Hey guys, it's Jack. I just wanted to talk to you today about
a way that you can help support the podcast. If you're not already,
we would really appreciate it if you guys went and reviewed us on Apple or
Spotify. Those reviews really help people find the podcast and help it get recognized,
and you know, if you've been enjoying the show, we really appreciate
your support. Another thing that you can do to support the channel is to
become a Patreon member. So we have Patreon memberships that started just five dollars
a month, and when you sign up, you get access to all of
our episodes add free. That's the big bonus for that. I mean,
we also do some Patreon bonus episodes for our subscribers, but this is the
biggest and best way that you can support the Teamhouse channel and podcast if you'd
like to, and we really appreciate that, So go and check us out
at patreon dot com slash the Teamhouse. Hello everyone, welcome to another episode
of iz On. I'm Andy Bilberin, fil my Marine Infantry and Special Operations
officer now working for the Team House. I'm very glad to be hosting this
episode with my co host, Dee Tacos, and Jason Lyons. Jason over
to you. Thanks, Andy, appreciate it. I'm Jason Lyons, former
Marine Marine Corps infantry and former CIA staff operations and Operations officer, and I
really appreciate being here with you guys. Like we've said in the past,
this is our guys. Take three guys sitting around our take on world affairs
as they occur, and I'm just happy to be here. Over to you
if you have anything. I just want to thank everybody for being here.
Jason, I'm glad you're back on it and your back's feeling better. I
have no real credentials at all. I'm just now I'm the movie producer,
yeah, podcast producer, but I have not I have no real Chippendale dancer.
Yeah that was my past. Yeah, that was my passion. Dance
was my passion for a couple of years there in my youth. But now
I'm happy to do this dipress. Yeah. I hope everyone likes subscribes.
If you're listening to us on audio, rate and review it, do whatever
you can to help, you know, spread out spread the message of what
we're doing. A political trying to keep it down the line facts you know,
and I have two experts here that you know, know what you're talking
about. So it's basically a show for me. Guys. It's thanks for
the ova whelming introduction date. You're welcome. Jason. You better step in
before totally buries himself. Well then I'll end up burying myself. But here
we go, so leading off we On Wednesday, Israeli Prime Minister Yahouh came
out publicly rejecting Hamas's proposal for a ceasefire to the ongoing conflict over there.
He flat out rejected the terms of proposal as preposterous, and he basically said
that the only thing that will end the war is the complete destruction of Hamas
whatever you know, whatever that means for as far as Israel's concerned. So
according to Ruters, I'm gonna read from what the confirmed sources say the document
of the proposal. Read it says, during the first forty five day phase,
all Israeli women, hostages, males under nineteen and the old and sick
will be freed in exchange for Palestinian women and children held in Israeli jails.
Israel would withdraw troops from Gods's populated areas. That's phase one. During the
second phase, it would not begin until both sides conclude indirect talks over the
requirements for ending mutual military operations and restoring complete calm. Obviously, what complete
calm means is relative to either side. The second phase would also include the
release of remaining male hostages and full Israeli withdrawal from all of Gaza. The
remains of any dead would be exchange during the third phase, and Washington has
cast this part of the deal for as part of a wider resolution for the
Middle East as a whole, conflict as a whole, hoping that there'll be
a reconciliation between Israel and out all of its our neighbors and the creation of
a Palestinian state. Blincoln Secretary Blincoln made a trip I believe it was Wednesday
there as well, so well Israeli as outright rejected it. The US still
has hope that there's going to be some sort of that this can at least
be the cornerstone for a long term ceasefire and a deal. Other from what
I've been reading, other partners in the East or in the Middle East,
such as Saudi Arabia, Saudi Arabia has flat out said that they like the
deal, but the only way that they would sign on to it would be
the establishment of a two state So yeah, two state solution. That's the
only way that they'll even speak with or entertained entering into relationship with Israel.
So I won't say that's a separate thing, but it is a separate thing,
and we already know Israel's stance on that. So I think what as
far as we are concerned, the US is concerned, and everybody the world
is, we need to look at the implications from a ten foot level all
the way up to a fifty thousand foot level on what you know this means,
if it's even partially implemented. I mean, obviously, first and foremost,
we want the hostages. Everyone wants the hostages returned. And we want
there to be a you know, we want the shooting to stop. We
want innocence to die or excuse me, hello, somebody's gonna take that and
cut it. Uh. That would never happen to anyone on a team house.
You wouldn't let that happen. You can see my face being right there
is Max Blumenthal. We want then, we want no more innocence nobody does.
