Speaker 1: And even if, like if you don't buy the US
Speaker 1: should be leader of the free world. Obviously I think
Speaker 1: we all do. But even if you don't buy that,
Speaker 1: then you go to the argument of you do realize
Speaker 1: that every dime we spent given to Ukraine that depletes
Speaker 1: Russian military capability increases our relative strength to our most
Speaker 1: dangerous adversary. Right, So, even if you take out the morals,
Speaker 1: the ethics, the fact that we're democracy and we've always
Speaker 1: viewed ourself as leader their free world, every dime enhances
Speaker 1: our own national security. And then even if you don't
Speaker 1: buy that, there's three hundred and thirty five billion dollars
Speaker 1: worth of frozen Russian assets that they could use to
Speaker 1: support Ukraine. It wouldn't even be our own money. Right.
Speaker 1: This is one of those times you have to decide
Speaker 1: what side you're on it it's pretty clear, and you
Speaker 1: don't get you know, you don't get peace by capitulation.
Speaker 1: You're just gonna get more conflict.
Speaker 2: Everybody, Welcome to another episode of Eyes on Geopolitics. I'm
Speaker 2: joined today with Mick Moulroy, Jason Lyones, maybe Andy Milburn
Speaker 2: in a little bit. I think he's just finishing up
Speaker 2: his Bicec workout. A lot happening as usual. The big
Speaker 2: stuff that's cooking right now that's taken like precedent precedents
Speaker 2: in the news anyway, is the twenty eight point piece
Speaker 2: plan for Ukraine and Russia that was supposedly drawn up
Speaker 2: by the US, but we don't really know. There's a
Speaker 2: bit of back and forth with that. I mean, I
Speaker 2: right through the twenty eighth the whole thing, and it's
Speaker 2: an absolute it's kind of a joke. And here's Andy
Speaker 2: and he's not even there. It's okay, we keep going.
Speaker 2: I'm mutah, so Eric, Andy, Andy, we're recording, So get.
Speaker 3: Your mind right, Hey, never mind dying. I did I
Speaker 3: miss the the announcement was the announcement Jason's getting married.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I already.
Speaker 3: Had occasion, that's right.
Speaker 1: I got dressed up for the occasion.
Speaker 3: I did.
Speaker 1: Yeah, he did it well, he did it well.
Speaker 3: Congrats.
Speaker 1: Congratulations Jaank, you appreciate it.
Speaker 2: That's awesome. Congrats Jay. All right, let's start over. I'll
Speaker 2: leave that in. Actually, all right, so we're talking twenty
Speaker 2: eight point piece plan that was supposedly written by wit
Speaker 2: cough uh Secretary of Rubio. Maybe there's like so many
Speaker 2: conflicting reports going on that we don't even know. There
Speaker 2: is a report saying that it's basically translated from Russian
Speaker 2: and it was a Russian report that was handed to
Speaker 2: Wig cough. Uh, it's chaos. If you read through the
Speaker 2: twenty eight points, it's like kind of like, you know,
Speaker 2: there's some good stuff in there, but it's mostly bullshit. Like,
Speaker 2: let's be honest. Uh So I'm gonna pass this over
Speaker 2: to the experts. Tell me what you guys are thinking
Speaker 2: in terms of what this peace plan means. Also, it
Speaker 2: was they gave him a gave you crane a deadline
Speaker 2: of Thanksgiving, which is kind of fucking hilarious. You know,
Speaker 2: the state of your here's the future of your country,
Speaker 2: and you have five seven days to decide, So let
Speaker 2: us know as soon as possible. Mitch, I'm edatorializing now, guys. Sorry,
Speaker 2: alert like you should maybe beat, you know, play hardball
Speaker 2: at fucking Russia. You know, the actual aggressor of this
Speaker 2: war over you guys, make you go ahead.
Speaker 1: So we've been talking about this all week as the
Speaker 1: US plan on the news, as people know, and now
Speaker 1: we're hearing that it could have potentially been Russian drafted
Speaker 1: plan that was then leaked to the press, and quite frankly,
Speaker 1: if you read the twenty eight points, it looks like
Speaker 1: a Russian drafted plan. So I don't know, but there's
Speaker 1: certainly a lot several media reports from very valid sources
Speaker 1: that Secretary of Rubio essentially said that the US did
Speaker 1: not draft it and imply that Russia did so to
Speaker 1: start with that, don't know if it's true, but that's
Speaker 1: very consistent with the way Russia does negotiations. It's very
Speaker 1: much their version of psychological warfare, what they call decision
Speaker 1: shaping or reflexive control for those of you who follow
Speaker 1: the Russian means of state craft, which is always intertwined
Speaker 1: with intelligence operations. So it's possible that Russia drafted the
Speaker 1: plan to look like it came from the United States,
Speaker 1: gave it to a delegate of the United States, let
Speaker 1: it circulate, and then leaked it to the press to
Speaker 1: basically cause a lot of consternation with European partners and
Speaker 1: obviously with Ukraine. I don't know that that's what happened,
Speaker 1: but that is what happened as far as like the
Speaker 1: internation part of it. So, and there was a lot
Speaker 1: of pushback not only from all our European partners, but
Speaker 1: Republicans in Congress, including the chairman of the Senate Armed
Speaker 1: Services Committee, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, And that was
Speaker 1: the part about Secretary would be a briefing those Senators
Speaker 1: who are very much not in alignment with what it's
Speaker 1: asking Ukraine to do. So some of the points and
Speaker 1: then obviously turn over to the nflos here if you
Speaker 1: concede completely your territory, not just acknowledge it, you can't
Speaker 1: take it back militarily. That is obviously rewarding aggression, and
Speaker 1: it can't be done just by the leadership of Ukraine.
Speaker 1: It has to include a referendum that would be entirely
Speaker 1: against their interests. It then requires that Ukraine cuts its
Speaker 1: military in half, that it can never join NATO, that
Speaker 1: European forces who have already volunteered can't go in to
Speaker 1: secure you know, that the war does not restart. And
Speaker 1: then it gives a tenuous security guarantee which doesn't appear
Speaker 1: to be, you know, essentially a treaty what they would
Speaker 1: need to guarantee it. And it's important to point out
Speaker 1: that Ukraine currently has an agreement by the United States
Speaker 1: and the UK to protect it from an evasion, and
Speaker 1: you can see how that's going. So they and then
Speaker 1: you know, there's even some versions that say the Ukraine
Speaker 1: would have to pay for the security guarantee actually compensate
Speaker 1: the United States for it. So I'm now hoping that
Speaker 1: this was a Russian plan that just gets ripped up
Speaker 1: and thrown in the trash can, and that they start
Speaker 1: over with one that's far more aligned with Ukraine, which
Speaker 1: is our partner, not Russia, and that the Europeans really
Speaker 1: step up because there's a lot going on, I'm sure,
Speaker 1: and you can get into it, Jake, get into it
Speaker 1: on the battlefield right now, and it's not really going great.
