Speaker 1: Hey, everybody, welcome to another episode of IS on Geopolitics.
Speaker 1: I'm here today with mc mulroy, Jason Lyons, I'm Dimitric Tacos.
Speaker 1: Thanks for joining us. To us a favor like subscribe.
Speaker 1: If you're listening to us on audio, click click five stars.
Speaker 1: Tell your friend about it, you know what I mean,
Speaker 1: Do what you can. What's up, guys? Happy Mother's Day
Speaker 1: to everybody.
Speaker 2: Same, Make sure you call your mom.
Speaker 1: Call your mom, Yeah, definitely don't.
Speaker 3: Don't.
Speaker 1: Don't waste them in it. Do it right now, Pause
Speaker 1: this right now and call your mom.
Speaker 2: Absolutely so.
Speaker 1: A lot happening as usual, First and foremost back and
Speaker 1: forth with Indian Pakistan. It was announced yesterday that there
Speaker 1: was a ceasefire, and then a couple hours later there
Speaker 1: was a bit of an exchange of fire between Indian Pakistan.
Speaker 1: But let's kick off with the ceasfire and what it
Speaker 1: looks like. Mick, what what are you tracking with that?
Speaker 2: Well, obviously the cease far is a good thing for everybody. Right,
Speaker 2: you got two major powers, both nuclear equipped, everybody. You
Speaker 2: want to see this de escalate, not escalate, to state
Speaker 2: the obvious. The fact that the US played a role
Speaker 2: I think is great, you know. I mean it was
Speaker 2: a little mixed messages. You know, this wasn't US concerned,
Speaker 2: and then there's ceasefire. Now we're kind of taking credit
Speaker 2: for the ceasfire. It's like, Okay, I guess it was
Speaker 2: good concern, but you know, other than that, I think
Speaker 2: it's a good thing. The US has relationships with both
Speaker 2: India and Pakistan, so a lot of countries had good
Speaker 2: relationships with one or the other, but not both. So
Speaker 2: that's why I think the US was critical. And this
Speaker 2: hats off the Secretary of Rubio and his team for
Speaker 2: the role they played in getting this. But I do
Speaker 2: think both sides were looking for an offer, right because
Speaker 2: it's like, I'm sure everybody's you know, General staff is
Speaker 2: sitting around going how does this end if it's not,
Speaker 2: you know, an immediate seaspire, because if it's tick for
Speaker 2: tack until ground forces are involved, there's an issue. You know.
Speaker 2: I think sometimes we talk too much about doctrine, like
Speaker 2: it can't be changed. But the Indian doctrine is a
Speaker 2: no first use, so they won't use it first. The
Speaker 2: Pakistani doctrine doesn't have that, so they can use it first,
Speaker 2: and they've already decided that and they don't consider like Russia,
Speaker 2: they don't consider tackle nukes to be nukes really, but
Speaker 2: most countries would if you had a tackle nuke laub
Speaker 2: that you so under their doctrine. Pakistan, if if their
Speaker 2: armies loses a key position, they can use a tactle
Speaker 2: nuclear weapon. So that could have been the triggering for
Speaker 2: an escalation to a full knowrategic level nuclear war. So
Speaker 2: that that was the biggest concern I think for everybody.
Speaker 2: And you know, we were just talking about before we
Speaker 2: came on air, Jay should let fill us in on this.
Speaker 2: There's still been stuff, but ultimately, if it holds long
Speaker 2: term good thing, perhaps this would be a time to
Speaker 2: transition into long term negotiations with the US leading in
Speaker 2: because they still haven't. You know, the Indus River Treaty
Speaker 2: is still old, there's still no diplomatic presence in each country.
Speaker 2: I think airspace is still there's still stuff that needs
Speaker 2: to be done other than there's not shooting at each other.
Speaker 4: Yeah, I agree, that's the key is you know, great,
Speaker 4: we got this short term ceasefire, but when we need
Speaker 4: to now start working on the long term, I think
Speaker 4: it would be a mistake for our administration to say, Okay,
Speaker 4: we got the ceasefire. Now we can let you guys
Speaker 4: handle it all. Not that they're not capable, but it's
Speaker 4: like when kids are fighting, when everybody's hot headed, nobody
Speaker 4: wants to, you know, talk it out until somebody's in
Speaker 4: a neutral party and is able to calmer heads prevail.
