Speaker 1: Hey guys, it's Jack.
Speaker 2: I just want to talk to you for a moment
Speaker 2: about how you can support the show. If you've been
Speaker 2: watching it enjoying it, but you'd like to get a
Speaker 2: little bit more involved and help us continue to do this,
Speaker 2: you can check out our Patreon It is patreon dot
Speaker 2: com slash the Teamhouse, and for five dollars a month,
Speaker 2: you can get access to all of these episodes of
Speaker 2: The Teamhouse ad free.
Speaker 1: The same goes with.
Speaker 2: Our affiliated podcast eyes On with Andy Milburn, Jason Lyons
Speaker 2: mcmulroy that one you will also get all of those
Speaker 2: episodes ad free, and you support the channel and the show,
Speaker 2: and we really appreciate it. The Patreon members are literally
Speaker 2: what has helped this company, this small business survive, especially
Speaker 2: during our early years, and you are what continues to
Speaker 2: help this thing going even as we navigate the turbulent
Speaker 2: world of YouTube advertising. So we really appreciate all of
Speaker 2: you guys. There's going to be a link down in
Speaker 2: the description to that Patreon page, and there is also
Speaker 2: going to be a link to our new merch shop,
Speaker 2: so if you guys want to go and get some
Speaker 2: Team House merchandise. We got stickers and we also have patches,
Speaker 2: and I should mention if you sign up for Patreon
Speaker 2: at ten dollars a month, we will mail you this
Speaker 2: patch as well, so we really appreciate that. But they're
Speaker 2: also for sale on the merch shop and additionally, they
Speaker 2: got t shirts up there, water bottles, a tote bag,
Speaker 2: coffee mugs, all that good stuff, so please go and
Speaker 2: check them out and support the show.
Speaker 1: We really appreciate it. Guys. Thank you.
Speaker 3: I'm everybody, welcome to another episode of iiz On. We
Speaker 3: got Nick Mulroy, Jason Lyons here today, myself to meet you. Contacos.
Speaker 3: A lot popping off since we've had a last episode.
Speaker 3: We get to have an emergency pod with Mark Poe Moreopolis.
Speaker 3: It was for Greek Independence dy rather than the Signal
Speaker 3: Gate stuff. But yeah, yeah, I didn't want any Marines
Speaker 3: Sully podcast. But the Marines are back and we haven't
Speaker 3: spoken about signal Gate publicly. We've been talking about it
Speaker 3: on our signal chat, but just what's gone on and
Speaker 3: the subsequent events afterwards, where you know, the entire administration
Speaker 3: seems to just be spinning this as.
Speaker 1: Like not a big deal. H incredible.
Speaker 3: I mean, everybody don't really need to rehash what went down.
Speaker 3: Mostly everybody knows what went down when signal Gate has
Speaker 3: been like the talk of the town for like the
Speaker 3: last week. So Mick, you start us off your thoughts,
Speaker 3: what if you did this?
Speaker 4: Ah well, I mean I'd start off starting with this.
Speaker 4: I mean, if if folks were upset about, you know,
Speaker 4: putting classified information on an email and sending it to
Speaker 4: a private server and all that, what I was, they should.
Speaker 5: Be upset about this.
Speaker 4: If you're upset about one and not the other, then
Speaker 4: it's really not about national security is and it's more
Speaker 4: about your performative artisan you know, beliefs, which is up
Speaker 4: to you. But I don't have those. So people should
Speaker 4: deal with classified information the way it's authorized to be
Speaker 4: dealt with it texts, sources and methods. And to the
Speaker 4: extent that we're talking about the recent event, it protects
Speaker 4: military members going into harms way. So everybody knows that,
Speaker 4: everybody that's served in the military and the intelligence community,
Speaker 4: this isn't this.
Speaker 5: Isn't a hard call.
Speaker 4: In my opinion, I've seen I've been in the Pentagon
Speaker 4: when we've had I've been obviously on missions. We had
Speaker 4: a mission chat. You know, my version of it was
Speaker 4: a little smaller than the Department of Defense. When I
Speaker 4: first got there and saw an actual like full military
Speaker 4: operation mission CHAT, I was incredibly impressed. But that's not
Speaker 4: what we're talking about today. We're talking about today is
Speaker 4: taking the TikTok from that which is definitely in a
Speaker 4: classified system. Everybody knows it's in a classified system. This
Speaker 4: is talking about we're going to attack an enemy using
Speaker 4: this platform at this time. And people say, well, didn't
Speaker 4: say the location. Well, the enemy knows where they are, guys, right,
Speaker 4: So all you need to know is an F eighteen.
Speaker 4: Where the F eighteen come from? USS Harry Truman, Man,
Speaker 4: that's where they come from. Did they know where the
Speaker 4: USS Harry Truman is? Yes, they have Iranian surveillance vessels
Speaker 4: all over the Red Sea. So if you know it's
Speaker 4: coming in two hours, you know where you are because
Speaker 4: they're going after Hooty leadership. And we'll get to that.
Speaker 4: Which is a good a good thing. This disclosed very
Speaker 4: sensitive classified information that never should have been out there.
Speaker 6: It is what it is.
Speaker 4: You shouldn't use signal, Yes, you're allowed to use signal.
Speaker 4: You're also allowed to pick up an open phone in
Speaker 4: the government but you're not allowed to do either of
Speaker 4: those with classified MATERI. So I would say the best
Speaker 4: to do, which is a little too late now and
Speaker 4: they're not asking me, is take responsibility for your actions.
Speaker 4: It meant you screwed up, come up with these and
Speaker 4: take the consequences, and it's up to the president uh
Speaker 4: and and come up with a better way to do
Speaker 4: this in the future that never lets us happen again.
Speaker 4: That's the way everybody's taught first day at boot camp
Speaker 4: or ocs.
Speaker 5: But that wasn't what happened. It was you know, excuse
Speaker 5: for this and blame this and on.
Speaker 4: So that's my take that going forward, we got to
Speaker 4: hold everybody accountable for how they treat classified material. It
Speaker 4: does come down the sources and method There's a lot
Speaker 4: more you could talk about that was put out there
Speaker 4: in this chat, you know, when it comes to sources
Speaker 4: that are conducting clandestine operations and other stuff like that.