Speaker 1: So we need to step up our support, tear up
Speaker 1: this agreement, start over, step up our support militarily and
Speaker 1: sanctions and the release of frozen funds or we're going
Speaker 1: to see a potential loss long term. It's going to
Speaker 1: take a while in Europe of a key democrat Acount Melbourne.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I mean, I don't know whether it's love for
Speaker 3: panic at this plan. It's just extraordinary. I mean, for instance,
Speaker 3: it prohibits Ukraine from launching a missile at Moscow or
Speaker 3: Saint Petersburg. But nowhere else in Russia, and there's no
Speaker 3: limit on Russian strikes at all. Russia basically is rewarded
Speaker 3: for whole its invasion by keeping all the territory it
Speaker 3: already has, plus some more. It gets welcomed into the
Speaker 3: international community, including the G eight, It gets relief from sanctions.
Speaker 3: What does Ukraine get? It gets a ceasefire which is
Speaker 3: likely to be temporary, and an American guarantee that Russia
Speaker 3: will not attack again. I think mich already summed up
Speaker 3: very nicely what that guarantee means. Yeah, I mean, this
Speaker 3: really does favor Putin because aside from limiting Ukrainians military
Speaker 3: cutting it in half, and by the way, there's absolutely
Speaker 3: no limit on the Russian military. So Ukraine is being
Speaker 3: pushed back. As they said, additional territory is being handed
Speaker 3: to Russia would be handed to Russia under this plan.
Speaker 3: And what's significant about that, Aside from the fact that
Speaker 3: whole cities full of Ukrainians are being turned over to
Speaker 3: the Russians, what's significant about that is that the Ukrainians
Speaker 3: of the last both sides, of the last two to
Speaker 3: three years have built up a series of fortifications and
Speaker 3: so now for Ukraine to pull back hand those fortifications
Speaker 3: over to Russia puts Russia in a doubly strong position
Speaker 3: if and when, I think we all know, when Russia
Speaker 3: decides to kick off the offense once again. No NATO
Speaker 3: troops are allowed to be stationed in Ukrainian territory, which
Speaker 3: puts an end to European plans which were until now
Speaker 3: supported by the United States to station a reassurance force
Speaker 3: there and essentially so Putin now he gets additional territory.
Speaker 3: It's a win for him, and he gets lifting lifting
Speaker 3: of sanctions which be hugely popular. He gets to rebuild
Speaker 3: his army, and he gets to continue to threaten not
Speaker 3: just Ukraine, but the you know, the whole flank of NATO, uh,
Speaker 3: you know, all all the way from from the Arctic
Speaker 3: to the Black Sea. And you know, if you've been
Speaker 3: following Putin, that's he is. He's he has to keep
Speaker 3: he has to keep gnawing away at at at what
Speaker 3: he perceives to be the enemies and trying to regain
Speaker 3: parts of the Soviet Empire, if not all of it.
Speaker 3: And that's what he's going to continue to do, uh,
Speaker 3: you know, aside from aside from anything else, We're going
Speaker 3: to look at the strategic messaging of this plan to
Speaker 3: to polices like Taiwan and South Korea. Again. You know,
Speaker 3: I'm just hoping this isn't going to be painted as
Speaker 3: a US plan. I agree with Mick it it looks
Speaker 3: like it was drawn out by a bunch of Russians
Speaker 3: after a heavy vodka drinking session and and and slipped
Speaker 3: into the hands maybe of a comatose diplomat who is
Speaker 3: now trumpeting at this as a as a US plan.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's probably Steve Wikoff. Let's like, not get it twisted.
Speaker 3: I didn't. I didn't mention it.
Speaker 2: I'll say it. I mean, and you know, we saw
Speaker 2: what happened. We heard what happened about a week ago.
Speaker 2: General Kellogg is out in January, so there's some rumors
Speaker 2: that he was fired or some rumors that he's resigning.
Speaker 2: Understand it will be so right because he's supposed to
Speaker 2: be the Special Envoy to Ukraine and he's been sidelined
Speaker 2: ever since, like probably that Oval Office blow up, uh
Speaker 2: with Jelenski and Trump couple. I mean, I was reading
Speaker 2: through this plan and it's almost fucking mind boggling that
Speaker 2: this could like you can dictate trying to dictate to Ukraine.
Speaker 2: You're gonna hold elections within one hundred days, You're gonna
Speaker 2: change your constitution, You're gonna you know, like you guys
Speaker 2: mentioned like cap your military. It's like, where the fuck
Speaker 2: do you get off telling us what to do with
Speaker 2: our country? And that's the US and Russia. I'm saying,
Speaker 2: that's Russia, definitely. It's just incredible. And there's another point
Speaker 2: here in terms of like the the frozen assets, the
Speaker 2: Russian assets, and one hundred billion would be given to
Speaker 2: Ukraine for the for the reconstruction. All three hundred billions
Speaker 2: should be given to Ukraine, if not for the reconstruction,
Speaker 2: for weapons to fucking keep smoking Russian soldiers and the
Speaker 2: interesting pizza like I was looking at is the US
Speaker 2: will receive fifty profits of these projects. It's like not
Speaker 2: everything is a fucking hotel deal, you know what I'm saying,
Speaker 2: Like these are real people's lives, Like let's get a
Speaker 2: ceasefire done. That makes sense for everybody, not so al much.
Speaker 2: They can fuck off the Russians in my opinion, but
Speaker 2: for Ukraine and then work on a lost, long lasting
Speaker 2: piece plan instead of like just these fucking grubby ass
Speaker 2: hands trying to get in and loot Ukraine for what
Speaker 2: it's worth.
Speaker 1: It tells, it tells, it tells NATO what to do too, exactly,
Speaker 1: it says NATO can't expand yeah, right, so now now
Speaker 1: we're we're selling out Ukraine NATO all for let's let's
Speaker 1: be let's be real. This isn't gonna last. As soon
Speaker 1: as they get to the negotiation table, Ukraine and the
Speaker 1: European partners, if they're invited, are gonna say no, just no.
