30:39] Speaker 3: imagery in Tehran where they had these regime sponsored graffiti artists.
[30:43] Speaker 3: If you see it like it looks like aircraft carriers destroyed,
[30:46] Speaker 3: just one that has like a rope tied around an
[30:47] Speaker 3: aircraft carrier, like pulling it in half. So they have
[30:50] Speaker 3: their own rhetoric in FARSI going on, but all we're
[30:52] Speaker 3: seeing is the English side. That doesn't mean we should
[30:55] Speaker 3: match their rhetoric. In fact, I don't think that's probably helpful.
[30:59] Speaker 3: But I'm just saying that it might in context. It
[31:01] Speaker 3: may not be as extreme as we measure, but it's
[31:05] Speaker 3: also not helpful.
[31:08] Speaker 4: And I and I mean, it's not helpful. I agree
[31:11] Speaker 4: with Jonathan. I do think there's so much of it
[31:14] Speaker 4: now that it's kind of just become background noise. And
[31:17] Speaker 4: I say that because you know, when you say stuff
[31:20] Speaker 4: like I'm going to wipe out your civilization, that's that's
[31:23] Speaker 4: pretty you know, hyperbolic, But when you say that every Tuesday,
[31:28] Speaker 4: it becomes like right, So even when I'm on, you know,
[31:32] Speaker 4: I use this as examples because I tend to get
[31:34] Speaker 4: more feedback, so I'm usually on when I do the
[31:36] Speaker 4: foreign thing with Iranians. When they start saying, oh, President
[31:41] Speaker 4: Trump said that, even the host interrupts and says, look,
[31:45] Speaker 4: if we're going to talk about everything, President Trump says,
[31:47] Speaker 4: that's all we're going to talk about, like we're not.
[31:49] Speaker 4: We're not we're not even going to go into like
[31:51] Speaker 4: that was an appropriate stuff because it's it's it's just
[31:54] Speaker 4: going to happen again and again and again and again,
[31:57] Speaker 4: and therefore it's not even we never address these substance
[32:01] Speaker 4: of it from their perspective, right, you see what I mean,
[32:04] Speaker 4: Like the host doesn't even wan't talk about anymore because
[32:06] Speaker 4: then that's all we do on their program is talk
[32:09] Speaker 4: about that. So I think even the Iranians, they'll use
[32:12] Speaker 4: it to their benefit, right, but they take it too serious.
[32:17] Speaker 4: Well maybe, I mean, we did start our decapitation strikes
[32:22] Speaker 4: between Friday and Monday. We're supposed to be on Monday.
[32:24] Speaker 4: So but I think, you know, when it comes to
[32:27] Speaker 4: the rhetoric, even if it's unhelpful, and I'm sure the
[32:30] Speaker 4: Secretary of State would say it is if you could,
[32:33] Speaker 4: but I just don't think it's having that big of
[32:36] Speaker 4: an impact.
[32:37] Speaker 2: I just don't think.
[32:40] Speaker 4: We're gonna, you know, if you don't do this, we're gonna,
[32:43] Speaker 4: you know, start the war over and we're gonna blow
[32:45] Speaker 4: your country and do Bolivia. I just I just think
[32:47] Speaker 4: they just just right over it.
[32:50] Speaker 1: Isn't that doesn't that kind of say something else about
[32:52] Speaker 1: like how fundamentally broken this reality is that we're living
[32:57] Speaker 1: in because like back in the day, not even back day,
[33:00] Speaker 1: like literally you know, last term or during Obama or Bush,
[33:04] Speaker 1: if a president made a statement like that or any
[33:08] Speaker 1: kind of statement that the president makes, carries used to
[33:11] Speaker 1: carry a ton of weight. And now it's just like,
[33:14] Speaker 1: oh yeah, that's like our crazy granddad, that's like out
[33:17] Speaker 1: of his mind. But it happens to be the leader
[33:19] Speaker 1: of the free world, the guy making the actually making
[33:21] Speaker 1: the decisions.
[33:22] Speaker 4: Right.
[33:22] Speaker 1: Like, the fact is this shit went down because bbcme
[33:26] Speaker 1: for a PowerPoint and then five guys in the situation
[33:29] Speaker 1: room figured, let's bomb Ran. Let's and not just bomb Ran,
[33:32] Speaker 1: let's take out the top forty of the entire hierarchy. Hierarchy.