Speaker 4: But ultimately this stuff should never have been put You
Speaker 4: can you cannot add somebody to a classified system that
Speaker 4: is not in the system, right you can on signal uh,
Speaker 4: and then probably means that this this person was already
Speaker 4: in somebody's you know, contact list. If you're if you
Speaker 4: have portable systems that you could use, they can set
Speaker 4: up tent. I think I forgot the name of the tent,
Speaker 4: but maybe Jason remembers it. But in a in a
Speaker 4: hotel room. You can obviously go to a skiff embassy
Speaker 4: that has a skiff from jump into the CI spaces.
Speaker 4: There's a thousand different ways to do it other than
Speaker 4: to go on commercial app which is probably penetrated by
Speaker 4: our adversary. Certainly they're trying to the last thing and
Speaker 4: thought over Jason, is every one of these persons is
Speaker 4: on the highest collection list for Russia, China or I
Speaker 4: was on the highest and I was not obviously the
Speaker 4: Secretary of Defense, and I still have on their list.
Speaker 4: They tried to They try to get into your personal
Speaker 4: devices and government devices every day, anything that touches the
Speaker 4: Internet they're trying to do. And there's and they also
Speaker 4: do that again journalists, especially if they report on national security,
Speaker 4: because who do they talk to national security? So they
Speaker 4: should probably do an entire review of this, figure out
Speaker 4: how to make sure it never happens again, and determine
Speaker 4: whether any of these devices had.
Speaker 5: Already been penetrated. Just to make sure that we know
Speaker 5: what the enemy might now know.
Speaker 6: Yeah, I agree with everything that you said. Nick.
Speaker 7: Like you said, from day one, you're taught, whether it's
Speaker 7: in you know, blot camp OCS, onboarding, when you're going
Speaker 7: to an intelligence agency, whatever it is, that number one
Speaker 7: personal responsibility is huge because that will guide everything else.
Speaker 7: And also, you know, stay off of unclassified platforms to
Speaker 7: discuss classified things, like even if you're something that we
Speaker 7: were taught when I was at CIA was even if
Speaker 7: you're down the street I forget the name of that
Speaker 7: pub that's right down the street from headquarters and you're
Speaker 7: with your classmates or your friends or whatever it is,
Speaker 7: you're not discussing classified information. You're not discussing work period
Speaker 7: because you just don't know. Even if you think the
Speaker 7: room is empty, you don't know if that room is
Speaker 7: micd up.
Speaker 6: You have no idea. So you have to be aware
Speaker 6: of that kind of stuff.
Speaker 7: And also, as you touched on, every one of the
Speaker 7: people that were on that group, they've had these briefings.
Speaker 7: Whether they want to say they did or not, they've
Speaker 7: had these briefings, and common sense just tells you that,
Speaker 7: you know, this is a platform that probably kids use
Speaker 7: you know, yes, it's you know, it's a secure quote
Speaker 7: unquote secure platform, but everybody uses it, so this shouldn't
Speaker 7: be discussed here. As you also said, everyone's a target on,
Speaker 7: especially everyone on that group. And I was thinking. I
Speaker 7: was talking with a friend about it, and he did
Speaker 7: the whole you know, wasn't classified thing, all this other stuff,
Speaker 7: and I said, okay, I could almost give it to
Speaker 7: you if the discussion has had a week after it happened,
Speaker 7: or you know, a month after it happened. But this
Speaker 7: is two hours before it happened. And if I'm not mistaken,
Speaker 7: and maybe I am, but I believe that it was
Speaker 7: called the Hoothy Working Group or something like that, so
Speaker 7: it's not hard to put it all together, you know,
Speaker 7: if you're someone who's in there. And uh, I also
Speaker 7: want to add that the fact that you know it,
Speaker 7: along with the mental gymnastics of dancing around taking responsibility.
Speaker 6: But people talking about charging this the reporter.
Speaker 7: Or the editor in chief for this for for what
Speaker 7: you know that it's just it's ridiculous and I'd be
Speaker 7: having just like you said, this same conversation, just switching
Speaker 7: names out. If this was a democratic you know, democrat
Speaker 7: administration or somebody else, because wrong is just wrong.
Speaker 4: So absolutely so, Jake Gilberts, is what you're talking about, Jay,
Speaker 4: j Gilberts to go there, But yeah, you want to
Speaker 4: run into some people.
Speaker 5: Yeah.
Speaker 4: I would point out to the last point that Jay
Speaker 4: made is if that's the idea, like it didn't say classified,
Speaker 4: then technically anybody in a skiff could read a document
Speaker 4: that has TSSCI codewordness and take all the information out
Speaker 4: of it, take it outside, not take the and just
Speaker 4: text it an it's not classified.
Speaker 7: I know someone sorry to interrupted, I know someone who
Speaker 7: got fired from the agency for doing just that, cutting
Speaker 7: printing out. They were printing out cables, cutting the classification
Speaker 7: off the headers and the footer and not taking it
Speaker 7: out of the building. But like discussing with people, it
Speaker 7: didn't need to be discussed with. Yeah, it's it's just
Speaker 7: common sense.
Speaker 5: It's this.
Speaker 4: Yes, it is the source of the methods, but especially
Speaker 4: in this case, it's the information. Yep, right, this is
Speaker 4: this is stuff that could get people killed. And I'm
Speaker 4: not a partisans so I'm just going to call balls
Speaker 4: and strikes all the time. I just wish more people would,
Speaker 4: you know, decouple themselves from being partisan and just focus
Speaker 4: more on just being an American and saying, hey, this
Speaker 4: is obviously something that should not have been done and
Speaker 4: it needs to not happen in the future. And then
Speaker 4: if the next step is talking about yeah, man, that
Speaker 4: is actually what we should be talking about. If it
Speaker 4: wasn't for this, you know, I think series of mistakes,
Speaker 4: because this is a pretty substantial escalation in a region.
Speaker 3: Yeah, one quick question about like when you do when
Speaker 3: you are a principle and you're starting in a new job,
Speaker 3: and let's say you are a whit cough or you
Speaker 3: are somebody who's not really been in the governmental world
Speaker 3: like national security world or heg seth right, like he's
Speaker 3: never been He's was in the military, but he's never
Speaker 3: been to that level. I mean the first day, you've
Speaker 3: got to be getting fucking briefs on like what to do,
Speaker 3: what not to do, right, Like that's got to be
Speaker 3: first and foremost. So it's not exactly like it was
Speaker 3: a couple of years ago and the things slipped his mind,
Speaker 3: Like this is like relatively recently. And you have a
Speaker 3: serious fucking job, man, like take it seriously. And you
Speaker 3: are provided with communications where you can chat with people
Speaker 3: about what's going on. Do that in the right way.