Speaker 4: So I'm hoping that we will stay in for the
Speaker 4: long run. It's uh, there's some pretty significant events that
Speaker 4: happened in the short this short conflict, one of which,
Speaker 4: if the rumors are true about the aircraft that were
Speaker 4: shot down and things like that, this would be the
Speaker 4: largest air battle between two countries in since I believe
Speaker 4: it was Vietnam. So the rumors are that, you know,
Speaker 4: I think it was eight Indian aircraft were shot down
Speaker 4: and a couple of Pakistani ones. The big thing being
Speaker 4: that in Chinese made. I think it's a J twenty
Speaker 4: I believe if that's correct, J ten. J ten shot
Speaker 4: down a Raphael, a French made Rafael on the Indian side,
Speaker 4: which is pretty significant because that's a first I believe
Speaker 4: combat loss of a rufl. If it's all true, I
Speaker 4: know that there's been a lot of misinformation, disinformation some
Speaker 4: of the videos that were being shown in the initial
Speaker 4: stages of the conflict were actually videos shipped from Gaza
Speaker 4: from a year or two ago, things like that, and
Speaker 4: then wreckage that was shown was purported to be from
Speaker 4: a different conflict, So we don't know exactly what's what.
Speaker 4: I don't believe, and Mick, maybe you can refute or
Speaker 4: say that this is true. There's not a big Western
Speaker 4: media presence in that area to report on this stuff,
Speaker 4: so we're basically going by whatever side is talking first.
Speaker 2: So I think that's fair. I've seen very few Western
Speaker 2: media reporting, some CNN, but it seems like they're out
Speaker 2: in Kashmere. But right now Kashmir is essentially a no
Speaker 2: go zone for anybody, So I think you're right having
Speaker 2: to rely on a lot of reports that could be
Speaker 2: seriously biased based on you know, where they're coming from.
Speaker 4: Absolutely, and I'm sure that US and other Western intelligences,
Speaker 4: if they're not in the region already, which I'm sure
Speaker 4: there are, are trying to get into the region. But
Speaker 4: that's still stuff. SOT has to be vetted, whatever information
Speaker 4: comes out and then scrubbed if it's going to get
Speaker 4: leaked to the press. You know about what is known.
Speaker 4: So I think for now we're just gonna have to
Speaker 4: rely on, you know, both sides, and to be honest
Speaker 4: with the probably the most truthful reporting would be from
Speaker 4: the average citizen tweeting on X, Hey I'm here and
Speaker 4: this is what I'm seeing kind of stuff.
Speaker 2: So mm hmmm. Yeah, you can validate where the person
Speaker 2: was when they shot at yep.
Speaker 4: Absolutely, and the that the ceasefire supposed violations. There was
Speaker 4: a an explosion. There were explosions reported in Shrinegar, the
Speaker 4: Cernagard region, and but nobody's been allowed to report from there,
Speaker 4: so we can verify that.
Speaker 2: So yeah, okay, well let's hope it holds.
Speaker 1: Yeah, definitely a little bit more on the aviation side,
Speaker 1: if it's true that they did down a rafile, it's
Speaker 1: the first time the Peel fifteen air to air missile
Speaker 1: that's a Chinese missile has been used in combat and
Speaker 1: has shot down. And it's the export variant too, so
Speaker 1: it's not even the variant that like China actually has
Speaker 1: on their fighters and stuff like. That's a medium to
Speaker 1: long range air to air missile that out that for
Speaker 1: all intensive purposes, does outrange our aim one twenties. I mean,
Speaker 1: we're still waiting for the aim to sixty that's supposed
Speaker 1: to like you know, beat everybody. But that's been in
Speaker 1: development for like the last few years and we still
Speaker 1: haven't seen it on a picture like on a plane
Speaker 1: or anything.
Speaker 3: So and it's oh, go ahead.
Speaker 2: I think the French validated that it was shut down, right.
Speaker 1: I believe so, I think the Rafel, Yeah, but they
Speaker 1: mentioned that they said that they shot down way more
Speaker 1: of them, and they said they also shot down to suey.
Speaker 3: Nine as well. Yeah.