So that is if you know, if we could have a perfect world
right now, that's the biggest and best thing to happen on both sides.
Regionally, obviously, you know, they we want as the US, I
say, we as the US would want a uh. We just we want
peace in the region for not just those on the ground, the innocence on
the ground, but for us as well. We have interests, you know,
uh for better or worse in the Middle East. And then we've got
the peripherals. We've got the Hooties, We've got you know, Iran,
who's got their you know, finger in the pie, so to speak.
So one way or another, the weather along with the positives of a ceasefire
and whatever else comes from that, there's the negatives, which is we're going
to be pricking at Iran and you know, the Huthis and any kind of
extremists in the region. So these are all things we're going to have to
take into account. And you know, for a I was just thinking about
that. I mean, this brings out so much and when we're not going
to have time to delve into everything here, but just some of the things
that you touched upon Jason, one of which which is a recurrent theme,
but it's very interesting. It's a very interesting phenomenon that is happening in two
countries right now, Ukraine and with Israel, where military commanders are apparently voicing
concerns that the stated political objectives are unattainable, and yet the political leaders are
still holding firm to those objectives that the commanders have told them we can't get
their boss. In the case of obviously net Yahoo, who by the way,
realizes that when this is over, you know, he's gone, so
I will make no more comments about that. But you know, in his
case, destruction of Hamas in very general terms, and his military commanders are
asking what exactly does that mean in terms of objectives on the ground, right
and not getting an answer. And the case we'll talk about this d I
think he wanted to his illutionies firing. This week's solutiony by the way,
headed up Ukrainian forces. And this is something that's been long time coming,
and the gradual disagreements becoming more and more serious as the offensive bogged down in
you know, in the south and eventually boiling over. But you know,
at root cause, fundamentally the largest difference between ZOLUTIONI and Zelenski were it wasn't
in their objectives. They're both one of with vigt Russians from Ukrainian soil.
But the fact was that Solutionary felt that Selenski was not willing to pay the
political price, which was going to general mobilization. Solutionali said, We're going
to need five hundred thousand additional troops right now the Ukrainian military. I'm sorry,
and I mean this is a good, fairly good segue. Right by
the way, we'll come back and talk about Israel. Great detail for a
couple of couple of episodes. Why while I'm out there later this month,
But you know, on the on the topic of Solution is firing, think
about this because this has this is very interesting, such a high tech war.
Eight now the the game change or the the the resource that that is
becoming most critical. It's not it's not artery shells right now. It's not
even you know, high mars or live bombs or any weapons system. It
is manpower. And I think, you know, I don't want to appear
prescient. In January, I was saying this, Ukrainians have a military of
eight hundred thousand. Solution is saying they need half a million, right,
that's what he was saying, half a million. Yeah, general, Yeah,
absolutely, general mobilization. Ukrainians have not gone to that yet, and
you know, one would guess that the only reason not to would be a
political reason. That it's kind of a I mean, it's a very unpopular
measure, right, but it's the solution is saying, hey boss, we
cannot get there from here. The offensive has has bought down. You know,
for an example, the last at the height of the offensive, the
Ukrainians made ten miles in ten days, the very high of the offense,
I've had the most successful down their robotine. You know that when the mainf
it was pushing, but they barbed down in twenty straight kilometers of Russian defenses.
Know, the Russians knew they were coming. And that's where the argument
started between Solutions and Zelenski. Zelenski, under immense pressure, all right,
to show gains on the ground to NATO is saying, hey, you've got
to go through it for it, you know, you've got to get We've
just got to continue conducting these huge attacks. And Solution is like, hey
man, there's no sign of incoming manpower, and at the rate we're losing
people, I cannot afford to do that, or we won't even be able
to hold the line, let alone exploit and offensive solution is supposedly his argument
all along was that unless they had a large exploitation force, they were not
going to be able to take advantage of any of their gains in the offense
of the hard won gains and breaking through these breaching lines. There's a host
of things to talk about here, and again it's not something you know that
we can go in a lot of detail right now, but I want to
come back to it because there's some really extraordinary things happening in the war in
Ukraine that we should take a look at. We've all heard about, you
know, the rise of unmanned systems, but the scale at which this is
happening has to be seen to be believed. And I'll give you an example.