Speaker 2: Well, that massa has kind of been clear ever since
Speaker 2: this planet came out. Right, Zelenski had like a big
Speaker 2: ten minute address to the nation, and he put it
Speaker 2: pretty bluntly, talking about how, you know, we're in a
Speaker 2: tough spot where like either give up our dignity or
Speaker 2: lose one of our biggest allies in the US.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and it's a big deal. I mean, a lot
Speaker 1: of the weapon system they have rely on the US intelligence.
Speaker 1: And if we're cut off intelligence, well there you go.
Speaker 1: I mean we've cut I think we've cut a lot
Speaker 1: of our security assistance down recently, losing it entirely. Is
Speaker 1: I hope there's there's some the Europeans step up right,
Speaker 1: I hope there's some churchhills out there, a lot less
Speaker 1: chamberlains because this is going to require and you know
Speaker 1: the battles that are going on right now, polkrits Am
Speaker 1: I saying that, right Andy, the hub of Ukrainian logistics
Speaker 1: is by all analysts I'm talking to, the Ukrainians are
Speaker 1: outnumbered almost ten to one. That the Tendu was hold on,
Speaker 1: that city would be one of the biggest to fall
Speaker 1: and it would really impact Ukrainians' ability to resupply themselves. Right. So,
Speaker 1: they're fighting against an overwhelming enemy for multiple for multiple years,
Speaker 1: and they have lukewarm support not only by their allies,
Speaker 1: but their allies that are literally right next to them.
Speaker 1: So this is always has been. But this is the
Speaker 1: situation where your neighbor's house is on fire. Are you
Speaker 1: going to wait to your houses on fire to start
Speaker 1: putting it out? Are you going to go help your
Speaker 1: neighbor here?
Speaker 2: Right?
Speaker 1: So it it really does take a leader to step up,
Speaker 1: hopefully multiple and put their actions where their mouth is.
Speaker 1: Harshly worded tweets are all huddling around a table to
Speaker 1: listen to a speakerphone conversations is not going to do it.
Speaker 1: It's going to take people being very definitive and stop
Speaker 1: caring about what's what Russian says. They're going to threaten
Speaker 1: nuclear war every time. We all know it, ignore it,
Speaker 1: move on, or else You're basically going to go down
Speaker 1: as cowards in my opinion, and I don't think anybody
Speaker 1: wants to be going down as a coward in history.
Speaker 1: But this is the history has been written right now.
Speaker 1: Hopefully people are going to take heat of that. And
Speaker 1: I'm not just talking about the US, I'm talking about
Speaker 1: all of the democracies that claim to be an alliance.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I am, you know, I can uni your right make.
Speaker 3: The only way ahead is for Europe to step up
Speaker 3: to the plate. I mean, we have been in the
Speaker 3: last year and a half two years an increasingly unreliable
Speaker 3: partner to Ukraine. And even before that, as I've said,
Speaker 3: and we grip fed Ukraine weapons allowing the Russians to adapt,
Speaker 3: We've given them too little, too late. I know there's
Speaker 3: a lot of the audience he who are going to
Speaker 3: disagree with that, but we're either in or we're out.
Speaker 3: And what we've done is kind of tiptoe around in
Speaker 3: the shallow water, being afraid of Putin and given things
Speaker 3: here and there, we should have poured on the lethal
Speaker 3: weight right from the start, and then we would be
Speaker 3: facing a very different situation now. I think all of
Speaker 3: us understand that who understand Putin? But we are where
Speaker 3: we are now, And I would say, you know, the
Speaker 3: best thing for Zelenski to do is not to fight
Speaker 3: this plan openly, but to try and negotiate and bring
Speaker 3: up other terms and counter terms, play Putin's game and
Speaker 3: watch Putin reject things, and eventually I think this administration
Speaker 3: will lose patients again, you know. And meanwhile, appeal to
Speaker 3: the Europeans. I mean, Europe's having some severe fiscal province
Speaker 3: right now, but they need to step up to the
Speaker 3: players I've said, and and I think you know there
Speaker 3: are European leaders willing to do that. Poland is the
Speaker 3: Baltic countries. The UK even under a labor government, has
Speaker 3: been more of a staunch support of Ukraine than our
Speaker 3: own government. So I think that, you know, to your
Speaker 3: point of finding a church, I'm not sure there is
Speaker 3: a church out there unless you're looking at a very
Speaker 3: gallic one macron. I know that's going to cen you
Speaker 3: to down people's spines. But you may not find individual leaders.
Speaker 3: But in the Baltics actually and in Poland, you're going
Speaker 3: to find very determined front to whatever the cost, to
Speaker 3: continue to support Ukraine to fight Russia. And Europe's make
Speaker 3: great strides in the last two years in manufacturing immune
Speaker 3: particularly one five five rounds, which you know that there's
Speaker 3: been a shortfall lot and uh, and Europe's going all
Speaker 3: in to include Germany on providing a defense systems uh,
Speaker 3: the you know, long range cruise and ballistic missiles. So
Speaker 3: you know, I think, I think that's what we're going
Speaker 3: to see. It's just, of course, hugely disappointing that our
Speaker 3: own country is no longer a staunch defender of freedom. Also,
Speaker 3: it appears yea, and.
Speaker 4: I've said this before, and I think one of you
Speaker 4: mentioned it too. What does this look like to our
Speaker 4: allies on the other side of the world, to Taiwan,
Speaker 4: you know, and moret most importantly to China. If we
Speaker 4: can't even write our own if this is true, if
Speaker 4: we can't even write our own peace plan or peace proposal,
Speaker 4: or we're you know, or the ones we are writing
Speaker 4: are one side, heavily one sided, to the aggressor what
Speaker 4: is thay One's probably thinking what the hell are you
Speaker 4: going to do for us? You know, and China's probably
Speaker 4: thinking this is perfect play This is a perfect playbook,
Speaker 4: you know. So the ramifications on the other side of
Speaker 4: the global to me are just as important. That's what's
Speaker 4: happening in Ukraine.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and even if, like if you don't buy the
Speaker 1: US should be leader of the free world. Obviously I
Speaker 1: think we all do. But even if you don't buy that,
Speaker 1: then you go to the argument of you do realize
Speaker 1: that every dime we spent given to Ukraine that depletes
Speaker 1: Russian military capability increases our relative strength to our most
Speaker 1: dangerous adversary. Right, So, even if you take out the morals,
Speaker 1: the ethics, the fact that we're democracy and we've always
Speaker 1: viewed ourself as leader of the free world, every dime
Speaker 1: enhances our own national security. And then even if you
Speaker 1: don't buy that, there's three hundred and thirty five billion
Speaker 1: dollars worth of frozen Russian assets they could use to
Speaker 1: support Ukrae. It wouldn't even be our own money, right,
Speaker 1: So this is one of those times you have to decide
Speaker 1: what side you're on it. It's pretty clear. You don't
Speaker 1: get you know, you don't get peace by capitulation. You're
Speaker 1: just going to get more conflict.