Speaker 1: Yeah, but the the Rafel, I've seen pictures of like
Speaker 1: the tail number and stuff like that. I've seen the
Speaker 1: pictures of the actual PL fifteen supposedly, but I would
Speaker 1: the thing that I'm questioning about that wouldn't the PL
Speaker 1: fifteen explode like that?
Speaker 3: They had one almost completely intact, yeah.
Speaker 4: Just like they have a fragmentation warheads.
Speaker 3: So yeah, would probably.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: There was also a picture of like the PL fifteen's
Speaker 1: like uh acer radar and stuff like that, their own
Speaker 1: like little seeker and stuff that was like relatively intact,
Speaker 1: and I would think, like, isn't that going headlong like
Speaker 1: into a plane that's exploding?
Speaker 4: Like I don't know how most of the time they're proximity.
Speaker 4: So is it when it gets to a certain ranger
Speaker 4: within the aircraft it'll go off. So maybe, you know,
Speaker 4: maybe parts may have ve it, But.
Speaker 1: So aviation, like the aviation world is like, I'll like
Speaker 1: spinning off because of this.
Speaker 3: Now I'm sure.
Speaker 4: Alex Hollins is locked in a room somewhere right now.
Speaker 3: Oh yeah.
Speaker 4: And what's crazy is I mean, it sucks because it's
Speaker 4: loss of life, but this is a good quote unquote
Speaker 4: good battlefield laboratory for us and for the Chinese and
Speaker 4: for the Russians because we're letting someone else take the
Speaker 4: heat and while we sit back and you know, hey,
Speaker 4: that worked, you know, and the Chinese are like, okay,
Speaker 4: that works. So it's it's a benefit, but it's not
Speaker 4: necessarily a great one.
Speaker 2: But yeah, well that's a good point, Jay, because there's
Speaker 2: a lot of conflicts going around in the world right now.
Speaker 2: I think we're trying to end them the best we can,
Speaker 2: but we need to get the lessons learned from them,
Speaker 2: because the other way to get those lessons is to
Speaker 2: be involved in conflicts. So you might as well take
Speaker 2: the opportunity to learn from others. That's that's where the
Speaker 2: real smarts come at.
Speaker 1: Absolutely, I wonder there's a US taking serious like the uh,
Speaker 1: the level of drone warfare that's been going on, like
Speaker 1: especially in Ukraine and stuff like that, like where we're
Speaker 1: going to like develop our own whether it's the defensive
Speaker 1: or or offensive drones to like I think, God.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I think we're heavily involved in those for one,
Speaker 2: to support for example, for the Ukrainians, but also because
Speaker 2: we're smart enough to say this is the future of warfare.
Speaker 2: It's happening right in front of it. It's not just happening,
Speaker 2: it's involving right in front of us, right there, right now.
Speaker 2: And the you know, warfare is the mother of all necessity,
Speaker 2: and necessity is a mother of all invention. Right, So
Speaker 2: I think we're we need to be taken all of
Speaker 2: this and maybe that's part of the things we get
Speaker 2: out of supporting Ukraine. It's not just you know, these
Speaker 2: raw earth materials, it's we want to have all of
Speaker 2: the you know, intellectual property that comes out of what
Speaker 2: are you doing with drone warfare? And because we don't
Speaker 2: want it just to be out there for everybody, because
Speaker 2: this is they've proven to take very inexpensive oftentimes commercial
Speaker 2: off the shelf material and lethalize it to a point
Speaker 2: of it's just staggering. Yeah, and that can be spread
Speaker 2: quickly to our adversary, so we need to control it. Yeah.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I believe Raytheon it might be raith On, one
Speaker 1: of the Primes, was testing out an anti drone kind
Speaker 1: of I don't want to call it artillery because I
Speaker 1: don't think they shoot actual projectiles. I think it's more
Speaker 1: like electromagnetic. But they've been testing it and they've they've
Speaker 1: started production on it, like for for us and I'm
Speaker 1: assuming probably Ukraine as well.
Speaker 3: That's defensive.