It has cultural I mean, it has dart MPLF that is, you
know, doctrind through fielding of equipment implications for the US military. It has
cultural implications for the US military. Typical the Ukraine's are finding that the most
effective squad effective small unit in this type of warfare is twelve to sixteen men,
you know, roughly size of an infantry squad, larger than the US
Army's Infrat sky. It isn't matter at the amount of men. What's really
significant is that half of these guys are drone operators, all right. Even
the local security, you know, flank security, all these things that we
learn about in the infantry, aster course or whatever, all these things are
now being conducted at the tactical level, all these tasks by drones, you
know, so you can see the implications there. It's a different type of
fella. Who is who is really you know, the sought after dude.
Even down at that level. You know, what do you think they're doing
for it? I mean point man, right, the point man is using
a drone all the time. It's considered suicidal not to do that, all
right. Same thing now when they're getting to urpen clearing, there is even
using fpvs, which is the first person view drones which are old quite you
know, previously quite cot to racing drones that have been repurposed in Ukraine.
Some of you may have seen the videos and it's some extraordinary videos of these
things chasing, chasing, Russian soldiers, I mean, and vehicles under culverts,
inter bunkers, all kinds of things. I mean, we talk about
combined arms in conjunction of artillery. These fpuvs are really proving to be a
game changer. And down again down to the squad level when you look at
the Marine Infantry squad and I just speak of the Marine Infantry Squad because I
you know, I was a member of I always remember it said squad at
one stage. It has not changed as far as lethality significantly in the thirty
five years it has been since Pfc Melbourne was carrying the saw as a newly
fledged member of his fire team. But the Ukrainian squad certainly is, you
know, and they've learned hard lessons. But nevertheless, until we can find
unmanned systems that can take and whole ground, we're going to need flesh and
blood as infantrymen. And that is the problem now facing the Ukrainians. And
that was the fundamental, one of the most fundamental reasons between the split between
Ziluzi and Zelenski. And I think it's you know, it's sad that he's
gone. It is sad. I think it's a I mean, we want
to see civilian control the military in any Western democracy. So the act itself
is encouraging, I suppose. But the fact that it was Illuzhni who had
such an iconic hold on the Ukrainian soldiers, they loved him, they really
did. They sensed he was going to ask you that if he was a
soldiers general. I don't want to draw comparisons, but I will. You
know Montgomery in the Second World War, Montgomery was not necessarily a tactical genius,
but he knew the relative strengths and weaknesses between the British army and the
Germans. L al A. Maine was a triumph of material, you know,
to just stop piling everything. He was almost a nutritional general. But
the soldiers loved him because they knew he wasn't going to throw their lives away,
and that is how they felt about solutioning. You know, the word
got out that he was stopping these mass assaults without sufficient cover on a transparent
battlefield. By the way, the way that we conduct breaching in the US
military is pathetic now has been shown to be pathetic by t Sanders of twenty
first century warfare. Soso for Christ say, using you know, outdated methods
like smoke generation. Ukrainians had tried that, and we're getting massacred. And
that is why Solution stepped in autoed the tactics to move tree line by tree
line, covered by vehicles by small unit, you know, making small incremental
gains, but at least saving lives, which he knew was going to be
critical at this stage of the y. And I got a question, Yeah,
please, let's say they did mobilize half a million troops. Would it
make a huge difference in terms of pushing the Russians back? Yeah, that's
that's also a great question. I would say. I would say, you
know, it's a question of scale, right, five hundred thousand guys,
It's that's now you've got to you've got to factor in the town timeline to
get those dudes through the system. The Ukrainians, the Ukrainians have had to
push people through in a matter of a few weeks. You know, before
these guys get they're barely trained in many many units, most units was our
judgment motorcycle group even a year ago. But even then, it's going to
take a while to integrate and assimilate these guys. But yeah, sure,
that's a significant force. And here's the other part of this. The Russians,
as far as personnel part, are on the ropes too. You know,
they went to general mobilization or not even general mobilization popsh or mobilization over
a year ago to raise three hundred thousand guys. They've lost, they've lost,
you know, combined attrition more than that since then. So they too
are fielding under strength units and that the Ukrainians can put together this many dudes
and replenish the stocks of equipment that they have lost in the offensive. Yeah,
they've got a fighting chance, absolutely, but you've got to remember too
that there's many a slip between cup and lip that's going to take months.