Speaker 3: And I don't know as you go ahead, Andy, No,
Speaker 3: it's just saying to make to your point about Pokrofsk.
Speaker 3: Actually one of our one of our listeners is a
Speaker 3: resident of pok Ross Score that's his hometown, because whenever
Speaker 3: I refer to it as a shithole, he gets quite upset.
Speaker 3: But sadly Pokrofsk, I mean it was a ship all before.
Speaker 3: I've spent quite a bit of time there, but it's
Speaker 3: been absolutely flattened and the environment there on the front line.
Speaker 3: We talked about this for a while. I mean we've
Speaker 3: talked about this before. It's just incomprehensible. I mean, anything
Speaker 3: that moves or amitzer heat signature is killed. You know,
Speaker 3: the Russians, there's talks of the Russians or you know
Speaker 3: stories of the Russians are attacking now on you know,
Speaker 3: carrying thermal blankets, stripping down to almost nothing in you know,
Speaker 3: small groups like twos and threes using sometimes quad bikes
Speaker 3: or motorcycles. No one uses APCs or infantry fighting vehicles anymore.
Speaker 3: Russie estimates. That's the Royal United Service Institute reputable. That's
Speaker 3: gonna say Russian reputable. British think tank estimates that in
Speaker 3: any given attack involving armored vehicles, two out of three
Speaker 3: are destroyed. I mean, the attrition is just incredible. Manned
Speaker 3: vehicles are becoming obsolete, and that's why the Ukrainians have
Speaker 3: have developed unmanned vehicles that shoot, move and communicate using AI.
Speaker 3: It's quite incredible. And there is a story in the
Speaker 3: Economists about the evacuation of medical person of I'm sorry, casualties,
Speaker 3: and they're using unmanned ground vehicles to do that. They
Speaker 3: recovered one guy from from no man's land. You know,
Speaker 3: I don't it's an exaggeration, but it says in the story, Yeah,
Speaker 3: and he gets He just climbs in the vehicle. It's
Speaker 3: like an egg, isn't. It closes around him and then
Speaker 3: Russians are trying to hit it with drones. It hits
Speaker 3: a mine and just keeps rolling. I mean, it's just unbelievable.
Speaker 1: Yeah, we do tackle training out here in Montana and
Speaker 1: we're adjusting based on all the incoming lessons learned from Ukraine. Right,
Speaker 1: there's going to be a lot more interests and you
Speaker 1: just it and individual low cost vehicles for transport, you know,
Speaker 1: motorspip cycles, electric ones, nomobiles, electric ones or at least
Speaker 1: their version. We're adjusting to all that because it's being
Speaker 1: you can see how things are shaping. And of course
Speaker 1: drone warfare is I mean, they just took a helicopter
Speaker 1: down I think an m I eight with a with
Speaker 1: a drone two hundred miles beyond enemy lines if I
Speaker 1: read it correctly. So all these lessons, that's the other
Speaker 1: thing that you ask to get from this. We should
Speaker 1: be sucking all this not only fully support in Ukraine
Speaker 1: with support, not fighting, but we could be getting all
Speaker 1: of these lessons learned because this we're looking at the
Speaker 1: face of modern warfare right now in Ukraine and it's ugly,
Speaker 1: but you don't want to lose it. So we need
Speaker 1: we need to be gathering all this information.
Speaker 3: And getting ready for Unfortunately, yeah, proliferation of FPD, that's
Speaker 3: first person view drones is particularly frightening. You know when
Speaker 3: you read about these things, you know these things are
Speaker 3: like multiple imagine multiple snipers who you know don't just
Speaker 3: have direct line of line of side fire that can
Speaker 3: follow their victims into buildings. You know, once once one
Speaker 3: of these drones is locked onto you, and I you know,
Speaker 3: I forget what the percentage is, but you've got a
Speaker 3: slim chance of surviving. And these drones are just hovering
Speaker 3: over both sides. Are these drones just hovering over the
Speaker 3: other's territory looking for targets. I mean, it's it's a
Speaker 3: terrifying It's like a dystopian movie about the future.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it is. We better be gathering Raly in front too.
Speaker 3: And by the way, just you know, not everything's going
Speaker 3: Russia's way. I mean, they can knew. Russia continues to
Speaker 3: take casualties, and Russie saying at least a thousand a day.
Speaker 3: You know, on a good day, it's a thousand casualties
Speaker 3: a day. And I mean it's just it's just incredible.
Speaker 3: And Russia now has turned on its own bloggers. You know,
Speaker 3: there's this whole bloggos there of military kind of YouTuber
Speaker 3: telegrammers on the Russian side who are commenting on the war.
Speaker 3: Of course, they're pro Russian. They always have been pro
Speaker 3: Russian because they're Russians, right, But now a bunch of
Speaker 3: them have turned against the conduct of the war. I mean,
Speaker 3: they've always been quite critical, but now they come out
Speaker 3: and forced to criticize particular generals and the government itself
Speaker 3: on how the war has been conducted. And they in
Speaker 3: turn have been labeled as terrorists, hunted down and in
Speaker 3: some cases in prison. So you know, again they when
Speaker 3: this narrative about Russia, Everything's going Russia's way and Ukraine
Speaker 3: has no hope. It's not true. Russia has been advancing,
Speaker 3: but Russia's being threatening on the verge of taking pop
Speaker 3: Ross for almost two years now, which just shows a
Speaker 3: good point taking place. And for every yard they take,
Speaker 3: they're suffering just an incredible number of casualties, one thousand
Speaker 3: a day, you know, on a good day too, you know,
Speaker 3: and Russy was saying during assaults that can be fifteen
Speaker 3: hundred or more.
Speaker 1: And just imagine if we release the funds, we released
Speaker 1: any restrictions on advanced weapons systems, and we put the
Speaker 1: Action in Russia Act into place. How that would shift
Speaker 1: the situation right now?