Speaker 3: Like I I said the joke last week with you guys,
Speaker 3: like you know, my dumb friends from Brooklyn have better
Speaker 3: like op SEC and some of these people that are
Speaker 3: supposed to have like the highest secrets that we've you know,
Speaker 3: the Secretary of Defense, like you're the top of the
Speaker 3: food chain national security advisor as well, your top of
Speaker 3: the food chain. So it's just kind of mind boggling
Speaker 3: how this could happen and how they could at a
Speaker 3: report our editor in chief of The Atlantic to the
Speaker 3: clue chat.
Speaker 1: And yeah, go ahead and mix.
Speaker 4: And you have a staff too, I mean, so you know,
Speaker 4: one of the things I told my staff was, if
Speaker 4: I'm screwing up, tell me, you know, I don't think
Speaker 4: you can hurt my feelings. I'd rather just do the
Speaker 4: do it the right way than and get counseled by
Speaker 4: my staff and the other So every one of their staff,
Speaker 4: I mean, and they have active uniform advisors obviously to
Speaker 4: the Secretary of Defense and all the way down in
Speaker 4: his staff. I did, they'll be they'll turn you up
Speaker 4: real quick if you're especially if you're breaking Opsact when
Speaker 4: it comes to a military operation, right, they take that
Speaker 4: very personal. So I don't know how this broke down.
Speaker 4: There's certainly a question of whether this is just the
Speaker 4: first time. To Jay's point, it said the HUTHI PC
Speaker 4: small group. PC small group is the normal term for
Speaker 4: the Principal's Committee meeting of that's pared down because it's sensitive, right,
Speaker 4: you don't need the Secretary of.
Speaker 1: Treasure that even though there Yeah.
Speaker 4: Yeah, I mean they can, they can pare it down
Speaker 4: that the small means it's it's not the full PC
Speaker 4: where you know, you have every Secretary of Agriculture and
Speaker 4: all that. So that's a question of whether this is
Speaker 4: the only time it happened. I mean, is they're they're
Speaker 4: labeling it of what you would label the actual meeting.
Speaker 4: So I don't know, I don't don't know. I wish
Speaker 4: people would just own up to it and then and
Speaker 4: then come up with the policy that you know, fixes it,
Speaker 4: and then we can start talking about Wow, so one
Speaker 4: hundred sorties in like a twenty four hour period being
Speaker 4: off just trying to hit the target facilities or the
Speaker 4: launch facilities.
Speaker 5: Rather they're going after the leadership. Yeah, which is great.
Speaker 4: I think it's about time that these these hooty leaders
Speaker 4: would like to get on with their you know, you know,
Speaker 4: five hundred ribbons and talk about you know.
Speaker 6: Back.
Speaker 4: Innocent, unarmed civilian vessels, you know, trying to get through
Speaker 4: the Red Sea. Start time, they start paying the price.
Speaker 4: So hats off those who carried off the mission. And
Speaker 4: I think it was the right policy decision. We'll see
Speaker 4: if it works, but the only way you're going to
Speaker 4: find out is to actually do this.
Speaker 5: And they're moving, you know. I think the.
Speaker 4: USS, Carl Vincent's and Guam it's even now, it'll be
Speaker 4: there mid April. I think that is publicly available information.
Speaker 4: I just googled it. They are moving, and I know
Speaker 4: we're gonna get into this. I think there's multiple B
Speaker 4: twos that have moved to Diego, Garcia. There's thirty five
Speaker 4: squadrons coming in. I mean they're getting ready to tune
Speaker 4: up some and I think that's the right answer. And
Speaker 4: it's also supposed to send a message to Iran, which
Speaker 4: I think it will.
Speaker 3: I think that's basically what the main thing is about, right,
Speaker 3: like sending the message to Wean, because I mean, you
Speaker 3: don't need five B twos to hit hoothy targets, right
Speaker 3: like what are we doing?
Speaker 1: Right? And the B two, like we.
Speaker 3: Discussed last week, is the only plan that can carry
Speaker 3: the mop the big boy, you know, thirty.
Speaker 1: Penetrator. What are you trying to hit with that? Right?
Speaker 1: And yeah, yeah, thank you, And like.
Speaker 3: You know, B twos can probably move around without their
Speaker 3: transponders on and get to from one point A to
Speaker 3: point B where it's not getting picked up on open
Speaker 3: source twitters and stuff that follow aviation. Like, let's be real, right, like,
Speaker 3: so there's a reason why they're putting this out there
Speaker 3: that we're moving such like that much hardware to a
Speaker 3: certain place which is in striking distance of around, Like
Speaker 3: the B twos can take off from Saint Louis from
Speaker 3: Missouri and bomb a r in and come back. You know,
Speaker 3: it's not exactly like so, I mean, it's kind of
Speaker 3: clear what's going on. Hopefully it does make our Ran
Speaker 3: come to the negotiating table for their nuclear weapons and
Speaker 3: hopefully Isral doesn't pop off beforehand. One quick last thing
Speaker 3: with Pete Hexseth and the signal gate stuff and the
Speaker 3: lack of OPSEC from the Wall Street Journal yesterday and
Speaker 3: last night, Hexeth brought his wife to sensitive meetings with
Speaker 3: foreign military officials. Mick, you were in the d D.
Speaker 3: Did you bring your wife to sensitive meetings with other
Speaker 3: you know, your your counterparts from foreign militaries.
Speaker 6: Uh?
Speaker 5: No, I mean I don't.
Speaker 4: I don't know what they're I mean by and I
Speaker 4: don't mean that as a way just to defend secretary,
Speaker 4: except I.
Speaker 1: Is it a meeting where like a meet and greet.
Speaker 5: Yeah, I don't know.
Speaker 4: I mean they definitely, you know a lot of these,
Speaker 4: Like I've been to events, a lot of events where
Speaker 4: I was there as the dasty with my wife, right, right,
Speaker 4: she's been doing that for thirty years, right, So right, man,
Speaker 4: I've got to a lot of meetings I didn't really
Speaker 4: want to go to. So I don't I don't know
Speaker 4: what the meeting was, So it's it's possible for me to.