You've got NATO's less less zealous members already kind of looking at Putin saying,
maybe we should go to the negotiation table. Right, Thank you Target Carson
by the way for that next. But before we do that, I do
want to talk about a couple of adaptations that are significant to what's happening now
in the Middle East. Right, So, the the Russians have adapted very
very quickly. You know, there's been a lot of a lot of news
about you know, the Ukrainians. So the Russians are using all the drones
in exactly the same way now even not not quite a discent the Ukrainians are,
but they're also adapting by using a weapon that has become the most feared
to the Ukrainian infantry. And the reports messages I'm getting back from people I
still know how that that's the glide bomb, all right. So you know,
earlier on in the war, the Russians were dropping dumb bombs and quite
ineffectively. They suffered high attrition, and of course the air war became kind
of what it became almost static. I mean, there was no air superiority
by either side. A operated behind or up to the front line. It
was considered suicidal to operate in front of the front line, right. But
so what the Russians have done, particularly with I mean all their or all
of their aircraft, rather than flying up or across the line, they will
lob these things, these glide bombs, from behind the lines, out of
range of Ukrainian EIGHTYA systems, all right. And these things have a warhead
of between you know, two hundred and five hundred kilograms, so significantly more
destructive than drones. And they are they are wrecking havoc. The Russians too
are using them almost in swarms with their lancet loitering ammunition. I know,
if you've smooth, you've been watching the videos maybe about these things. They
are. Land Set two is very feared weapon. You know, it's me
as is any loitering munition coming. I mean, one minute everything's fine,
next you're gone, all right, and there's no warning sign at least with
artillery or small arms or anything else. You get some indication, right or
they so. But but yeah, these things are tremendously have a tremendous psychological
impact, which is interesting. You know, the land set even though they
are the small warhead and even though they kind of plank and take out one
or two guys in small aircord at a time. So the Russians are adapting,
adapting fast in this. Now, when I say applications the Middle East,
the there's a couple of things, all right. So the Ukrainians have
done very well in the Black Sea. They've been using the kind of hoofy
tactics, all right. So there's a message for us here the downside.
But I suppose you call it a mosquito fleet. The Ukrainians really do not
have a navy worth talking about, but they've got plenty of anti ship missiles,
or rather missiles they've repurposed to be anti ship missiles. They've got still
very capable special operations guys, to include maritime special operations. And they've got
a fleet of seaborn drones that are literal that are really cutting edge, you
know, beyond what we have. And so with those things, plus you
know, the loitering amminisions of their own, they've been clinking away at the
Russian fleet with some success, but the Russians still largely control the Black Sea.
And you know, when we're talking about the fight for freedom of movement
there, you know, I don't want to suggest the Ukrainians have have brought
the Russians to a stand soil, but it's kind of interesting how they have
certainly certainly prevented that freedom of movement. The Russians are unable to impose the
blockade, and the Ukrainians, as a result, we're able to export you
know, four point eight million tons of grain last year, which is almost
back to their pre war levels. So again, you know, we should
be looking at what's happening in the Black Sea to glean some lessons. What
are the Russians, you know, what are the options to counter this this
type of this snipe of warfare the other thing very quickly because we're not going
to come back to Ukraine in this episode. Who knows what's going to happen
next episode? E w all right. Counter drone warfare then has has come
down to electronic warfare on both sides, all right, the Russians the Ukrainians
estimate that they lose about two thousand drones a month to Russian e w.
All right. And the Ukrainians have themselves brought in LT of systems and are
reporting that, yeah, these are way more effective than any kinetic solution.
So we gain you know, some lessons here that we can certainly learn from
them, you know, aside from that engagements on the ground from between vehicles.
This is kind of an interesting point. Have been small packets, right
we US military, We wouldn't dream of sending a tank out without a sister
tank, right, I mean that's you know, preferably a platoon, which
is four tanks. You know, you need your wingmen, you have mutual
support blah blah blah with the Ukrainians are operating their tanks and Bradley's or I
fees singly, why is that? Will? It comes back to live bombs
and lan set and it comes back to priority of targets. The Russians aren't
going to plank a single vehicle and lose an asset, right, even a
you know, even a lancet they might with lancipe certainly not a life bomb,
right, it costs a lot of money. So they're waiting for a
larger conglomeration, you know, at least a platoon, maybe company. So
the Ukraine has have figured out that if they can work out how to operate
alone in conjunction with infantry loan vehicle, then they're going to be more survival
and have more success. Hence that is why you have this extraordinary story of
a Bradley knocking out a T ninety, you know, a couple of weeks
ago, near near our detail. So anyway, hey, listen, I've
droned. I've gone on about Ukraine for amount back to you, any guy
one more? One more thought about Ukraine. I was thinking about Aslusy from
a political and slash intel standpoint. I had a thought of giving his popularity
with his troops. How much of this is this decision to remove him as
political because of it may be a political thrill, you know. So that's
something to think about. And on the outside, on the on the back
half of that, now that if if it is political, if part of
it is political, which we would you know, we would assume any replacement
is this is going to be somebody that's gonna you know, walk the line,
which would downline compromise you know, tactics, and you know, the
troops and stuff. So that's something to think about. No, that's a
really good point, really good point, Chason. I gotta tell you that
that the scuttle butt in Ukraine is exactly that that. Uh listen, I'm
just repeating, you know the word, and this is why it was.