Speaker 4: And not for nothing. But Russia's already has no qualms
Speaker 4: about fomenting, you know, sabotage in other countries in the
Speaker 4: UK and Poland, what was it last week? There was
Speaker 4: that rail explosion, and I guess they're charging two Ukrainians
Speaker 4: who are allegedly working on behalf of Russia. But it's uh.
Speaker 4: I mean, if that doesn't give European leaders the that
Speaker 4: they need to get all in on this, then I
Speaker 4: don't know what it is. Because Russia, if they get
Speaker 4: what they want you know, based on this twenty eight
Speaker 4: point plan there, that's not going to stop them there
Speaker 4: as far as I'm concerned.
Speaker 3: Yeah, And sadly, although we talked about Russian casualties, there
Speaker 3: is really they're not having an effect, right, I mean,
Speaker 3: no one in the in the regime that it really
Speaker 3: cares about casualties, and there isn't and there's such a
Speaker 3: firm clamp down on the population as far as the media,
Speaker 3: as far as speaking against the war, even about the war,
Speaker 3: that it's not as though, you know, it's not like
Speaker 3: it was in Afghanistan where groups of mothers got together
Speaker 3: and protested the war and that led in the end
Speaker 3: to Gelbachok pulling people out. This is a totally different situation,
Speaker 3: different regime. And by the way, Russia has not gone
Speaker 3: to second round of conscription. I mean, the last round
Speaker 3: of conscription was over two years ago. And that's because
Speaker 3: they're getting enough volunteers and they're offering huge amounts of money.
Speaker 3: The real story about how the war is being fought
Speaker 3: isn't filtering back to the Russian public. I mean, last
Speaker 3: year twenty twenty four, the Russians recruited like four hundred
Speaker 3: and thirty thousand troops, right, so they're recruiting more. Even
Speaker 3: if they're losing one thousand day, they're still recruiting more
Speaker 3: than they're losing. And in twenty twenty five, I think
Speaker 3: it's almost that that. I was like four hundred and
Speaker 3: three thousand, an enormous number of volunteers now, and plus
Speaker 3: of course they're emptying the jails. The amount of money
Speaker 3: that these guys are being offered is a huge amount.
Speaker 3: It's life changing money, but of course it's sadly for
Speaker 3: most of them, many of them, actually probably most of them.
Speaker 3: It's a life changing experience, and not in a good way.
Speaker 4: Yeah, and you just talked about emptying the jails in
Speaker 4: it sparked something I had read and so I just
Speaker 4: looked it up. Says that Russia, according to Ukrainian intelligence
Speaker 4: and human rights groups reports, Russia is systematically recruiting and
Speaker 4: sending men with significant mental and physical disabilities of the
Speaker 4: front lines, Like they're being declared unfit for duty and
Speaker 4: immediately they're being told too bad, sign this and they're
Speaker 4: sending them off to the front. You know, all kinds
Speaker 4: of mental and physical disabilities. It's just crazy.
Speaker 3: Yeah, it's a way of mix, isn't it? A very
Speaker 3: very high tech wall and yet the need for infantry
Speaker 3: is insatiable, demand for country on both sides, and the
Speaker 3: Ukrainians are having problems, severe problems, you know, that's partly
Speaker 3: why the line is so porous. That their units are
Speaker 3: routinely now staffed at forty percent or below, and those
Speaker 3: are frontline units. It's you know, they're just finding it
Speaker 3: really hard to define the manpower to fill combat units.
Speaker 3: And then they've got a huge desertion rate, you know.
Speaker 3: And you know, frankly, who can blame these guys because
Speaker 3: there was a very because they are so low on numbers,
Speaker 3: that means that for the guys they do have, they're
Speaker 3: spending an unending time in the trenches. It's not now
Speaker 3: even if when you read about the First World War,
Speaker 3: units were rotated, right, I mean, I'm not saying it
Speaker 3: was a picnic, but at least units were rotated back
Speaker 3: from the front after a period of time, and so
Speaker 3: you'd have a regiment manning a line and battalions would rotate,
Speaker 3: so you always had a battalion in the rest period.
Speaker 3: And the Ukrainians just can't do that. When you were
Speaker 3: talking fondly about the First World War, it's a good example.
Speaker 2: Yeah, destibilization in Ukraine.
Speaker 3: There is mobilization conscription, you know, for some reason, and
Speaker 3: I think this is a cultural piece. Age limit at
Speaker 3: the bottom of the lower threshold has always been quite high.
Speaker 3: It was in the early thirties and it went down
Speaker 3: to twenty seven I believe, and someone can correct me.
Speaker 3: I'm sure if I'm wrong. I believe it's twenty five.
Speaker 3: So you've still got a segment of the population, large
Speaker 3: segment of young men who are not eligible to call up.
Speaker 3: But you know, in the first year, and I mean
Speaker 3: I know this from personal experience, first year of the war,
Speaker 3: that there was a tremendous sturge of volunteers to go
Speaker 3: to the front. But sadly, you know, I mean that
Speaker 3: was three years ago, and those guys statistically would have
Speaker 3: been killed or wounded Ukraine's lost, you know, the best
Speaker 3: of its You some six hundred thousand estimated men eligible
Speaker 3: to fight, and I don't know if that includes eighteen
Speaker 3: to twenty five year olds have left the country illegally.
Speaker 3: If you were between the age of sixty and eighteen,
Speaker 3: you're not allowed and mail you cannot leave Ukraine. But
Speaker 3: an estimated six hundred thousand have left.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean, we'll obviously keep keep an eye on
Speaker 2: what's going on here. Little I just want to mention, like,
Speaker 2: the chief of staff of the army, what are you doing?
Speaker 3: Bro?
Speaker 2: He was I guess he was quoted or something about
Speaker 2: like you know, like hard line talking about like how
Speaker 2: you create ass till Thursday and that's it, which is
Speaker 2: like why even why even talking? Isn't there a chief
Speaker 2: of staff? Isn't there a joint chiefs of staff. Isn't
Speaker 2: there defense secretary? Like why are you popping off in
Speaker 2: the media unless Randy George? No, jeez, what's his name?
Speaker 2: And hold on.
Speaker 1: You talking about the civilian the secretary of the army.
Speaker 2: The army chief is yeah, I think it was the
Speaker 2: army chief of staff.
Speaker 4: Like the George Randy George current chief of staff.