[33:38] Speaker 1: It's just see where everything lands afterwards, when the smoke settles,
[33:42] Speaker 1: you know, and here we are.
[33:43] Speaker 2: So I mean, I don't know.
[33:46] Speaker 4: There's the actual decision, and then there's a rhetoric. As
[33:49] Speaker 4: far as a rhetoric, I mean, if you're if somebody
[33:51] Speaker 4: was asking me, I go with Teddy Roosevelt right walks
[33:55] Speaker 4: offtly and carry a big stick. But obviously that's not
[33:59] Speaker 4: the current thought process of the administration and they're not
[34:03] Speaker 4: asking me, so it is what it is. But the
[34:06] Speaker 4: decision process I think would be greatly helped to your
[34:09] Speaker 4: point D by expanding it back to what it always
[34:13] Speaker 4: has been, which is a process. A National Security Council
[34:19] Speaker 4: is a process that has input from several different levels expertise, diplomacy, military, intelligence, economic.
[34:31] Speaker 4: I think we'd be helped by that rather than just
[34:34] Speaker 4: people who feel like they have to agree and are
[34:36] Speaker 4: very limited.
[34:37] Speaker 3: It seems that the process is not working. I mean
[34:39] Speaker 3: we see that because this kind of whipsaw behavior with
[34:43] Speaker 3: foreign policy, where it seems like there's one thought that's executed,
[34:47] Speaker 3: it didn't work out well, they didn't like it, so
[34:49] Speaker 3: they stopped. They'll try something new, and there's a lot
[34:51] Speaker 3: of this kind of testing of policy in real time. Normally,
[34:55] Speaker 3: that testing of policy would happen in discussions in the NSC,
[34:59] Speaker 3: where someone bring that up and they'd wargame it, they'd
[35:01] Speaker 3: talk through it, and they'd find out like, oh, there's
[35:03] Speaker 3: a weakness here in that execution pathway. We need to
[35:05] Speaker 3: rethink how we're going to get there, and it wouldn't
[35:07] Speaker 3: happen in the real world normally, but it seems that
[35:10] Speaker 3: that is actually happening now where they're testing out policy
[35:12] Speaker 3: decisions by making them by doing them, which is obviously backwards.
[35:18] Speaker 4: Yeah, just to give a short example of what Jonathan's
[35:22] Speaker 4: talking about. Okay, we decide to go to war, what's
[35:25] Speaker 4: likely to happen. The Strait's going to take close. The
[35:28] Speaker 4: intelligence community is going to say, yes, that's likely to happen,
[35:30] Speaker 4: So you have to go with that assumption. Okay, so
[35:32] Speaker 4: the strait is closed. What do we have to do
[35:35] Speaker 4: to open the straight If they won't open it, well,
[35:37] Speaker 4: we're gonna have to use ground forces. Are we willing
[35:39] Speaker 4: to do that? Yes?
[35:39] Speaker 2: Or no?
[35:41] Speaker 4: Now, okay, so then we're going to do a blockade.
[35:44] Speaker 4: What effect will the blockade have on the regime? How
[35:46] Speaker 4: long will it take to have the actual effect that
[35:49] Speaker 4: we want? Are we willing to wait that long? Will
[35:51] Speaker 4: we take the economic pressure? And if the answer is no,
[35:55] Speaker 4: right it. I know that's not you know, super sophisticated,
[35:59] Speaker 4: but ultimately that's what is discussed in the National Security Council.
[36:04] Speaker 4: Are we willing to take that pain? No? Well, then
[36:06] Speaker 4: we think the whole thing or you know, it's it's
[36:09] Speaker 4: that kind of scenario, the constituency plans, whether we're willing
[36:13] Speaker 4: to do it, what is that the enemy's most likely
[36:16] Speaker 4: course of action, most dangerous course of action. It's basic
[36:20] Speaker 4: military planning, to be honest. But they do it at
[36:22] Speaker 4: a at an inner agency level in the NSC, and
[36:26] Speaker 4: everybody weighs in because there's expertise for the like the
[36:29] Speaker 4: Energy Department, the Treasury Department. They have a lot of
[36:32] Speaker 4: input into things that you don't necessarily think of as
[36:35] Speaker 4: a military person. But then you're like, oh, and then
[36:39] Speaker 4: other things we can do to amp up pressure that
[36:41] Speaker 4: could have been an alternative to stress those kind of things.