It was a dangerous move to to fly this guy. I suppose, I
mean it was I suppose draw drawing comparison with maconface firing. But uh,
but to your point, yeah, that's I mean, politics in Ukraine,
as you know, is pretty cut in frost. And that's an understatement,
right, I mean, it takes you take no prisoners, and even a
guy like Zelenski, you know, ostensibly easy going, amiable, he wouldn't
have got where he is without being able to slit some throats politically, and
the popularity certainly of ZOLUTIONI could well have annoyed him. They had differences.
I mean there were Listen, there were essensibly there were good reasons so far,
I mean Solution. He had a public difference of opinion with him,
like, yeah, an interview to the economists in which Zolution he said,
hey, yeah, the war is a stalemate. You know, we can't
get there from here without more resources, which was a huge departure from his
boss. His boss I had to walk that back in so so, yes,
I agree with you, Jason. I think that's probably that could well
be a motivation. But there were enough reasons ostensibly for for the president to
blame it on other other things. Can I ask so Zelenski's like, you
know, he's trying to get more resources out of like you know, NATO
or the US specifically. Probably was it Like the biggest beef between them was
the mobilization, right he meant more in terms of manpower. Yeah, I
can't pretend to be you know, in the in the circle, but that
is Yeah, that's what I'm hearing that that that was you know that that
was the root cause. Yeah, I mean Solutionary emerged from the first year
of the war as a hero and he still is regarded as a hero to
the troops. I mean he is, you know, I mean my mind.
I mean, there's no doubt about it, and I can't believe they
used that term. But the last year has been a rough year. You
know. First year saw the defensive Kiev. It saw you know, the
can't keep breakthrough it's or retaking Kasan. But there's been definite changed in the
last Ukrainian casualties. Mount Ukrainians haven't released their figures, but all les song
that they uh, they were on parody for a while, both in vehicles
and in personnel during the offensive, which of course, you know, the
Ukrainians cannot they can't afford to sustain that, right, all right, So
back to the Middle East, and they are like Jason's Jason's expertise, the
US targeted strike on the what's the organization's name in Bagdad? The logistics guy
was it a CIA? Joe and Jason tell us everything. Let me close
the doors first, you know, I honestly I don't know, I would
venture and educated guests that we had that the agency had a hand in it,
whether it was on the ground intel or you know, strategic intel on
it, but I would think so that we would have had a hand in
it. It was the the precision of it would suggest that this was something
that was in the in the works for a little while, whether that's two
weeks or you know, because it was it was not indiscriminate at all,
And we've been wanted for I mean, this guy has been I would just
say, this guy has been on uh on on he's been on the Post
checklist. Yeah, he's been on the Post for a while for a while.
Yeah, so ye, no, sorry. And also to the fact
that we knew, uh going into this, you know, before we hit
the pickle switch, that we were going to incur the wrath of the iraqis
in this. So you know, at this point we're already talking about withdrawing
our troops from that, from the coalition anyway. So it's kind of one
of those in my eyes, it's one of those, well, we're going
to do it anyway. We're leaving anyway, so we're going to get our
licks in before we go. So you know, yeah, I do believe.
I mean even on a you know, on a common sense level,
agency or any intel apparatuses would have been at work in the planning and executing
of this thing. So hopefully that is a roundabout way of answering your question.
Yeah, it was. He had a strange name, was like with
some al Saudi, but he called himself Aboo Bacca. I don't know how
he got away with that, but that was that was his norm de guerre
after a big daddy aboobaka. And and actually uh and he was he headed
up The media reported faiously that he was there. You know, he handled
logistics, that he headed up KH operations in Syria. I don't believe he
headed up all KH operations in Syria. He's certainly connected with the drone operations,
and so you see, there may have been a perceived connection between the
fact that it was a drone attack and you know, on the base,
even though the drone came from Iraq. You know, this guy was supposedly
an expert in repurposing drones, so you know, we we had that.