Speaker 2: Might be him. Yeah, yeah, I think he went on
Speaker 2: he popped off. I'm like on the record, I don't
Speaker 2: know why say you that? Yeah, uh, that's that. I
Speaker 2: was just like what I think he might be actually
Speaker 2: in Geneva with Rubio right now as well. Anyway, we'll
Speaker 2: keep an eye on what's going on with the twenty
Speaker 2: eight point piece plan. I don't think it's gonna be
Speaker 2: signed and we're gonna buy win by some by Christmas
Speaker 2: will have a fucking parade more to come obviously with that,
Speaker 2: I wanna uh touch on what's going on, what's going
Speaker 2: on with Venezuela. A bunch of what are they called
Speaker 2: note rams like yeah, yeah that uh, you know, airspace
Speaker 2: is closed and stuff like that in and around the
Speaker 2: Caribbean and Venezuela reports about doing leaf lift drops. We
Speaker 2: have seen a bit of sabotage going on, some oil
Speaker 2: refinery and oils stations going up in flames. You know
Speaker 2: who could that be? Obviously the CIA working with Venezuelan people. Ah,
Speaker 2: what are we looking at with that? Make You had
Speaker 2: mentioned a little bit about that on our group chat.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Obviously I don't know when we're talking, but it's
Speaker 1: clear that that at least. Plenty of people in the
Speaker 1: media think that this has started, right, So the covert phase,
Speaker 1: which would come first, kind of uh shape the battle space,
Speaker 1: so to speak, with sabotage operations, likely fomenting potential uprising
Speaker 1: against Maduro, replacing him, trying to get to his inner
Speaker 1: circle to do that, push him out, maybe give him
Speaker 1: an off ramp flight to Cuba. This speculation on my part.
Speaker 1: If it works, it could you know, it certainly would
Speaker 1: be good for the people of Venezuela and it would
Speaker 1: avoid the need for military action. If it doesn't work,
Speaker 1: we certainly have the firepower in place for air and
Speaker 1: missile strikes. Whether it's just focused on drug infrastructure, narcotics infrastructure,
Speaker 1: or also on the capabilities. We'll find out. But the
Speaker 1: dates that people are talking about is twenty four November
Speaker 1: because that's when the Foreign Terrorist Organization designation goes into place.
Speaker 1: They covert efforts, which won't stop. Of course, even if
Speaker 1: we go over, we'll have time to at least begin
Speaker 1: and we could see a pretty busy week next week.
Speaker 1: Of course, the questions from they are going to be
Speaker 1: is how limited are these military actions if there are
Speaker 1: military actions, and what is Congress going to do. Are
Speaker 1: they going to do nothing? Are they going to They're
Speaker 1: going to require that they're approve, you know, under the
Speaker 1: War Powers Act. There's a lot of questions, but certainly
Speaker 1: we could see a lot of action coming up right
Speaker 1: time for Thanksgiving.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 2: I I.
Speaker 3: Assume that this is all calculated to get Maduro to
Speaker 3: step down, you know, to to enhance the opposition within
Speaker 3: Venezuela and to enhance their position and persuade Maduro to
Speaker 3: step down, you know. And of course I do hope
Speaker 3: that we don't really planning to go to war against Venezuela.
Speaker 3: But I mean, it would seem that I don't have
Speaker 3: to appear to apologize for saying this, but it would
Speaker 3: seem to be far fetched, wouldn't it. I mean, especially
Speaker 3: in light of what we've been hearing from the administration
Speaker 3: on the side almost being isolationists and avoiding foreign wars
Speaker 3: going ahead, or maybe fighting against Venezuela doesn't count as
Speaker 3: a foreign war in their books. I don't know much more.
Speaker 2: Bombing like Iran, you know, and everybody else like those
Speaker 2: seem like foreign not wars, but at least escapades. Well,
Speaker 2: I mean, if you run on stopping war, I don't
Speaker 2: think like be too bombing Iran and then you know,
Speaker 2: threatening to bomb the ship out of Venezuela really is
Speaker 2: a campaign promise achieved.
Speaker 3: I mean a playing Devil's advocate, those two, those two
Speaker 3: activities on different planes. The no pun intended because you know,
Speaker 3: the strike against Iran's nuclear facilities could be regarded as
Speaker 3: the culmination of you know, a decade and a half
Speaker 3: of planning and negotiation and planning. And again I'm playing
Speaker 3: Devil's advocate here, and you know, the strike was calculated
Speaker 3: to preempt a situation that would have led to increased
Speaker 3: conflict or war in the Middle East or reduce stability
Speaker 3: in the Middle East. I mean that is that that
Speaker 3: is an argument for the bombing of Iran's nuclear facilities,
Speaker 3: but I cannot think of a comparative argument to use
Speaker 3: as far as going to war with Venezuela.
Speaker 2: Yeah, so it was like the first nuclear deal with Iran,
Speaker 2: right in terms of like US wanting them not to enricheranium.
Speaker 1: Yeah, right, I don't know. But at that time, to
Speaker 1: Andy's point, go ahead, to Andy's point, Israel had already
Speaker 1: destroyed their their air and muscle defense, their air force.
Speaker 1: If there was any good if there was ever going
Speaker 1: to be a good time to do that, which the
Speaker 1: biggest risk, of course, would be to the aircraft that
Speaker 1: was it. I mean, as you guys you might remember,
Speaker 1: I supported that. I'm not probably at any risk of
Speaker 1: putting the note about Peace Prize either, but that I
Speaker 1: think was supported by the by the situation. To Handy's point,
Speaker 1: I mean, I would love to stop narcotics coming to
Speaker 1: the United States, and I do think Maduro has destroyed
Speaker 1: Venezuela if it's caused a lot of instability in the
Speaker 1: Western hemisphere. I hope that we can do this. If
Speaker 1: we're going to do it, I hope we can do
Speaker 1: it without the need to put any servicemen or women
Speaker 1: in arms. So I hope the covert program that the
Speaker 1: President's already you know, announced, is successful.
Speaker 3: We'll see and now stokenly, yeah, yeah, if not, I
Speaker 3: don't know how many targets.
Speaker 1: I mean, maybe we have some in our audience that
Speaker 1: are that have a better idea. I mean, how long
Speaker 1: could an air campaign against Veezuela really last? I mean,
Speaker 1: is it going to look like, you know, we're just
Speaker 1: going to be hitting dirt dirt strips or I mean
Speaker 1: are we actually going to go after infrastructure targets? Uh,
Speaker 1: to make the situation worse at Venezuela red so even
Speaker 1: more people leave.