Speaker 1: We also had a great former guest on Teamhouse and
Speaker 1: Eyes On, Chad McCoy, former twenty fourth Sts operator, who
Speaker 1: is the CTO and founder of Firestorm Labs, which is
Speaker 1: a drone company. I think they just signed a big
Speaker 1: deal with the DoD and stuff to develop like drone
Speaker 1: stuff for them.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 1: It's pretty interesting how it's involved because it's artillery and
Speaker 1: it's also drones. It's like old school and like new stuff. Yeah,
Speaker 1: all mixed in one area. Like, it's pretty interesting to
Speaker 1: like see play.
Speaker 4: Out, and I think something that we would be smart
Speaker 4: to do if we're not already doing it, and I
Speaker 4: would think we would, but would be to have a
Speaker 4: mini operation paper clip type thing where we take some
Speaker 4: of the battlefield tested drone operators and designers from Ukraine,
Speaker 4: bring them here and say what works, what doesn't help
Speaker 4: us with this? And I'm sure that in some way
Speaker 4: we're doing that already. I mean we have, you know,
Speaker 4: we've bought some of their fighter pilots over here to
Speaker 4: train them, you know, fly the F sixteen, things like that.
Speaker 4: It wouldn't take much to get some of them over
Speaker 4: here to help us with our development.
Speaker 2: Yeah, there's actually they call it tech Rodeo. It's down
Speaker 2: in Sheridan, Montana, this place called Granite Creek. It's a
Speaker 2: giant ranch. We went, me and Eric Ah, Eric my
Speaker 2: business partner, went. I think it was like five years
Speaker 2: ago and it was maybe, I don't know, thirty five
Speaker 2: forty people. Apparently, now it's it's way bigger and they
Speaker 2: are it is a drone, counter drone, air ground ground
Speaker 2: drone dogs going into mine shafts. I mean, it's apparently
Speaker 2: it's insane now. It's just it is just exploded and
Speaker 2: they use it as one. It's so far out there
Speaker 2: that there's no concern when it comes to like the
Speaker 2: clearances for the drones to fly and out of sight
Speaker 2: and all this other stuff. So that's why it's there.
Speaker 2: But we plan on going back this year, and we're here.
Speaker 2: It's just packed and it's to be able to test
Speaker 2: your drone against counter drone technology and all that stuff.
Speaker 2: So it's a competition. It's a lot of fun, I suppose.
Speaker 2: So we're heading down there. It should be something interesting
Speaker 2: to see.
Speaker 4: Nice.
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, I just wanted to. There was a report
Speaker 1: I believe by CNN, I can't remember, don't quote me,
Speaker 1: But the reason why the Trump administration got involved with
Speaker 1: India Pakistan is because on Friday night they got alarming
Speaker 1: intelligence that kind of made them like just put the
Speaker 1: foot on the gas and started talking with Indian Pakistan
Speaker 1: and engaging us at least moving them towards the sea,
Speaker 1: towards a ceasefire. The funny thing was like Secretary of
Speaker 1: Rubio posted something about it where like Dave agreed to
Speaker 1: do further talks and the Indian, uh, the Indian if
Speaker 1: I believe, Foreign Minister said yeah, no, we haven't agreed
Speaker 1: to talk. The ceasefire is yes, but we talks, we
Speaker 1: have not agreed to yet.
Speaker 2: Right, and that's needed to actually resolve the sort of situation. Right, Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 2: that's how intelligence plays a big part.
Speaker 1: What do you think they heard like they're putting nukes
Speaker 1: in command and control, like on command and control into
Speaker 1: like generals or kernels whatever, like strapping nukes to like artillery,
Speaker 1: because that's scary.
Speaker 2: I mean it's just speculation. But something to be that
Speaker 2: concerned about would be repositioning nuclear voice, even tactical ones.
Speaker 2: Yeah right, I mean a tactical one they say it
Speaker 2: obviously has yes, less yield, so that's how they distinguished
Speaker 2: the two. But people here in nuclear you shot a
Speaker 2: nuclear or anything at somebody else, it's you know, stand by,
Speaker 2: yeah right, Uh, escalation is going to happen pretty quickly.
Speaker 5: Mm hmm.
Speaker 3: I don't know.
Speaker 2: I assume India has tactical nuclear weapons. If they don't,
Speaker 2: then they're going and respond with what they have, which
Speaker 2: is like high yield, and then there you go.
Speaker 1: I mean you got to assume in the it's got
Speaker 1: tactical nukes, right if they know Pakistan does, right, Yeah.