But but in these statements, remember they just made a comment that he was
responsible for for aggression against US forces or whatever. Causing US casualties, not
specifically notice the attack on Tower twenty two. But you know, I say
all that because you know his ideal. And I've said this before. It's
immensely viscerally satisfying to see a bad guy killed. Right on the other hand,
one hopes it's part of a larger comprehensive plan. And we said the
same thing about the money. And by the way, you know, at
the time, I think we the more circumspect observers were saying that, hey,
listen, it's going to take a while for revenge to happen, but
revenge will happen. And it did you know Kadarveis Fla lost Mahandez and it
took three years, but they hit Tower twenty two. There's anyone who thinks
there's no connection. There is. So what I'm saying is we're injecting.
It's incredibly when you look at everything we've been talking about, right from what's
happening in the Middle East to what's happening in the I mean what's happening in
the Middle East holistically, from Gaza to the Red Sea. Right, obviously,
it's a wicked problem. To use General Nevey's terms and what we're doing
is injecting energy into the system. Israelis are injecting energy in the system.
Iran is right, and we're all kind of observing. Okay, what did
that do? Well? We're we should have some predictions about whenever we inject
energy into the system, to include whacking someone, you know, a mitigation
strategy, a just a campaign. So it's part of a larger picture.
And that's what I hope is happening. I'm not suggesting that that's not.
But there will be repercussions, of course, you know, and even in
the kind of information space we we do, we are going to suffer some
loss of ground. All right, that's all I'm saying. Okay, before
your audience goes crazy saying that I don't you know, I don't support killing,
which is I know, one of the main ethoses of the Team House
podcast. But but you know, when you talk about information spaces almost amusing.
Of course, the Iraqi military is up in arms about violation of sovereignty,
you know. The military spokesman said the United States has become a factor
for instability and threateness to entangle Iraq and the cycle of conflict. The coalition
consistently deviates from the reasons and objectives for its presence on our territory. Right,
so just laying you know, laying the reverse side of the red carpet
for us to to get out while the chairman of the PMC meets with the
Russian ambassador. The chairman of the PMC is an official Iraqi government position that
that happened. As I talked about two weeks ago. You see what's happening.
All this blood and treasure, We've spent all this effort in Iraq and
now we're kind of being eased out and coming in the back door. Is
Russia no cost to itself in blood and treasure and Iran? You don't worry,
We'll get We will talk about positive things later. Right. There's another
story out there too about the idea for Mussad hitting on you know, smoke
and i RGC guys in Syria. There's another report about somebody being poisoned to
don't remember that, but yeah, they killed actually three IRGC guys in a
farm near Damascus, which brings up an interesting point when we talk about again
and we you know, we stay clear of taking sides politically, but when
we talk but politics strives warfare, right, and we talk about our political
stance the Zabdia Israelis, how we're walking a fine line. And yet meanwhile,
although we we you know, say ourselves we didn't kill any IRGC guys
and the well publicized strikes, so we do behind the scenes almost the Asraeli's
are taking them out one by one in Syria. Yeah. So, like
my question, is part of the US strategy, like you've seen it with
specifically that the White House briefings like they're trying to cool some tangents, move
it towards the ceasefires negotiations. Is it part because they need Israel to kind
of turn down the volume a little bit, It because, like you said,
they bring so much energy to the region. Yeah, is that part
of a strategy, right, like to have them like pull back a little
bit so this place like kind of calms down a little bit. Yes,
certainly, you know, I mean that we are trying to we're trying to
lower the heat, right and and I mean the the Israelis have an advantage
in a sense and that they almost can do what they want, right,
and they know they will ultimately get us backing, and they're playing to a
domestic audience when they do so, right, it's the opposite for us.
And we're walking all these fine lines in the Middle East right now, and
we're trying to keep the lid on, and as we've seen, there's so
many relationships there that that don't work in terms of cause and effect anymore,
you know, like the Iranians and that proxies that. It's the unpredictability is
off the charts. And I mean, you throw in you name it,
you throw in the peripheral activity that is spiking or growing on the on the
Israel's northern border with his Bolla that's again almost behind the scenes, or the
trouble on the West Bank, discussions about Iranian influence now and infiltrating the West
Bank. I mean, these are not comforting signs, right. You don't
have to be chicken little to be saying wow, I really think I really
feel right now, there's so we're sitting on a powder keg in the Middle
East. Man. That is such a cliche, isn't it, But it
really does feel that way right now for all of these reasons. Let me
see what else on that. I'm just trying to think of anything else on
that topic. Oh hey, so yeah, information space Right. This week,
various very statements released about our strikes. But k H came out and
they basically said, hey, our previous ceasefire is off and there are no
US forces that are out of reach of our drones. Basically, you know,
specifically talked about using drones to to hit US again. Various and and
uh a cough. Another major militia group, Iranian back militia group said set
your clocks for a revenge time. It's minutes our missiles, it's seconds are
drones. Oh wow, like that I could see that. I could just
picture their like strategy secsion on that stage. Yeah, yeah, well I
think that would be a pretty cool Christmas present, Like, you know,
a clock literally with minutes that are missiles, seconds are drones. And you
know that that the both the initial halting of operations against US troops and then
this reinstatement of it is from a tap on the shoulder from big brother Iran.