Speaker 3: I don't know.
Speaker 1: I mean, what what would be the the main effort
Speaker 1: of the air and missile strikes.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I mean, it's not as though I kind of
Speaker 3: mentionine Venezuela has a very sophisticated I adds, But again,
Speaker 3: I yeah, I'm not sure where we would be going.
Speaker 3: Often it's interesting, you know, we talked about the legality
Speaker 3: of striking these drug boats in it, and I think
Speaker 3: there's at least murmurings in the Senate about the same
Speaker 3: thing that. Yeah, I mean all of us, I don't think.
Speaker 3: I don't know. I don't mean to speak for you guys,
Speaker 3: but I don't think any of us would evitably have
Speaker 3: problems with killing members of cartel. But that's not necessarily
Speaker 3: the people who are dying number one, which is a concern,
Speaker 3: right if we're killing innocent people. And number two, I.
Speaker 2: Think a handful of those boats weren't from Venezuela either.
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, I mean, even if they were, it's you know,
Speaker 3: as we talk about Venezuela, it's not even the lead
Speaker 3: conduit of the drugs.
Speaker 1: Started automating their whole maritime distribution system. Yeah, like, it's
Speaker 1: kind of crazy they're actually putting people on it, unless
Speaker 1: they just really don't care about the individuals on it.
Speaker 1: They're just expendable. Car tells you. But if you made
Speaker 1: this with automated boats, which is common, we all know
Speaker 1: it's coming right. Well, do you think it subverts himself
Speaker 1: at hide and then come back up and then land
Speaker 1: somewhere surreptitiously in the United States? Yeah, it's it's already happening.
Speaker 1: I gotta jump you guys, alright later we might be
Speaker 1: maybe talking to you later this week with this kicks off.
Speaker 1: Be a heck of a Thanksgiving special.
Speaker 2: All right, guys, do me a favorite check out check
Speaker 2: out mixed podcast and linkers in the description's got a
Speaker 2: new one about stoicism. All right, let's wrap this up
Speaker 2: with each other.
Speaker 1: We don't need.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I don't buy it. I don't buy that Venezuela
Speaker 2: is this big, dangerous narcotic state. It is, but it's
Speaker 2: not like ruining the infrastructure of the American people. If
Speaker 2: we really are serious about going after drugs, we're gonna
Speaker 2: have to go after Mexican cartels're gonna have to go
Speaker 2: to Colombian cartels, and we're gonna have to peep whack
Speaker 2: at the minimum. China makes the fucking fentool, like, who
Speaker 2: are we kidding here? So if somebody explained to me
Speaker 2: the fucking point about fucking taking out fucking Maduro.
Speaker 3: Yeah, but you know, I'm going to ship topics here
Speaker 3: before we sign off. And because you just you made
Speaker 3: me think about something as you normally do. And you know,
Speaker 3: we talked a little bit about Taiwan earlier, and we've
Speaker 3: all expressed concern about about kind of the drop in
Speaker 3: the USA's stance about projecting strategic ambiguity right about whether
Speaker 3: or not we would defend Taiwan because US three and
Speaker 3: I know Mickfield's this way too, because he has said
Speaker 3: as much US we may doubt very seriously that the
Speaker 3: United States will go to war over Taiwan, that Americans,
Speaker 3: America's sons and daughters will be in hard to be
Speaker 3: put in harms way, I don't. I think probably that
Speaker 3: would be politically unacceptable to the American public. But it
Speaker 3: has always been the stance of administrations on either you know,
Speaker 3: either side of the aisle not to tell China that
Speaker 3: right too, you could see they fuck around and find
Speaker 3: out to use that over used the expression and certainly
Speaker 3: deposture ourselves. And look what the Marine Corps is doing
Speaker 3: with false design twenty thirty. As though we do seriously
Speaker 3: intend to go to war with China, I mean, China
Speaker 3: is regarded as being our piecing threat for acquisitions, for
Speaker 3: training and everything. And even if it is just a
Speaker 3: colossal demonstration, there is a point to it, right, But
Speaker 3: we undermine that point if we turn our backs openly
Speaker 3: on Taiwan. That is a concern. So having said that,
Speaker 3: though I read an interesting article the other day that
Speaker 3: from a I love the term China watcher, but the
Speaker 3: China watcher right in one of the and DC and
Speaker 3: I remember his name in a moment doesn't matter, but
Speaker 3: you know his point is this, Look, the State Department
Speaker 3: reached out to the KMT opposition member in Taiwan, the
Speaker 3: Kumin Tang Party and the KMT. They're not exactly pro China,
Speaker 3: but they're less opposed to China, right, they're more open
Speaker 3: to conciliation, although obviously not giving up Taiwanese independence. So
Speaker 3: I'm talking about in Taiwan. The State Department curiously enough,
Speaker 3: reached out the opposition leader and invited him to visit
Speaker 3: the United States. That is bizarre, all right, instead of
Speaker 3: Taiwan's Taiwan's president and I forget the name of the party,
Speaker 3: but who represents a party that is very openly I
Speaker 3: won't say belligerent, but anti China and is very strident
Speaker 3: in voicing its intention to defend Taiwan to the last man,
Speaker 3: the last bullet. Right, So USS has done this to
Speaker 3: send a message perhaps and who did you send a
Speaker 3: message to Taiwanese opposition of a more conciliatory to China,
Speaker 3: maybe to China. And at the same time, G has
Speaker 3: been mass firing members of his military, uh, the army,
Speaker 3: in the navy primarily, and this is these are the
Speaker 3: old Guard who spent their whole lives preparing to invade China.
Speaker 3: So anyway, this, this China watcher postulates, I like that term,
Speaker 3: that what is happening is that there has been talks
Speaker 3: between G and Trump and the you know, the kind
Speaker 3: of the talks have gone along the line so of hey, look,
Speaker 3: let's you know, blah blah blah tariffs, but let's also
Speaker 3: talk Taiwan. Maybe there is some compromise here that doesn't
Speaker 3: involve a high out invasion of Taiwan, but also involves
Speaker 3: more of a partnership between Taiwan and China, and China
Speaker 3: involving the Kuman Tang Party uh going ahead, and then
Speaker 3: you know, both sides can declare victory and it's going
Speaker 3: to be better for both sides. And then g having
Speaker 3: committed to that or having decided that that's the best
Speaker 3: course of action, now is faced by the old god
Speaker 3: of his military. You are like, hey, boss, what the
Speaker 3: fuck are you talking about? No, that's all we mean,
Speaker 3: that's that's our whole reason for being is to invade Taiwan.