Speaker 5: To really sure.
Speaker 3: It's not like a state visit where it's a dinner,
Speaker 3: dinner party or something like that.
Speaker 4: Yeah.
Speaker 7: Sorry, one last last thing I'm curious to ask to you.
Speaker 7: And I'm saying curious because I don't know the answer
Speaker 7: as to the legality of and I don't know if
Speaker 7: this is true or not, but I heard that the
Speaker 7: meeting the signal group chat was set to disappear, the
Speaker 7: messages to disappear after a certain amount of time. I
Speaker 7: don't know what that violates, you know, I do know,
Speaker 7: and Mike you know as well that the mantra is
Speaker 7: if you didn't write it down, it didn't happen. So
Speaker 7: I don't know if that's what we're doing here, you know,
Speaker 7: But I'm just curious about that.
Speaker 5: That's a good point, Jay.
Speaker 4: So there's a record law which is like they take,
Speaker 4: even at my level, they would take. They took all
Speaker 4: the notes that I wrote. I'm sure nobody can ever
Speaker 4: read them, but yeah, there's do you have to you
Speaker 4: have to keep all especially in this especially in the
Speaker 4: PCC meetings. That Policy Coordination Committee, which is the baseline
Speaker 4: inside the NSC, which is the old executive building right
Speaker 4: next the White House, right So there's there's people from
Speaker 4: the O, d C, I, A state and folks that
Speaker 4: come and meet in the NSC, and it goes the
Speaker 4: Policy Coordination Committee, which is what my level was. Then
Speaker 4: you have the deputy's committees, the deputy secretaries of this,
Speaker 4: that and the other.
Speaker 5: Then you have the PC, which is a.
Speaker 4: Principal's committee, so the actual secretaries and then if the
Speaker 4: president is there, it's called the NSC, so it's the
Speaker 4: PC plus the president makes it the NSC. But all
Speaker 4: that stuff there's recorded. I don't think they actually recorded,
Speaker 4: but they take notes and then people actually sign off
Speaker 4: on what was said.
Speaker 5: So we all agree.
Speaker 4: Primarily, we could agree what we agree to and what
Speaker 4: we're all going to do to make it happen right
Speaker 4: under the recage. Keep an act that way, under the
Speaker 4: transparency of government that people can eventually one day when
Speaker 4: it's declassified, say, oh, that's how the Bay of Pigs happened.
Speaker 3: Yeah, So a little bit more about Hegseth's wife, just
Speaker 3: to get the facts in there. Hex Seth's wife, Jennifer Hegseth,
Speaker 3: has been president two meetings where sensitive information would discussed,
Speaker 3: according to The Wall Street Journal, citing multiple people who
Speaker 3: were president at the meetings or have not college of
Speaker 3: her presence at them. The first meeting was high level
Speaker 3: discussion at the Pentagon with the top UK military officials,
Speaker 3: including the UK Minister of Defense John Healey, took place
Speaker 3: in early March, the day after the US was announced
Speaker 3: the US would stop sharing military intelligent military aid and
Speaker 3: intelligence with Ukraine, and the second was in Brussels in
Speaker 3: mid February at NATO headquarters during a meeting of the
Speaker 3: Ukraine Defense Contact Group, a form of about fifty nations
Speaker 3: meant to help coordinate military support for Ukraine as it
Speaker 3: tries to fight off its invasion from Russia.
Speaker 4: Yeah, I mean, again, sensitive is sure. If it was
Speaker 4: it was a meeting in which classified information was being discussed,
Speaker 4: and I don't know that it was, then the rules
Speaker 4: applied to everybody. So if you don't have a clearance already,
Speaker 4: you know should be in there. If it was just
Speaker 4: high level discussions that weren't classified, I mean that's.
Speaker 5: Yeah.
Speaker 6: I don't know.
Speaker 1: I can't.
Speaker 5: I don't cast the judgment on something.
Speaker 4: And then I don't know all the facts and I'm
Speaker 4: rarely not here a cast judge, and I'm gonna just
Speaker 4: explain what I think, you know, the rules are.
Speaker 3: Yeah, So back to the Hoho thies and you know, yeah,
Speaker 3: I mean we did hit them yesterday as well, in
Speaker 3: the last couple of days, hit a bunch of targets.
Speaker 3: I think they said over seventy five. So it's still
Speaker 3: going on. I mean, hopefully at some point red Sea
Speaker 3: kind of loosens up a little bit in terms of trade.
Speaker 5: Yeah.
Speaker 4: Absolutely, I mean this is going on when I was
Speaker 4: still in government, So this idea is all about Gaza.
Speaker 4: I mean they've they've been attacking. They attacked the Saudi
Speaker 4: oil facilities, they attacked you, they tried to they almost
Speaker 4: hit the international terminal at in Albadami, Baby and the Hookies.
Speaker 5: They obviously tried to attack Israel. They tried to.
Speaker 4: I mean I saw one report where our destroyer going
Speaker 4: through the Red Sea was they tried to attack one
Speaker 4: hundred and twenty times, right, and then they've hit and
Speaker 4: killed crew on commercial vessels. So they're terrorists. They're doing
Speaker 4: terrorist activities. They're attacking the US. It's not primate. I
Speaker 4: mean the US has taken the lead because we're the
Speaker 4: ones and you can see that in the chat. Actually
Speaker 4: we are the only ones that have the capability to
Speaker 4: do a lot about this. The French have an aircraft
Speaker 4: carrier there right now, I think near the Bob Almandez.
Speaker 4: But essentially no country can do this without the United States.
Speaker 4: So we have a coalition, but it's really led by US.
Speaker 4: It's not I mean, I think that's our place in
Speaker 4: the world, a leader in the world. We have the capability,
Speaker 4: but China gets more energy from this region than we do.