Speaker 2: They actually have a new the whole nuclear triad. They
Speaker 2: have sea land obviously in air launched, so they're way
Speaker 2: more sophisticated nuclear in the military than Pakistan. But yeah,
Speaker 2: I mean we did a study we had to do.
Speaker 2: Me and Eric did a talk on it. So we
Speaker 2: looked at all the stuff on a limited exchange between
Speaker 2: India and Pakistan on a nuclear front. It's like catastrophic crown. Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 2: I mean, it's way way more impactful than you think.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 2: You know, it's like the global temperature drops three degrees.
Speaker 2: It doesn't sound like too much, but it is, and
Speaker 2: like crop productions plummets, people start starving, melts down, and
Speaker 2: it's it's it sounds hyperbolic, but every everywhere we looked
Speaker 2: and then validated, people are like, oh, yeah, that's what's
Speaker 2: gonna I mean, it's just so it's not just going
Speaker 2: to be Wow, it sucks to be over in any
Speaker 2: of Pakistan's or here it comes, it's just a wave.
Speaker 2: You know, it's going to get dark, dim, cold, produce
Speaker 2: goes way down.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 1: Louis Reeda mentioned it, and when we had a mom
Speaker 1: Me and Jack on aizon that they did like models
Speaker 1: that if Indian Pakistan used twenty five percent of their
Speaker 1: arsenal against each other, these things would happen, and it
Speaker 1: would affect the United States in terms of crops, millions
Speaker 1: of people, Like millions of people die in the United States,
Speaker 1: right like because we think, oh, Indian Pakistan, it's you know,
Speaker 1: ten thousand miles away or whatever, like we don't even
Speaker 1: think about it, like, oh, it won't nothing will affect us,
Speaker 1: but it most obviously certainly would. Yeah, hopefully they do
Speaker 1: bring them both back from the brink and cooler heads
Speaker 1: prevail and we can start worrying about you know, other stuff.
Speaker 6: All right, As it's Jack, I just want to talk
Speaker 6: to you for a moment about how you can support
Speaker 6: the show. If you've been watching it, enjoying it, but
Speaker 6: you'd like to get a little bit more involved and
Speaker 6: help us continue to do this. You can check out
Speaker 6: our Patreon It is patreon dot com slash the Teamhouse,
Speaker 6: and for five dollars a month you can get access
Speaker 6: to all of these episodes of The Teamhouse ad free.
Speaker 5: The same goes with.
Speaker 6: Our affiliated podcast eyes On with Andy Milburn, Jason Lyons
Speaker 6: mcmulroy that one you will also get all of those
Speaker 6: episodes ad free, and you support the channel and the show,
Speaker 6: and we really appreciate it. The Patreon members are literally
Speaker 6: what has helped this company, this small business survive, especially
Speaker 6: during our early years, and you are what continues to
Speaker 6: help this thing going even as we navigate the turbulent
Speaker 6: world of YouTube advertising.
Speaker 5: So we really appreciate all of you guys.
Speaker 6: There's going to be a link down in the description
Speaker 6: to that Patreon page, and there is also going to
Speaker 6: be a link to our new merch shop, so if
Speaker 6: you guys want to go and get some Teamhouse merchandise.
Speaker 6: We got stickers and we also have patches, and I
Speaker 6: should mention if you sign up for Patreon at ten
Speaker 6: dollars a month, we will mail you this patch as well,
Speaker 6: so we really appreciate that. But they're also for sale
Speaker 6: on the merch shop. And additionally, they got t shirts
Speaker 6: up there, water bottles, a tote bag, coffee mugs, all
Speaker 6: that good stuff, So please go and check them out
Speaker 6: and support the show.
Speaker 5: We really appreciate it, guys. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Interesting what happened last night one am local time in Moscow.
Speaker 1: President Putlin had an address to the country and the
Speaker 1: basic measle scent of the address was that he wants
Speaker 1: to cease fire is open to talking to the Ukrainians
Speaker 1: more bilaterally rather than with the US, or I guess
Speaker 1: having the US there, but you know, more face to
Speaker 1: face with the Ukrainians instead of having like the mediator
Speaker 1: that runs in from one room to the other like
Speaker 1: we've been seeing with the Iran talks. I just being
Speaker 1: the cynical person that I am, is gonna say I
Speaker 1: feel like that's bullshit and like anything that Putin said,
Speaker 1: I mean, I'm sure he wants to cease far because
Speaker 1: his army is in a meat grinder.