[36:47] Speaker 4: And it's not like it's over, you know, as we
[36:50] Speaker 4: talk about every week, I want the US to come
[36:52] Speaker 4: out ahead, So it's not over. We still have a
[36:57] Speaker 4: chance to get a better nuclear agreement, which is good
[37:01] Speaker 4: for the world, but we're gonna have to probably do
[37:04] Speaker 4: We're going to have to do something different because it
[37:06] Speaker 4: doesn't seem to beheading in that direction. They seem to
[37:09] Speaker 4: be saying I'm not gonna bunch on anything. There's not
[37:12] Speaker 4: even real discussions about recovering the HU, which you know,
[37:17] Speaker 4: the Vice President said was in the MoU.
[37:20] Speaker 3: Yeah. More likely we're gonna have to have an Adams
[37:22] Speaker 3: for Peace type, you know, Eisenhower outcome where they're allowed
[37:25] Speaker 3: to continue using what they have under very strict supervision
[37:29] Speaker 3: and guardrails and different agreements with various countries. China in
[37:33] Speaker 3: particular is very interested in small modular reactors SMRs that
[37:37] Speaker 3: they've been building in the Middle East and North Africa
[37:39] Speaker 3: and things, and I think that probably to get true
[37:43] Speaker 3: international buy in, you're going to need China or Russia
[37:45] Speaker 3: Rosatome for example, to come in with the US and
[37:49] Speaker 3: actually agree to monitor and work with the Iranian program.
[37:52] Speaker 3: That's probably the most realistic. It might not be ideal
[37:54] Speaker 3: or what we want, but to actually get it back
[37:57] Speaker 3: again under scrutiny, that's probably what's going to have to happen.
[38:02] Speaker 4: Perfect.
[38:03] Speaker 1: Yeah, So a lot's gonna be happening. We're gonna keep
[38:05] Speaker 1: an eye on it, and obviously this is probably gonna
[38:08] Speaker 1: be the leadoff discussion again next week if I had
[38:12] Speaker 1: a bet. All right, moving on to Ukraine and Russia.
[38:16] Speaker 1: We've seen over the last you know, several weeks, Russia's
[38:20] Speaker 1: air defense is either severely depleted or they're moving them
[38:24] Speaker 1: around because they don't know where Ukraine's gonna hit next.
[38:26] Speaker 1: You've seen a lot of hits in Moscow, UH, super
[38:30] Speaker 1: far and super deep.
[38:32] Speaker 2: UH.
[38:32] Speaker 1: Crimea is getting pounded as well, So there's a lot
[38:36] Speaker 1: going on there. Over the last week as well. Our
[38:39] Speaker 1: last few days, the Russian delegation or you know, Putin
[38:44] Speaker 1: was in a closed door meeting with Lukashenko talking about
[38:48] Speaker 1: what I don't know. I mean, Lukashenko is being the
[38:50] Speaker 1: president of Belarus or the dictator Belarus. I don't know
[38:54] Speaker 1: if they're asking, they're trying to push him to join
[38:58] Speaker 1: the fight, get some Belarusian soldiers in on it. I
[39:02] Speaker 1: don't know, but it obviously seems like I don't know
[39:05] Speaker 1: if the tide's turning in Ukraine. But Russia does not
[39:09] Speaker 1: seem like this unstoppable force. They really haven't for four years.
[39:13] Speaker 1: But you know, to see Moscow get peppered like they did,
[39:18] Speaker 1: it's pretty incredible, frankly, and it's something we haven't seen before.
[39:23] Speaker 1: So you know, where you guys at on this? What
[39:25] Speaker 1: do you guys should like tracking?
[39:28] Speaker 4: So to start with, and we shared this in our
[39:30] Speaker 4: group chat, the average life expectancy now for a Russian
[39:34] Speaker 4: recruit is three weeks from when they walk through they
[39:37] Speaker 4: stand on their version of the yellow footprints. You've been
[39:41] Speaker 4: to Paras Island, you know what I'm talking. They're dead.