Speaker 3: And so now he's getting hard with them and firing
Speaker 3: them in mess. I mean, it's an interesting hypothesis. I
Speaker 3: don't think he has any evidence, but it's certainly you know,
Speaker 3: informed speculation answers the white question, Right, why wouldn't the
Speaker 3: opposition leader to Kuman Tang Party here, why would she
Speaker 3: be firing.
Speaker 2: Because back in the day, that would be like a big,
Speaker 2: massive news story, right.
Speaker 3: Like, yeah, yeah, that was going on exactly.
Speaker 2: I mean a little different now, like I want.
Speaker 3: And and the other thing is, so she is is
Speaker 3: firing these military leaders, and normally it's for corruption, but
Speaker 3: these are not corruption trials. They're just mass firings and
Speaker 3: without without any kind of indication of what they could
Speaker 3: be about. So it does certainly answer that question. Anyway,
Speaker 3: it's interesting speculation that she is like that there's some
Speaker 3: kind of like under the table negotiations like.
Speaker 2: Taiwan.
Speaker 3: Maybe. Yeah, I mean that's that that could be a
Speaker 3: course of action, because it would have to be a
Speaker 3: course of action whereby she could say to the Chinese people, hey, look,
Speaker 3: you know, basically the de facto delivered Taiwan, right, we
Speaker 3: didn't have to lose a ton of people doing that.
Speaker 3: So you know, I'm not saying it's a solution that
Speaker 3: the majority of Taiwanese would be ecstatic with. Who knows,
Speaker 3: clearly not right now because the party that is more
Speaker 3: consideratory conciliatory to China is in the minority, is only out. Anyway,
Speaker 3: would I bring that up?
Speaker 2: That's super interesting.
Speaker 3: And before we sign off though, the I would like
Speaker 3: to talk about and see if any of our listeners
Speaker 3: are interested. Do we have any positive Do we ever
Speaker 3: get positive comments? I think we do, don't we always? Yeah,
Speaker 3: we've got a we've got a hard catre of uh critics,
Speaker 3: but they keep it.
Speaker 2: I think it's like, I think that the ratio is
Speaker 2: very it's as.
Speaker 3: Many anyway for the for the serious fans of this show,
Speaker 3: and there are at least three of those. I think
Speaker 3: we should ask if they would be interested in like
Speaker 3: a deep dive on the drone war in Ukraine. I
Speaker 3: can bring in a guy who's been in Kiev, an
Speaker 3: American involved in that since the outset of the war.
Speaker 3: But there's some really fascinating lessons coming out of that
Speaker 3: that we haven't had a chance to talk about on
Speaker 3: the show. Yeah.
Speaker 2: I mean, since this is a dictatorship, the answer is yes,
Speaker 2: Like we don't need to put it to a vote
Speaker 2: to our listeners. Yeah, okay, I say yes, yeah, yeah,
Speaker 2: I am seeing ping in this in this show.
Speaker 3: And the other thing is we want to we want
Speaker 3: to book a hearing on the team house, which is
Speaker 3: where all the drinking takes place. Yeah, to talk about
Speaker 3: disgards of paper that that McK and I have been writing.
Speaker 3: It was seventy five pages long and then we found
Speaker 3: out that the limit this twenty five pages. So that's
Speaker 3: why so publishing a book it's like, what are we
Speaker 3: going to do with this now? Yeah?
Speaker 2: No, I mean I think it'd be great to publish
Speaker 2: that and let people read that. I'm sure there'll be
Speaker 2: insights in it that people really didn't think of or No,
Speaker 2: I know you've been tracking it.
Speaker 3: Boring. I mean we can chat and I mean we
Speaker 3: we won't be as lively as some of your guests.
Speaker 3: I mean, you know, at least a third of them
Speaker 3: are in prison right now, right another one just just
Speaker 3: went to the Big House over there.
Speaker 2: Yeah, former CIA.
Speaker 3: All types of that show of spies, traders, pedophiles. So
Speaker 3: I mean we're pretty run of the mill.
Speaker 2: Yeah, well you know yeah, once it's ready to go,
Speaker 2: we could definitely have you guys like, let's do a
Speaker 2: team house.
Speaker 1: Yeah, okay, what are you doing some digging?
Speaker 4: I know we talked about it for to bring somebody
Speaker 4: on and talk about Sudan Mozambique now, you know, because
Speaker 4: while yes, the thing's going on in Ukraine, uh and
Speaker 4: gods are absolutely critical, there's things going on in Africa
Speaker 4: that need to be talked about too. So I'm doing
Speaker 4: some tigging and try to bring some folks on and
Speaker 4: talk about it.
Speaker 3: Yes, it is good to me, Sudan. It's just I mean,
Speaker 3: it's not incredible that Sudan hasn't become more of a
Speaker 3: story in the media. But the impact of Sudan, the
Speaker 3: global impact of Sunanas of Sudan is you know, already
Speaker 3: far greater than that of Gaza, and and yet it
Speaker 3: receives very little publicity, hidden away as it is on
Speaker 3: the continent of Africa.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 2: Also, I'd love to talk more about like the proxy
Speaker 2: war that's going on between Saudi and uh yeah, Gatar, Yeah,
Speaker 2: because it seems like that's pretty hot heavy and Sudan.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it's crazy.
Speaker 2: Uh yeah. So those are things to look forward to,
Speaker 2: guys on the eyes On podcast. So do as a favor,
Speaker 2: like and subscribe, Tell a friend that's the best thing,
Speaker 2: Share it on your social media. Andy Milberg. Andy Milburn
Speaker 2: is a prolific author and his book his autobiography, is
Speaker 2: called When the Tempest Gathers Incredible. I want you to
Speaker 2: check it out. That link is in the description. Jason
Speaker 2: Lynes his links are in the description. He's still working
Speaker 2: on the book. Will keep you posting. Once he knows
Speaker 2: what's up, We'll let you guys know. And the best
Speaker 2: place to support the show is patreon dot com. Slash
Speaker 2: the Teamhouse. You get both eyes on geopolitics and the
Speaker 2: Teamhouse ad free early and if you have any questions
Speaker 2: you can shoot his questions. And yeah, as always this
Speaker 2: is great.
Speaker 1: Guys, good to see everybody. Take you care, Lenn.
Speaker 2: Thanks