That's I don't think that that was a group a small group decision.
I think that was okay, you know, back off for a few minutes
for a little bit, and now it's okay, go ahead and wrap it
up again. We got your back. So yeah, it's good. That's
a good point. It's you. It mightst be talked about last week.
The Iran. Of course, Iran stance is disingenuous. It has made these
groups capable of doing what they can do. Whether they are now controlled by
Iran or not is almost irrelevant. In fact, it's in our interests that
they are controlled by Iran, because at least then we have one semi rational
actor to insert pressure on. But our fear is and the evidence, well,
the indicators are that in the case of the who thi's and certain and
to certain extent the PMCs, and in Iraq they're beyond I mean, they're
no longer listening ye to kots force and the way of the knowledge and training
to do it. And that could be again, you know, unintended consequences
of a strike. Remember, you know, Jason, we talked about strikes,
and we go through all the other stuff why it needs to happen.
Now there's always the you know, what what happens? What are the repercussions?
Who replaces this guy? Right? And so who replaced Sulimani was a
guy named Ghanni who talked about a little bit last week, Different different guy.
Sulimani was loved by the rank and file, very charismatic, but he
the the militias in the rack were scared of him. Gharney doesn't exert that
kind of control. So part of it may be just natural kind of move
on. The kids have grown up when they leave the house. Part of
it may come down to personality, which is all important. Absolutely. How
are we doing on time? Uh? Pretty good. I think we're at
like thirty five is forty minutes? Yeah? You want to talk about Toucher
Colson real quick there? Yeah? The interview with Yeah, all right,
the Great History lesson of like Putlin's Putin's view on things. It was wild
that first thirty minutes of yeah, shutting down talker and being like no,
no, no, this is what's going on. I'll get to that whenever.
You know what I mean, he just freaking owned them. Yeah,
let me frame it this way. Okay, I'm not you know, sitting
now and make comments about mister Colson as a person. I don't know him,
and I'm sure he has many staunch fans within our audience, but but
I will say this that he had a terrific opportunity, you know, western
journalist, which he's we're gonna, we're almost going over time rich He's got
his boneus making it very evident. But you know, he he is the
first Western journalist right to get in with Putin recently, certainly all the major
networks have been turned down and he so he had this prime opportunity to really
get in and dig down. What were you thinking? What are you thinking
now? Well, instead he asked a series of softball questions, all right,
and he let Putin run off, just run off script and didn't bring
him back in. You know, he acted like a rookie. He acted
like a star strike rookie. So regardless of you know what you think about
this politically, blah blah blah, I think it was a huge loss opportunity.
And I just wish that we'd had someone or it had been someone of
more substance and greater talent than than Tucker Carlson. I mean, christ goodness
saked in the first you know, interview, first minutes of the interview,
we get we're in a link discussion about r Rick. What'said the Vrangian chieftain
of the ninth century. In the medieval reign of Yuoslav the Wise, and
I'm thinking, what just happened? We fell through the looking glass? Tuk
I get us back? And and by the way that you know, although
there may have been some crossover, there maybe a reason why they're talking about
this guy because he's kind of a he's kind of a hero with a right
wing rur Rick. He's doesn't Ruic sound like the guy in Dirty Rock and
Scoundrels who has to go to the box under the table and body. That's
a great reference because that used to be one of my favorite movies as a
kid. It was a great movie. It was Rupert Well. What was
true for me is when he spoke about Poland and uh world War two,
basically starting World War two. And literally right after that, I watched I
turned on YouTube and I was watching something and they were talking about uh Wagner's
footprint in Africa and how it's starting to wane a little bit and taking over
is what Russia has dubbed their Africa core. And I was like, oh,
oh, well, that's that term sounds so familiar. Yeah, I
was like, oh yeah, I know, that was that was a great
one. Poland started the Second World War by very selfishly being invaded by Germany
on third of September nineteen thirty nine, the h Martin and then and then
he claimed and chas and can talk about this at length that you know twenty
fourteen in Ukraine was a CIA backed coup by the way, you know,
Carlson seemed to not understand the difference that there was, so you know,
there were two revolutions when in four and twenty fourteen, and he got confused
between those two. He didn't ask a single question, hardball question, not
even about I don't know, Russian war crimes, including those for which Putin
stands personally accused, or the repression of domestic critics such as you know Navoni.