[39:44] Speaker 4: It's literally minutes once they get into combat, right, So
[39:48] Speaker 4: the meat grinder is running out of meat. The meat
[39:51] Speaker 4: grinder is running out of meat. I think you're muted there, buddy,
[39:54] Speaker 4: I can't hear you.
[39:55] Speaker 3: Can you hear them, jentlemen, I can't hear thee I
[39:58] Speaker 3: see his mouth moving.
[40:00] Speaker 1: Yeah, we'll you're a little choppy mixed, so I have
[40:02] Speaker 1: my mic muted. Just repeat what you were saying from
[40:04] Speaker 1: when they first get in the average life span of
[40:07] Speaker 1: a new soldier in Russia.
[40:08] Speaker 4: Yes, so there was a study, I think a well
[40:12] Speaker 4: sourced one that for when a soldier is taken from
[40:15] Speaker 4: his village in Russia and enters into training, he has
[40:20] Speaker 4: three weeks and he'll be dead three weeks. That's the average.
[40:24] Speaker 4: They have minutes. It's like twenty seven minutes is the
[40:28] Speaker 4: average soldier's life expectancy once they engage in combat. So
[40:33] Speaker 4: the meat grinders and running out of me even if
[40:38] Speaker 4: you don't care, which putin obviously doesn't care about the
[40:40] Speaker 4: next generation of Russian males. They're still going to run out,
[40:45] Speaker 4: They're just not going to be and that this is
[40:47] Speaker 4: at the same time when the capacity, not only the
[40:51] Speaker 4: actual capabilities of these really sophisticated drones are increasing, but
[40:58] Speaker 4: they're their quantity is also increasing substantially, like they're producing
[41:05] Speaker 4: more drones every day than they did the day before.
[41:08] Speaker 4: So think about it just running out at soldiers. But
[41:12] Speaker 4: at the same time, Ukraine is and you already mentioned it,
[41:15] Speaker 4: they're getting they're striking further into Russia, which is where
[41:19] Speaker 4: all of their significant logistical facilities are on purpose, right
[41:24] Speaker 4: because they didn't think they could be hit. There's a
[41:27] Speaker 4: state of emergency in Crimea for the same reasons, and
[41:30] Speaker 4: that's going to get more and more challenging, and quite frankly,
[41:33] Speaker 4: if they could take Karsk Bridge out for weeks at
[41:36] Speaker 4: a time, not just days, and potentially block the ground
[41:39] Speaker 4: corridor that the Russians have, that's going to seriously challenge
[41:44] Speaker 4: Russian's ability to stay in Crimea. So talk about a
[41:47] Speaker 4: shift right now that's going on. We're talking about Iran
[41:49] Speaker 4: all the time, and maybe it's a good thing because
[41:51] Speaker 4: it's just happening anyway. Ukraine is shifting the tide. I
[41:55] Speaker 4: don't want to overstate it and say, like, you know,
[41:57] Speaker 4: they're going to throw them out tomorrow. Probably not, but
[42:00] Speaker 4: the tide is shifting. So there's one of two things
[42:03] Speaker 4: can happen. It can keep shifting and then potentially, hopefully
[42:08] Speaker 4: Putin's deposed and cooler heads there step in or Putin
[42:14] Speaker 4: does a crazy ibant and goes, I don't know what
[42:17] Speaker 4: he can do, but he could seriously escalate start, you know,
[42:21] Speaker 4: using tactical nukes. I don't know. Hopefully that's not the case.