Speaker 3: But uh, you know, I can't. You can't. I don't
Speaker 3: know if you can really trust exactly what Putin says.
Speaker 2: M you cannot, Yeah, trust what Putin says. I think
Speaker 2: it's if looking at it as a positive, it shows
Speaker 2: he's getting pressure, right, he sees Now it's not just
Speaker 2: the US who seems to have shifted their position on
Speaker 2: this whole thing, particularly after the signing of the Investment
Speaker 2: Fund agreement, and now looks like and we've turned back
Speaker 2: on military aid and potentially we might increase it, which
Speaker 2: we should absolutely hundred percent. And now they have this
Speaker 2: coalition of the willing in Europe, Germany, France, UK and Poland.
Speaker 2: Essentially saying times up, agree to a cease fire without
Speaker 2: any conditions, or they're going to impose additional sanctions. So
Speaker 2: that's what Putin understands strength, right he does. Yeah, you
Speaker 2: can kiss up to him and say all these great
Speaker 2: things about him and thanks for the lovely painting and
Speaker 2: all that stuff. None of that stuff matters to him.
Speaker 2: It's it's just a way to manipulate people. But when
Speaker 2: he hears oh, man, so secondary sanctions would cut off
Speaker 2: potentially Indian China for buying my oil. That's going to hurt,
Speaker 2: right that, Oh, the three hundred and twenty five billion
Speaker 2: dollars worth of your Russian funding, that's certain in Brussels
Speaker 2: they're going to start giving away thirty billion dollars at
Speaker 2: a time to Ukraine. That's going to hurt. This is
Speaker 2: what needs to happen, not threatened. I mean he he
Speaker 2: either like they should have a deadline. We I think
Speaker 2: President Zelensky just said like Monday, So like you agree
Speaker 2: by Monday to a thirty day unconditional or these things
Speaker 2: need to happen, and that's the only consequences he gets.
Speaker 2: That's why he got up at one in the morning.
Speaker 2: He wanted to throw something out there. Oh okay, maybe
Speaker 2: he really wants to do this, and then two weeks
Speaker 2: later it'll be like, oh, it never happened, or he'll
Speaker 2: declare a unilaterals he's fired.
Speaker 3: Than violate it.
Speaker 2: It's got to be you know, it doesn't have to
Speaker 2: be thirty days, but I think thirty days is what
Speaker 2: we should require. That's when negotiations start. Yeah, it's really
Speaker 2: hard to negotiate when you're fighting because anything could happen
Speaker 2: that we'll just completely rupture the discussion. So I think
Speaker 2: the US and Europe are coming together, which is a positive,
Speaker 2: and we need to actually do what we say we're
Speaker 2: going to do if you want to get this into
Speaker 2: meaningful negotiations.
Speaker 3: Yeah, agreed.
Speaker 4: It's long past time and everybody, at least on one
Speaker 4: side wants to see it stop, and I'm sure that
Speaker 4: the Russian people want to see it stop. But I
Speaker 4: think there has to be Like you said, there has
Speaker 4: to be consequences. Again, I hate using the child metaphor,
Speaker 4: but if that's what you're dealing with, Like with a child,
Speaker 4: you can say all you want. If you don't stop,
Speaker 4: you're gonna go to your room room. You know you're
Speaker 4: not eating dinner whatever. But until you actually do it,
Speaker 4: it's not gonna mean anything. And just like a child,
Speaker 4: Putin will push his limits as far as they can go,
Speaker 4: as long as you allow it, until you don't allow
Speaker 4: it anymore, you know. And if that means we have
Speaker 4: to lose a little face, well, and by we, I
Speaker 4: say the administration has to lose a little face after
Speaker 4: we've big uped him all these years, months, whatever, and
Speaker 4: do a onet eighty and say, you know, smack the hand. Well,
Speaker 4: then that's what we have to do, because there's lives
Speaker 4: at stake here.
Speaker 1: Yeah, well said, hopefully something does happen. I mean, I
Speaker 1: don't believe a fucking word from any Russian like and
Speaker 1: the trippiest one is Medvedev.