Speaker 4: Europe does send more trade through this region. Other countries
Speaker 4: need to step up. But I think it's the right
Speaker 4: decision by the United States. Although you know, you could
Speaker 4: see the disagreement in the chat, I think that ultimately
Speaker 4: the President made the right decision and that we need
Speaker 4: to amp up our efforts against the Huthies because what
Speaker 4: we were doing before clearly wasn't working. And there's no
Speaker 4: guaranteed this will work. But people tend to get You
Speaker 4: get their attention when you start killing them, right when
Speaker 4: the leadership starts seeing it's not just the you know,
Speaker 4: Joe Schmoe that's that's trying to launch these drones that's
Speaker 4: getting shacked, when it's you know, the head pooh Bah
Speaker 4: general and a lot of them got killed on these
Speaker 4: last few strikes where we've started focusing focusing intelligence. The
Speaker 4: CIA's obviously got their their stuff together and are up
Speaker 4: and running in Yemen and they are taking out some
Speaker 4: of these UH senior leaders, and I think that's that's
Speaker 4: a good thing. If you want, if you know, I
Speaker 4: got asked for media a lot like, well, isn't this
Speaker 4: going to destabilize the region. Well, Iran's destabilizing the region.
Speaker 6: So if these.
Speaker 4: Guys want to stabilize the region, stop attacking commercial vessels
Speaker 4: in the US military. If you did that, I'm sure
Speaker 4: that the stabilization would would come back to the fold.
Speaker 4: But this is Iran, and I know we're gonna get
Speaker 4: to and this is the houthis and I think we'll
Speaker 4: see how it goes. It's gonna take a while, but
Speaker 4: I think this.
Speaker 3: Was It's interesting too, because like the UK's got aircraft carriers,
Speaker 3: you know, China does, China's got a base in JIBOUTI like,
Speaker 3: what's up, guys, you know what I mean, Like they
Speaker 3: can step up? I mean it would it would make
Speaker 3: sense if they kind of did too. And I get
Speaker 3: there's more to this than just like the free passage
Speaker 3: of goods and stuff. It's definitely a message to our
Speaker 3: eight ye round, let's not kid ourselves, you know what
Speaker 3: I mean? Because like it seems like the houthis for
Speaker 3: the for right now at least, they're like the only
Speaker 3: proxy force that's kind of still I guess tough, because
Speaker 3: I'm sure has Bull is still very active and as
Speaker 3: well as Moss.
Speaker 1: But they're the only proxy force that's really.
Speaker 3: Kind of in Israel's kind of periphery, I would say,
Speaker 3: rather than there forocus on Hasbla and Hamas and stuff
Speaker 3: like that. And yeah that's all I got. I don't
Speaker 3: know where I was going with that, but whatever. So yeah, Iran,
Speaker 3: what happens may speculate for me.
Speaker 4: So that I think you're one hundred percent right. This
Speaker 4: is a message to Iran for two reasons. Right, Iran
Speaker 4: supports all these groups. Right, the who these didn't come
Speaker 4: up with advanced drones that can go from northern Yemen
Speaker 4: and hit Ben Gurion Airport, Right, this came from Iran.
Speaker 4: They're targeting information on the US vessels comes from the
Speaker 4: surveillance ships that are on.
Speaker 1: I think.
Speaker 5: All this stuff is are on. They back.
Speaker 4: They started Hezbolah, right, it was the IRGC Krutz Force,
Speaker 4: kind of a combination of our CIA and Jaysawk. They
Speaker 4: started hes Below. That's their most significant and Israel's done
Speaker 4: a number on them. They funded Hamas. Ninety percent of
Speaker 4: their military support came from Iran. And if they didn't
Speaker 4: have military support, they wouldn't be conducting attacks, right, And
Speaker 4: they support the Houthis.
Speaker 5: I'd say the houthies are probably the least able to be.
Speaker 4: Directed by Iran, but they're still in the proxy category.
Speaker 4: And if they didn't give them weapons systems, they wouldn't
Speaker 4: be I mean, who cares if they're just up there
Speaker 4: rant and raven in the mountains and they don't have
Speaker 4: any ability to do it. So they're responsible for these folks,
Speaker 4: and we had to start with that. Second, President Trump
Speaker 4: set a letter apparently this is in the media to
Speaker 4: the regime in Iran and said you need to come
Speaker 4: back to the table. We need to discuss a new
Speaker 4: nuclear agreement. The past nuclear agreement, the biggest criticism was
Speaker 4: that didn't address the proxy operations. It just addressed them
Speaker 4: not getting a nuke. There was a lot of discussion
Speaker 4: when we decided to get out in twenty eighteen that
Speaker 4: we should still keep it because we still don't want
Speaker 4: to have a nuke, and then we should just address
Speaker 4: the proxy separately. But we decided to get out. We
Speaker 4: did get out. We put a lot of sanctions on them.
Speaker 4: It was called the maximum pressure campaign. I did think
Speaker 4: that had an effect with them funding, but they still
Speaker 4: obviously kept funding. They figured a way to wait around
Speaker 4: the sanctions and to sell their oil and all that stuff.
Speaker 4: And now we're to a point where in a breakout
Speaker 4: scenario they have enough enriched uranium up to sixty percent.
Speaker 4: Breakout scenario could be a month, and they would have
Speaker 4: enough enriched uranium weapons great uranus nuclear weapons. Then they
Speaker 4: would have to they have to come up with a
Speaker 4: triggering mechanism and then of course figure out how to
Speaker 4: deliver it. But you could deliver it on a large
Speaker 4: a dow which is a small boat, so it's a
Speaker 4: triggering mechanism, but they could get that from.
Speaker 5: North Korea Russia.
Speaker 4: So this is a very real concern for multiple administrations.
Speaker 4: We've said it's completely unacceptable for Oran to have a
Speaker 4: nuclear weapon. There's got to be meaning to that. And
Speaker 4: I think what the Trump administration, the second one, is
Speaker 4: doing is saying there is meaning to that. So we
Speaker 4: see six plus maybe B twos that are in strike distance,
Speaker 4: and I think you're id They turn those transponders on
Speaker 4: for a reason, so everybody knows, and there are officials
Speaker 4: telling reporters right now. US officials like this is the
Speaker 4: reason why we're sending the B twos. They had the
Speaker 4: two month period for to come back to the negotiation
Speaker 4: negotiation table is up. The next step, clearly from President
Speaker 4: Trump's comments, is potential direct military action. So I don't
Speaker 4: think anybody should view this as just bluster. I think
Speaker 4: it's I think it's meaningful, and I think we're really
Speaker 4: the only country, unless we do a lot to support
Speaker 4: Israel that can can actually carry this out. Israel might
Speaker 4: do it if they feel like they were not going
Speaker 4: to US as a capacity. It would be a significant
Speaker 4: military of that. But it is, uh, it is doable,
Speaker 4: and they're getting everything into place because it's not just
Speaker 4: the bombers, right. I'm not going to go into the details,
Speaker 4: but you got to you got to mitigate air missile
Speaker 4: defense systems. You get all that stuff to make sure
Speaker 4: we can do it. So it requires a lot of
Speaker 4: other but you're seeing all this stuff flow into the region,
Speaker 4: and I hope, I hope Aron takes the right decision
Speaker 4: comes to negotiation table because the US is offering a
Speaker 4: diplomatic way out. If they choose not to do that
Speaker 4: and to go for a nuclear weapon then unacceptable.