And the only thing he came away with was kind of these memories of
the seventeenth century Cossack leader, which which Putin, oh, a file of
letters, right, Yeah, that was hilarious. That should be like on
a Bengal card, like a word leader handing documents over to a journalist.
Like that's the best. When that happened, I love it. But on
a serious level, it sounded like Putin was hinting that he still might use
nukes. I think that's going to come up in any interview with him.
Oh yeah, no, I mean, yeah exactly. He said he wasn't
interested in invading Poland or Latvia, but of course he said the same thing
about Ukraine. Yeah. What I get what I get from Putin. And
this is like most of his interviews, our statements, is he plays like
the victim. Really well really, that's a message he's trying to put across,
like you know, woe is us, and like we're just trying to
negotiate with the West, like we're not doing anything. He did ask him
about like if Russia would be would Russia have joined NATO back in the nineties,
He's like, yeah, we would have been open to it. Like
what are we talking about? Yeah, I mean even though he wasn't running
the nineties. You know, one of the challenges for a guy interviewing Putin
is he's got this, especially when he's on home turf, very kind of
the sneering, supercilious, arrogant attitude that builds a wall between him and interviewer,
and many interviewers, especially in Russians, of course, fall into this
kind of sycophantic mode. So and it's very much Putin is in controls the
interview, and this was no exception. You know, he putin showed absolutely
no regard for the interest or pace, so the viewers and Tucker didn't bring
him back in. Who has just not he's not accustomed to explaining himself and
Carson didn't make him do it. And he's a he's an intel guy at
heart. He's a he's a spy. So, I mean, look at
what he did. Uh, I don't remember the year when he brought his
dog into the talks with I was at Merkle. I believe it was knowing
that she was terrified of dogs. Yeah, right in between them. I
mean, he's he's a he's an intel guy thrown through so he does I'll
give him credit. He does mention that that he is a. Yeah,
I'm a KGB guy. I worked for the main director and stuff like that,
like because he talked some ship about the c i AM he put he
put Carson in his pocket though, like at at one point when he mentions
the Carlson like oh yeah you you you know, try to get into the
c I A and we're rejected. Yeah that's interesting, Like he knows how
to get in your head. Yeah, well you know, here's the point.
I mean, he he blew it. I'm talking about Carson. You
know, as a as a as a professional journalist, he should be He
shouldn't be proud of that effort. You know, power power in Russia is
absolutely opaque, and it seems like the often seems as though the only only
one man in the know is Putin, and even he seems to be frequently
failing. And so you know, Carlson's granted this rare access to him,
and he blew it. And and the message we all got was, you
know, again, Putin's not a it's not to be trusted. Yeah,
but more importantly certainly not a guy to emulate or admire, is you know
kind of the at least I got the impression from from Tucker Carlson could be.
But that's you know, which is it's a shame. So that's see.
Well on that note, d O do you do we miss anything out?
Uh? No, I think we got everything. Jason, you got
anything that you want to touch on? Or no? I think it's all
a matter of, as Andy alluded to earlier, connecting all the dots between
everything. Nothing is happening in a vacuum, whether it's Ukraine, Middle East,
whatever it is, it's all connected. Whether it's for the military tactically,
what did we learn lessons learn politically? You know what's going to happen
next. I think we just need to keep an eye on it and keep
doing what we're doing. Yeah, well, I am going to wrap it
up now. And I know D has reminded me to say something. I
was desperately trying to remember what he'd reminded me of the same. Now I
know, all right, hate everyone, We really really welcome your support,
but kind of tangible proof of the it is really what we need. So
you know, even just like videos of the podcast, writing a review,
all of these things really really help out. So if you enjoy this,
if you kind of enjoy this format, you don't have to like us personally,
but please do please do like the episode, subscribe on whatever platform that
you are watching or listening to this, and follow us on social media.
And that is pretty much it. Yep. Well, we'll see you guys
again on Wednesday. We're going to be doing these twice a week because I
think, you know, the news is evolving so fast that I think it's
warranted. And yeah, exactly what Andy said, don't forget to like,
subscribe, share, tell your best friend about it. You know what I
mean, Like you're sitting there with your wife and she doesn't want to hear,
but tell her about it anyway, you know, inundate people. So
thanks guys, all the best, See you in a couple of days.