[42:24] Speaker 4: The West needs to be very specific now. We are
[42:28] Speaker 4: going to support Ukraine even more. And by the way,
[42:32] Speaker 4: the US is doing basically nothing. We're basically just a
[42:35] Speaker 4: lowing to buy some of our stuff. That's nothing, essentially,
[42:38] Speaker 4: but we could double down on it. We could increase
[42:40] Speaker 4: our support. Obviously there's support for that in Congress across
[42:44] Speaker 4: the Aisle. Double down and say Putin, the only way
[42:47] Speaker 4: out of this is immediate cease fire negotiations period. If not,
[42:55] Speaker 4: we're just going to increase our support and we're going
[42:58] Speaker 4: to increase the economic conquests to you. That's what we
[43:02] Speaker 4: should be doing. Now. If not, I think Putin's going
[43:05] Speaker 4: to probably go with the extreme option because he doesn't
[43:09] Speaker 4: he doesn't see another way out of it. I don't
[43:11] Speaker 4: know what that extreme option is, but it could drag
[43:13] Speaker 4: in other countries into war. That's why you're seeing countries
[43:17] Speaker 4: like Moldova's I think they're talking about joining. Help me out, John,
[43:25] Speaker 4: there's the country they're talking about. It's right, it's for
[43:28] Speaker 4: some reason, I can't remember the name of the country,
[43:30] Speaker 4: but it's the other countries in NATO, all right, So
[43:34] Speaker 4: that there's other things that are happening right now that
[43:38] Speaker 4: are prepping for this. It's either going to turn to
[43:41] Speaker 4: something that's what we want to see, like a negotiated
[43:45] Speaker 4: into this settlement, probably more in line with what General
[43:50] Speaker 4: Kellogg was proposing a long time ago, if you remember
[43:53] Speaker 4: a long time being a couple of years ago, or
[43:56] Speaker 4: or Putin's going to do a crazy eye than and
[43:58] Speaker 4: literally do something extreme and that could push this into
[44:02] Speaker 4: expanded war into the NATO country we don't want.
[44:06] Speaker 3: Yeah, in particular Poland, if you've seen recently, there's a
[44:09] Speaker 3: little spat between Zelensky and Tusk, the Polish president, and
[44:14] Speaker 3: I'm curious if there's some Russian influence operation in there
[44:19] Speaker 3: to amplify that and make it worse, because I think
[44:23] Speaker 3: what Russia wants most is for less European countries to
[44:26] Speaker 3: support Ukraine. They already got their success with the US
[44:29] Speaker 3: supporting Ukraine less and I'm curious if that is kind
[44:32] Speaker 3: of a pocket that they're trying to exploit now because
[44:35] Speaker 3: they are running out of new options and so perhaps
[44:38] Speaker 3: they're trying to do more of dividing support so that
[44:42] Speaker 3: there's less for Ukraine to have. The problem is that
[44:45] Speaker 3: Ukraine now has the largest ground force in Europe. It's
[44:47] Speaker 3: a seasoned combat force, it has the ability to act autonomously.
[44:52] Speaker 3: There are needs for support, for sure, but the Ukraine
[44:55] Speaker 3: today is not the Ukraine four years ago, and so
[44:58] Speaker 3: it's kind of too late, i think, for Russia to
[45:00] Speaker 3: try to exert those influence operations, especially on Poland, is Stonia, Latvia, Lithuania,
[45:04] Speaker 3: which is kind of that area that they are targeting
[45:06] Speaker 3: because it's the near enemy for them, and those countries
[45:09] Speaker 3: are concerned about what Russia will do next. And even
[45:12] Speaker 3: a few months ago, before the tables had started turning,
[45:16] Speaker 3: those three countries, Latvia, Lithuania and Sotnia were very concerned
[45:19] Speaker 3: about being next, and I think Russia wanted them to
[45:22] Speaker 3: be next. But since things are changing, Putin has to
[45:26] Speaker 3: think about how can I still exploit that northern pocket,
[45:29] Speaker 3: probably through influence operations against Poland. And as you know
[45:32] Speaker 3: Polish history, Poland has routinely been invaded by the East
[45:35] Speaker 3: and West over time. It's very difficult for Poland to
[45:39] Speaker 3: retain its territorial integrity, mostly due to its terrain structure,
[45:44] Speaker 3: and so that's very hard for Poland, and Poland's acutely
[45:47] Speaker 3: aware of that, and so Russia's kind of probably pushing
[45:50] Speaker 3: that button a little bit domestically in Poland to create
[45:52] Speaker 3: some tension between those erstwhile allies between Ukraine and Poland,
[45:56] Speaker 3: one being a EU member and one not being a
[45:59] Speaker 3: EU member. So I think that's a place Putin's trying
[46:01] Speaker 3: to acutely influence. The problem is there's a lot to
[46:05] Speaker 3: focus on. As you mentioned, make crimea become a problem
[46:09] Speaker 3: that was originally an asset and it's now becoming a
[46:12] Speaker 3: weight that's pulling down attention southeast out of the combat
[46:18] Speaker 3: area that Putin wanted to have, and that's going to
[46:20] Speaker 3: be an interesting development. And as you mentioned, with the bridge,
[46:23] Speaker 3: that's infrastructure. That's a fixed target. So if you're creative,
[46:28] Speaker 3: you can find new ways to go after it. Even
[46:29] Speaker 3: if it becomes hardened or defended, well, there will be
[46:32] Speaker 3: ways to destroy it because it's a fixed target. So
[46:36] Speaker 3: that's going to be a challenge for them and a
[46:38] Speaker 3: very expensive challenge for them to defend, and it will
[46:40] Speaker 3: be a low cost relative low cost thing to attack
[46:45] Speaker 3: and destroy.