Speaker 7: As I mean, so how you I mean agreed, There's
Speaker 7: not much more I can say. I think that, Yeah,
Speaker 7: this was all put out there publicly for a reason,
Speaker 7: and like you said, hopefully Iran will take the message
Speaker 7: and come to the negotiating table willingly rather than having
Speaker 7: to be physically dragged because you know, they just got
Speaker 7: decimated did their country was decimated militarily, So hopefully they'll
Speaker 7: take it.
Speaker 6: And I I'm.
Speaker 7: Gonna rare time say this, I applaud the administration for
Speaker 7: you know, this is the one one of the times
Speaker 7: that I say being public about it and blustering quote
Speaker 7: unquote about it is you know, it could work. I'm
Speaker 7: not going to say it's absolutely gonna but it's something
Speaker 7: that past administrators have not done and I think it's
Speaker 7: high time for it.
Speaker 5: Yeah, well this could be an interesting next month.
Speaker 6: Yep.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 3: This past week too, that which kind of went out
Speaker 3: of the radar obviously, Israel sent a delegation to d
Speaker 3: C to discuss what to do I guess with Iran
Speaker 3: and whether they go with solo or with our help
Speaker 3: or with us you know involved completely. I mean, listen, man,
Speaker 3: if you're if I know, I ran the enemy and stuff,
Speaker 3: but if you're Iran, like what do you what else
Speaker 3: do you see in terms of like if your proxies
Speaker 3: are decimated and you have Israel who's extremely belligerent. What else,
Speaker 3: what other move is there to do to secure your regime.
Speaker 3: I'm just thinking pragmatically. I'm not a fan of the Ayatola.
Speaker 5: It's like, I mean, crazy idea.
Speaker 4: But they could basically give up their proxy operations, stop
Speaker 4: their nuclear ambitions, have all the sanctions released are relieved,
Speaker 4: h and unleash their economy because, as I'm sure you
Speaker 4: guys know, the the Iranian population is very modern, very sophisticated,
Speaker 4: very educated. They have a middle class. Certainly from the
Speaker 4: education perspective they do. They would do really well on
Speaker 4: the international economy, I think, and yeah, but does that
Speaker 4: preserve the regime. I don't know they're going to say, well,
Speaker 4: we get you know, middle It's maybe they'll well, yes,
Speaker 4: but it's unacceptable. I mean they have caused sally if
Speaker 4: you look at behind the curtain all of the problems
Speaker 4: of the Middle East, right, Israel doesn't want to pick
Speaker 4: up a war with Iran.
Speaker 5: Why would they?
Speaker 4: I mean, it's stupid that Israel is a burgeoning economy,
Speaker 4: very modern place, but yet they've got a gate attacked
Speaker 4: on four sides all the time. So and that propagation
Speaker 4: leads away from any kind of diplomatic resolution to the
Speaker 4: Palestinian issue. Right now, you go to Israel, you know,
Speaker 4: I go there quite often. I mean even right, right,
Speaker 4: left and center. Now they don't want to hear about
Speaker 4: two stage solutions.
Speaker 5: Right.
Speaker 4: People that were adamant for adamantly for the two stage
Speaker 4: solution because of the current situation, they want to talk about.
Speaker 4: Iran does not help the Palestinian people at all. I mean,
Speaker 4: look at it. Look at Gaza. It's completely decimated. It
Speaker 4: looks like you know, Stalingrad or Dresident or something that
Speaker 4: was because ultimately Iran, they they gave the weapons systems
Speaker 4: to Hamas that they used to attack Israel on October seventh.
Speaker 4: You don't have to be, you know, an security analyst
Speaker 4: to figure out what Israel's going to do to an
Speaker 4: attack like that, and it happened. So Aaran is the
Speaker 4: problem of the Middle East. I think that's clear, and
Speaker 4: they could They're at a fork in the road, so
Speaker 4: we'll see which fork, which direction they take. I think
Speaker 4: I hope they take the diplomatic path.
Speaker 5: It's better for everybody.
Speaker 7: Yeah, I think in my in my minuscule knowledge of
Speaker 7: all of this, it's like common sense if you do
Speaker 7: it now if the regime comes to the table, now
Speaker 7: they can get out of it with savings, with some
Speaker 7: face saving. You know, I don't think this is going
Speaker 7: to be a post World War one, pre World War
Speaker 7: II Germany where it's like just devastated economically, militarily and
Speaker 7: everything and you know has to you know, bend the knee.
Speaker 7: They could get out of it saving some face and
Speaker 7: say well, we did this, you know, we willingly did
Speaker 7: this for our people. Whereas if they take the step,
Speaker 7: they get the trigger, they're you know, just about ready
Speaker 7: to launch, and they just get destroyed. Well, now now
Speaker 7: it's going to be a pre World War one Germany,
Speaker 7: you know. So I think it comes down to power
Speaker 7: and ego with any you know, regime, any government, it's
Speaker 7: we don't want to let go because we have the
Speaker 7: power and we don't want to bruise our egos by
Speaker 7: admitting that we we just took it too far.
Speaker 5: That's a great way to put it.
Speaker 4: The administration literally got to just take what you just
Speaker 4: said and use that like that. That is a clear path.
Speaker 7: And you're right, faith yep, the emperor did it. After
Speaker 7: the Japanese emperor, he did it. He said I'm doing
Speaker 7: this for my people. You know, we're giving this up
Speaker 7: for our people. He was able to save some face,
Speaker 7: you know, but the power and ego get in the
Speaker 7: way every time.
Speaker 3: Yeah, really, well said a little bit of history though, right,
Speaker 3: Like I know this is like this is kind of
Speaker 3: more of like a thought exercise. If we didn't go
Speaker 3: into Iraq, would i Ran be this like regional as
Speaker 3: big of a regional power that it is now.
Speaker 4: Yeah, I mean it would have been a different scenario.
Speaker 4: I take your point. But Iran had already started heschla
Speaker 4: Hesslo before nine to eleven, was the most significant terrorist
Speaker 4: organization against the US. They'd killed more Americans than any
Speaker 4: other group, so Ran was super destabilizing before the Iraqi
Speaker 4: vasion on two thousand and three. One could certainly argue
Speaker 4: we shouldn't have done that. Sure, little to know a
Speaker 4: nexus to nine eleven. But to point out, Arnado ally
Speaker 4: still went with us. They're still with us, and a
Speaker 4: lot of them got killed just because they honored the treaty,
Speaker 4: even though they certainly could have made an argument like
Speaker 4: wait a minute, so I'll Kaida attacks you and taken allness.
Speaker 4: So just the point there, just a point of the
Speaker 4: history in NATO, but I do think Iran.
Speaker 5: That was their intent.
Speaker 4: They have utilized our invasion of Rock to a certain
Speaker 4: extent to their advantage. But they always do They always
Speaker 4: in view, they take any kind of destabilized situation and
Speaker 4: turn it into essentially a worse situation, and they think
Speaker 4: it's in their national interest, right.
Speaker 3: Yeah, speaking of our NATO allies, are you guys looking
Speaker 3: for a property in Greenland or like, what are we
Speaker 3: gonna do? Because that's also been in the news unfortunately,
Speaker 3: kind of like I don't know why, absolute waste of time,
Speaker 3: you know, And Greenland is technically a territory of Denmark, correct, Yeah,
Speaker 3: Denmark's lost guys in Iraq and Afghanistan the war on Terror,
Speaker 3: Like they stepped up for us, and we're trying to
Speaker 3: take a piece of their land, which is absolutely for
Speaker 3: somebody who prides himself as or talks himself up about
Speaker 3: being an isolationist, Uh, annexing land doesn't really scream that
Speaker 3: out to me, unless it's like a new age isolationism.
Speaker 3: Like I don't know, uh, Nick, what are your thoughts?
Speaker 3: Because I could see you, I could picture you just
Speaker 3: sitting in a DD meeting and they're talking about something
Speaker 3: with Greenland, and you're like, what the fuck? I mean,
Speaker 3: you want to do it, but you mean, what the
Speaker 3: hell's going on here? Like we got real shit to
Speaker 3: deal with.
Speaker 4: Well, like before we came on, we started courting. I
Speaker 4: told you, like I geeked out on the Arctic when
Speaker 4: I was in the Pentagon and people kept reminding me
Speaker 4: of the freaking Middle East guys, though, beat it, right,
Speaker 4: But ultimately this is about this is about the Arctic, right,
Speaker 4: So the ice cap is melting. There is massive amounts
Speaker 4: of oil, gas and rare earth minerals in the Arctic
Speaker 4: region to include Greenland, Ah, and there is passageways. It
Speaker 4: makes the world much much much more small. I mean,
Speaker 4: take your globe, look at it from the top and
Speaker 4: see how close Europe and the United States and everything
Speaker 4: actually is from that direction. So h and I won't
Speaker 4: I don't want to, you know, drone on too much.
Speaker 4: But essentially there's eight countries that have direct access to
Speaker 4: the Arctic. Almost all except for Russia are in NATO.
Speaker 4: So we have a huge advantage in the United States
Speaker 4: thanks to the smartness of purchasing Alaska is one of them, right,
Speaker 4: But we also have key to NATO Allies all the
Speaker 4: rest of what Norway, Iceland connect Canada and.
Speaker 1: The Allies maybe not so much anymore.
Speaker 5: Well, I mean they always were no people. I think the.
Speaker 4: Canada and England interest is not. It's not you know,
Speaker 4: economic equality. Maybe there's a part of it in Greenland's
Speaker 4: not because you know, they're not defending themselves. It's about
Speaker 4: US wanting to dominate the Arctic, right, so China's trying.
Speaker 4: They got you know, the Polar Silk Road. They're there
Speaker 4: there there, and I don't know why they're allowed. They
Speaker 4: have some scientific bases in Iceland and I think Norway
Speaker 4: that should be kanked. They've tried to get into Greenland,
Speaker 4: and Greenland and Denmark as well as the request of
Speaker 4: the US kanked it. So there's actually no Russian or
Speaker 4: Chinese military presence in Greenland.
Speaker 5: Not accurate.
Speaker 4: The US used to have three air bases in a
Speaker 4: in a in a Navy base. We had over twelve
Speaker 4: thousand groups there. It was significant during the Cold War.
Speaker 4: We had intercept and detect missile launches and we even
Speaker 4: had ground based I think launchers for nuclear We had
Speaker 4: strategic bombers. We basically withdrew all that so one of
Speaker 4: the countries that has neglected the security of Greenland as
Speaker 4: it relates to the US is a US. We now
Speaker 4: have one base with one hundred and fifty more ditties there, right,
Speaker 4: So that is not a big investment by the United
Speaker 4: States in Greenland security or since it's always been about
Speaker 4: our security, because it's positioning our security. So I think
Speaker 4: we could go back and ask Denmark and Greenland if
Speaker 4: we could put more troops there have more direct access
Speaker 4: to the Arctic in Russia of course claim like more
Speaker 4: than half of the Arctic, which is not accurate, and
Speaker 4: so did Canada, and so all these overlapping claims of economics.
Speaker 4: It seems to me that the way to do this
Speaker 4: that is more likely to be successful is to go
Speaker 4: in with our NATO partners that have Arctic presence and
Speaker 4: combine for the exploitation of oil gas and push back
Speaker 4: against Russia. That's the odd man out in this and
Speaker 4: this circle literally the circle, right, and if we need
Speaker 4: to put more military pres Russia has fifty bases of
Speaker 4: the Arctic, by the way, so they're they're doing the opposite.
Speaker 4: They have you know, the TU one sixties, the strategic bombers,
Speaker 4: the biggest, heaviest, lifting, fastest strategic bombers that could drop
Speaker 4: nukes on the United States. They have them up there.