[46:47] Speaker 4: Romania, that's the country I couldn't well, Dave Dovia, and
[46:51] Speaker 4: I think there's support from both sides, so from the
[46:55] Speaker 4: Muldavian opitation and the Romanian to join.
[47:00] Speaker 3: Mouldiva is that Transnistria is one of those frozen conflict
[47:03] Speaker 3: zones that Russia invaded and occupied and still occupy as illegal.
[47:06] Speaker 3: And it's the same concern that Georgia has. If you
[47:08] Speaker 3: drive down to Belisi, there's all kinds that there's actually
[47:11] Speaker 3: a NATO office into Blisi because Georgia wants to join NATO,
[47:15] Speaker 3: and both Georgia and Moldava have this this Russian pocket
[47:21] Speaker 3: inside their territory that's occupied by Russian forces to this date.
[47:25] Speaker 4: Because pocket, if they join, you think anything.
[47:29] Speaker 3: So the problem is they cannot join until that's released. Right.
[47:32] Speaker 3: So the thing is that you have to have complete
[47:35] Speaker 3: territorial integrity to join NATO. Now this was a question
[47:38] Speaker 3: because Cyprus joined even though it's split in half by Turkey,
[47:43] Speaker 3: but that was kind of put to the side, crazy John. Yeah,
[47:51] Speaker 3: Otherwise that has been followed. That rule has been followed.
[47:54] Speaker 3: So countries have to have their territorial integrity, which is
[47:56] Speaker 3: a reason that that Russia wanted to keep Crimea OCCU
[48:00] Speaker 3: even if they lost all of Ukraine. They wanted to
[48:01] Speaker 3: keep Crimea because that would exclude Ukraine from joining NATO
[48:05] Speaker 3: and joining the EU if Russian forces occupied Crimea. So
[48:09] Speaker 3: similar with Moldiva, Multavah would have to shake that Russian
[48:12] Speaker 3: occupation or surrender that territory to Russia, which is not
[48:16] Speaker 3: going to happen. So there's there's those two options. Otherwise
[48:18] Speaker 3: they can't join.
[48:19] Speaker 2: What do you guys?
[48:20] Speaker 1: And the other thing we didn't mention that's been all
[48:22] Speaker 1: over like the internet and stuff is showing like all
[48:24] Speaker 1: the fuel shortages in Russia, you know, people fighting on
[48:28] Speaker 1: fuel lines and stuff like that, and like like, you know,
[48:31] Speaker 1: wasn't it John McCain who said, like they're a gas
[48:33] Speaker 1: station with nuclear weapons or whatever, like you know, Yeah,
[48:38] Speaker 1: so it's pretty incredible to see. They're also talks of palsy.
[48:42] Speaker 1: They're gonna have some closed door talks Monday, starting tomorrow
[48:46] Speaker 1: about stopping the export of diesel from Russia out I
[48:51] Speaker 1: guess to save it and ration it, which is fucking
[48:54] Speaker 1: incredible and insane to see. So you're seeing the Ukrainian
[48:58] Speaker 1: you know, they've been they've been targeting oil infrastructure for
[49:02] Speaker 1: months now, and uh, you're really seen it kind of
[49:05] Speaker 1: pay off, and I cannot believe. It's like people are
[49:09] Speaker 1: probably walking around like it's a fucking funeral in the
[49:11] Speaker 1: Kremlin or wherever Putin's bunker is, you know, like who's
[49:15] Speaker 1: gonna tell him the bad news and all, you know,
[49:17] Speaker 1: things to that nature. So you know, I would lock
[49:21] Speaker 1: my windows if I'm like a high up fucking Russian
[49:24] Speaker 1: official or something like that, because who knows if you're
[49:26] Speaker 1: gonna get tossed out of a window or not in
[49:28] Speaker 1: the next you know, coming months.