Speaker 4: They have Make thirty ones, They've got nuclear powered ice cutters,
Speaker 4: they have god all in. So if we need to
Speaker 4: catch up, I think the best way to do it
Speaker 4: is to catch up with the partnership of our NATO
Speaker 4: allies and focus on the adversary, which in this circle
Speaker 4: is Russia, not Iceland, not Norway, Denmark through Greenland, not
Speaker 4: Canada obviously.
Speaker 5: Anyway, that's my.
Speaker 3: I mean that that sounds like, I'm under standable strategy
Speaker 3: from a common like a common sense, thoughtful person strategy
Speaker 3: that seems to be coming out of the administration does
Speaker 3: seems to be the antithesis of what you have. Maybe
Speaker 3: it's the same goal, but annexing allies doesn't exactly sound
Speaker 3: like great strategy to me.
Speaker 1: And yeah, I'm a dummy, but you.
Speaker 7: Know, yeah, I agree. I think that bare bones of
Speaker 7: it is. It's a great want, it's a great you know, strategy,
Speaker 7: but are I should say it's a great long term
Speaker 7: plan and need. But the way it's presented to the
Speaker 7: world when you're a world leader and you use world
Speaker 7: words like when you say things like we're going to
Speaker 7: have it one way or another, that doesn't you know,
Speaker 7: that doesn't generate any kind of confidence from your your allies,
Speaker 7: especially the people of Greenland, you know. And then when
Speaker 7: you use words like annex, me personally, when I hear annex,
Speaker 7: automatically go back to pre World War two Germany, you know,
Speaker 7: I start thinking of, you know, things like that. So
Speaker 7: it's people can say, oh, it's just blustering, it's just
Speaker 7: you know, misspeaking. Well, when you're a world leader and
Speaker 7: you're a world when you're a superpower, words mean things.
Speaker 7: They have you know, really really big meaning. So I
Speaker 7: think if it had been like one of those behind
Speaker 7: closed doors like Mick said, you.
Speaker 6: Know, hey, with our NATO allies and.
Speaker 7: Go behind closed doors, we come to some sort of
Speaker 7: agreement and then open the doors, have a press constant
Speaker 7: and say this is what we agree to, instead of
Speaker 7: saying we'll have it one way or another, because that's
Speaker 7: all people are gonna hear one way or another, you know,
Speaker 7: And even if they didn't mean militarily, that's what people
Speaker 7: are gonna think.
Speaker 6: That's what other world leaders are gonna think. So we
Speaker 6: got to do better.
Speaker 7: With the way we're and when I say we, I
Speaker 7: mean the President and his cabinet, the way they speak
Speaker 7: publicly about these things. They have to do better because
Speaker 7: the message is getting lost in We're going to take
Speaker 7: it whether you like it or not.
Speaker 4: Right now, it might like, if we're to the Vice
Speaker 4: president's point that we need Greenland to be secure for
Speaker 4: our security, which certainly can make the argument that it is,
Speaker 4: then we could send more troops there.
Speaker 6: Yeah, and I may.
Speaker 4: I think I think they would now except for now,
Speaker 4: because it'd be like, wait a minute, is slow invasion here?
Speaker 1: You know?
Speaker 4: So yeah, I mean I think I think that the
Speaker 4: interest is is right, the policy interests in the region
Speaker 4: is right. I think the focus on trying to annex
Speaker 4: NATO allies territory when we could simply cooperate with them
Speaker 4: have joint ventures. I mean, all these rare minerals that
Speaker 4: were interested in require a lot of investment to actually
Speaker 4: get out of the ground. So and we could come
Speaker 4: in with the investment, the US, right, and then we
Speaker 4: could reap the benefits, so could our native allies, you know.
Speaker 4: And that's another way.
Speaker 5: To do it.
Speaker 4: That's what I recommend. And if this is just rhetoric.
Speaker 4: I kind of feel like this is even if they
Speaker 4: have no intent obviously of invading Greenland or something like that,
Speaker 4: I think it makes the whole cooperation more difficult.
Speaker 5: To Jay's point, what you just.
Speaker 3: Said, Yeah, I mean case in point, the vice president
Speaker 3: was visiting Greenland and no one came to see him.
Speaker 3: Uh he had He went to the one base that
Speaker 3: we do have there for a few hours and then
Speaker 3: headed home. I mean, yeah, just the way they're doing things. Uh,
Speaker 3: what's the word that's a good word that's not a
Speaker 3: bad word. Is head scratching. I'll be honest, Yeah, it's
Speaker 3: completely and scratching.
Speaker 4: On the form, I would say on the substance, I
Speaker 4: think it's a good thing that we're starting to look
Speaker 4: at not being so reliant in every other country in
Speaker 4: some cases our adversaries for stuff that we know we're
Speaker 4: gonna need. Right, So some of these rare minerals what
Speaker 4: they make all these these you know, advanced technological devices
Speaker 4: which the whole world's running on now, and a lot
Speaker 4: of them com ou out of China. So I like
Speaker 4: the idea personally that we have more autonomy for the
Speaker 4: United States on making things and having access to things,
Speaker 4: you know, I just I would just advocate for a
Speaker 4: different way of going about it.
Speaker 3: Yeah, all right, guys, that's all I got. What do
Speaker 3: you have anything else on your mind that you want
Speaker 3: to get?
Speaker 5: You know, I don't think that's that's a lot of stuff.
Speaker 1: Yep, guys.
Speaker 3: Of course, if you want to find folks out there,
Speaker 3: if you want to find the guys. The links are
Speaker 3: all in the description Mick Molroy, fog Bo Lobo Lobo Institute,
Speaker 3: all in the description Jason Lyones, of course, any and
Speaker 3: all links, Andy Millburn his book in the description Do
Speaker 3: us a favor patreon dot com slash the Teamhouse. You
Speaker 3: get both the Teamhouse and eyes on Ad free. If
Speaker 3: you pay ten dollars a month, you get all that
Speaker 3: plus us patch sent to your home. We ship internationally
Speaker 3: as well well, like Europe and stuff. I don't know
Speaker 3: if we could send it to like Jibouti or something,
Speaker 3: but I'll try.
Speaker 1: I'll figure it out.
Speaker 3: I'll make I'll try and get it to you if
Speaker 3: we have one fan in Djibouti by the way. Um, Yeah,
Speaker 3: and that's it. Thanks guys, This is great, Thanks everybuddy.
Speaker 2: All right, assass