[49:30] Speaker 2: It's it's a pretty wild scene. What's going on.
[49:33] Speaker 4: That would be an indicator we start seeing a lot
[49:35] Speaker 4: of uh, senior people get killed, it's either the coup
[49:38] Speaker 4: was attempted or yeah, it probably means that to be
[49:42] Speaker 4: frank because he tried to get ahead of it by
[49:45] Speaker 4: taking him out. I mean, ultimately they can do it
[49:49] Speaker 4: right if you got the right people they could putin.
[49:53] Speaker 4: You know, he has the levers, but if the lever's
[49:55] Speaker 4: not working for him anymore, they could turn it against it,
[49:58] Speaker 4: and it's in their own country's interest and quite frankly,
[50:00] Speaker 4: it would be an absolute gift to this generation. That's
[50:04] Speaker 4: being Anihlid.
[50:06] Speaker 1: Yeah in Ukraine too, right, anything else you guys want
[50:12] Speaker 1: to touch on before we move on about Ukraine and Russia?
[50:17] Speaker 1: Did I miss anything? I mean that's pretty much general
[50:20] Speaker 1: what I was saying.
[50:20] Speaker 3: But okay, well, General Donahue got forced out of Europe,
[50:26] Speaker 3: most likely because of disagreements on either NATO policy or
[50:29] Speaker 3: Ukraine policy my opinion.
[50:32] Speaker 2: That's why you think. Yeah, yeah, a.
[50:36] Speaker 4: Big, big loss for the US military, well known, super respected,
[50:42] Speaker 4: and the special operations community, including inside the agencies. I mean,
[50:48] Speaker 4: the guy did everything. He was a true commander, swider commander,
[50:51] Speaker 4: the unit commander of the army component of Jaysak. He
[50:56] Speaker 4: you know, eighty second Airborne commanding General. I mean, the
[50:58] Speaker 4: guy was just see a great American selfless service and
[51:07] Speaker 4: the idea that he was just he was going to
[51:10] Speaker 4: be the next Army Chief of Staff, I think, and
[51:13] Speaker 4: I know people who would know, and they told me
[51:15] Speaker 4: he was going to be the next Army chief set
[51:18] Speaker 4: so big loss, big loss. I don't know how that
[51:22] Speaker 4: works now. I think he there's an issue of keeping
[51:25] Speaker 4: his four star because when he retires, this guy needs
[51:28] Speaker 4: to be able to and I know this is seems
[51:32] Speaker 4: forever but and he'll probably move on with his life.
[51:35] Speaker 4: I hope he comes back, and I don't know if
[51:40] Speaker 4: that's possible. But obviously the current acting or not acting,
[51:44] Speaker 4: the current Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff was
[51:47] Speaker 4: retired before it he became the Chairman of the Joint
[51:51] Speaker 4: Chiefs of Staff, So maybe CD can do the same thing.
[51:56] Speaker 1: Yeah, and for everybody else, like you know, who doesn't
[51:58] Speaker 1: know the insight in a working the Pentagon, who exactly
[52:01] Speaker 1: General Donahue is uh the famous picture of him walking
[52:05] Speaker 1: onto the either was c. Seventeen or whatever getting leaving Afghanistan,
[52:10] Speaker 1: So he was technically the last boots on the ground
[52:12] Speaker 1: from our twenty year adventure in Afghanistan. Yeah, it's pretty
[52:17] Speaker 1: incredible on a guy like that get gets pushed out
[52:20] Speaker 1: and frankly like John, if you if you're thinking that's
[52:23] Speaker 1: because of you know, strategy in Ukraine, I don't understand.
[52:28] Speaker 1: I don't see where the downside is of helping Ukraine. Okay,
[52:33] Speaker 1: if you don't want to give him one hundred billion
[52:35] Speaker 1: dollars a year, fine, but like more than what we're
[52:37] Speaker 1: doing right now, I'd understand where the friction is from.
[52:41] Speaker 1: I mean, I do understand obviously we all know why,
[52:44] Speaker 1: but I'm saying like it just doesn't make sense.
[52:48] Speaker 4: At one point, since you brought it up, and rightfully,
[52:52] Speaker 4: I'd like to say for those that are blaming General Donahue,
[52:56] Speaker 4: I'm like the exod of Afghanistan. One, the military doesn't
[53:02] Speaker 4: make policy. Two, he was sent there after the decision
[53:06] Speaker 4: was made and it was actually he was already going down.
[53:11] Speaker 4: He made the best that he could of the situation
[53:14] Speaker 4: he was in period. So blaming him.
[53:16] Speaker 5: For it is just, in my opinion, nonsense. Not that
[53:20] Speaker 5: many people are. Yeah, that is an issue. In my opinion,
[53:26] Speaker 5: it's not. He was simply ordered and he did the best.
[53:30] Speaker 2: Yeah.
[53:30] Speaker 1: And if anyone's confused as to what I'm talking about
[53:33] Speaker 1: in terms of it's because this administration for some reason
[53:38] Speaker 1: or other cowtows to the Putin regime and does everything
[53:42] Speaker 1: it can to make it as easy as possible for
[53:44] Speaker 1: Putin to get what he wants or play Catum at
[53:48] Speaker 1: the very minimum, play Catom, and it's a fucking disgrace.
[53:50] Speaker 1: Let's be honest. Just I just want to make sure
[53:53] Speaker 1: there's nobody confused about how I feel. Yeah, all right, boys, Uh,
[54:02] Speaker 1: if there's anything else, this is great. We'll do the plugs.
[54:05] Speaker 1: Look at John's beautiful background too. You can grab his
[54:08] Speaker 1: two books, Theory of a Regular War and I ran
[54:11] Speaker 1: Shadow Weapons. So the reason why he did that is
[54:13] Speaker 1: for me to be able to plug it and remember
[54:14] Speaker 1: the titles of the books, which I appreciate.
[54:17] Speaker 2: John, Thank you. Yeah.
[54:22] Speaker 1: Make the white Fish Security Summing happening in February of
[54:24] Speaker 1: twenty twenty seven.
[54:25] Speaker 2: Check that out. That link is in the description.
[54:28] Speaker 1: Uh mix got a great podcast called The Pub and
[54:30] Speaker 1: the Porch Applied Stoicism. All those links are in the description.
[54:34] Speaker 1: If you want to find these guys on LinkedIn or
[54:36] Speaker 1: Twitter or wherever else everything's there and help support the show,
[54:40] Speaker 1: go to Patreon dot com slash the teamhouse. Please you
[54:43] Speaker 1: get ad free episodes and early episodes like you'll get
[54:46] Speaker 1: this episode earlier than the than the regular people. So
[54:51] Speaker 1: we appreciate and we appreciate the continue support. Thank you guys, guys,
[54:55] Speaker 1: Happy Sunday, go get them punish the enemy. That's why
[55:00] Speaker 1: me and my friends say in our group chat in
[55:03] Speaker 1: the morning.
[55:04] Speaker 6: Later, Hey guys, I want to take a moment to
[55:10] Speaker 6: tell you about the Teamhouse Podcast newsletter. If you go
[55:13] Speaker 6: and subscribe, it's totally free, and what it will do
[55:17] Speaker 6: is aggregate all of our data, all of our content
[55:20] Speaker 6: that we put out, the things that are on the
[55:23] Speaker 6: Teamhouse on our geopolitics podcast, Eyes On, things that I
[55:28] Speaker 6: write journalistically with Sean Naylor on the high Side, anything
[55:32] Speaker 6: else that we have going on books, we recommend upcoming
[55:37] Speaker 6: guests that we have coming on the show, and also
[55:40] Speaker 6: you know, filtering in some fun stuff in there as well.
[55:44] Speaker 6: If you go and check it out, we send it
[55:45] Speaker 6: out just once a week. We don't want to spam
[55:47] Speaker 6: you guys. It's just a kind of roll up of
[55:49] Speaker 6: all of our content on a weekly basis. You can
[55:53] Speaker 6: find our newsletter at Teamhouse podcast dot kit dot com,
[55:57] Speaker 6: slash join again. The way website for that is Teamhouse
[56:01] Speaker 6: Podcast dot kit dot com slash join.
[56:05] Speaker 3: So We hope to see you there. The link will
[56:07] Speaker 3: be down The description

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.