Speaker 3: He's a fucking lunatic. He just tweets out crazy shit.
Speaker 1: And it was so funny during the Obama administration when
Speaker 1: Medvedev was the president in Putin was taking you know,
Speaker 1: the president, but the actually prime minister.
Speaker 3: Like there was like, oh there's a reset.
Speaker 1: There's like a kind of like yeah, and this guy's
Speaker 1: actual kuck bird, he's out of his fucking mind. Yeah yeah, which,
Speaker 1: like Andy, I remember before when I've mentioned it, said
Speaker 1: like he was probably full of shit the whole time,
Speaker 1: you know what I mean, he was probably just playing
Speaker 1: the fucking role the whole entire time. And you know,
Speaker 1: this is who he really is, like an absolute savage warmonger.
Speaker 1: I don't know why they haven't done the three hundred
Speaker 1: and twenty five bill yet. I mean, you know, at
Speaker 1: least like trickle it out, like drip it out and like, yo,
Speaker 1: this is gonna happen, and the clock's ticking and the
Speaker 1: money's going directly to Ukraine for arms, and they're gonna
Speaker 1: keep killing your soldiers, making you look like the paper
Speaker 1: targety you look like for the last three years. You know,
Speaker 1: it's like it's whoever said Russia is literally an oil
Speaker 1: field with nuclear weapons or a gas station with nuclear
Speaker 1: weapons is not wrong?
Speaker 3: Like that's the.
Speaker 1: Exact perfect way. John mckaye shout out rest in peace.
Speaker 1: I mean, it's not that, it's you can't even describe
Speaker 1: it better than that.
Speaker 4: Ah.
Speaker 3: So anyway, last bit of news.
Speaker 1: Iran in the United States just wrapped up their fourth
Speaker 1: meeting in Oman today. No parent breakthrough in a public
Speaker 1: standoff over enrichment, but both sides confirming plans for future negotiations.
Speaker 1: I think it's a good thing that we keep negotiating
Speaker 1: for sure. What do you guys, what do you guys
Speaker 1: got on that?
Speaker 2: Well, I agree with the negotiations are always good. I mean,
Speaker 2: it doesn't mean that you can't take action if they
Speaker 2: fall apart. But if you're not negotiating, then there's really
Speaker 2: no diplomatic path for so I think the US the
Speaker 2: issue of the US faces and there's a lot of
Speaker 2: internal disagreement on this is are we willing to accept
Speaker 2: something that is essentially twenty fifty jcpoway that there was
Speaker 2: problems with that agreement. The biggest problem was it didn't
Speaker 2: address proxy force support by the Iranians as Malahamas boothies
Speaker 2: and now we can see, you know what those groups
Speaker 2: have been up to, causing complete chaos in the Middle East.
Speaker 2: It didn't address ballistic missiles, which obviously if you they
Speaker 2: keep working on ballistic missiles where they can deliver a warhead, right,
Speaker 2: and there was some question on whether we actually knew
Speaker 2: what they were doing completely. But that's the negative. The
Speaker 2: positive is it did keep them at three point sixty
Speaker 2: seven percent enrichment, right, so that's far away from a
Speaker 2: nuclear weapon at sixty percent now, so you can do
Speaker 2: the math on how much more that is, and you
Speaker 2: only need to get to ninety and apparently to go
Speaker 2: from sixty to ninety, it's very quick, like a week's
Speaker 2: or two weeks. So the question now is are we
Speaker 2: going to be complete hardliners, of which the Uranians won't
Speaker 2: agree to any kind of new agreement and we will
Speaker 2: essentially go back to the track where we'll likely take
Speaker 2: a military strike. President Trump said that numerous times. Unless
Speaker 2: he's bluffing, that's potential, that's a potential action. It really
Speaker 2: needs us to be successful. Israel might do it themselves.
Speaker 2: The issues that are going to be sticking points, of course,
Speaker 2: or in addition to proxies and ballistic missiles, are they
Speaker 2: allowed to enrich their own uranium, even for what they're
Speaker 2: calling civilian nuclear power. It's Secretary Rubio has made it
Speaker 2: clear now though there was an issue or a confusion before,
Speaker 2: that they won't be allowed to do that. They will
Speaker 2: have to import it from Russia, I suppose, or some
Speaker 2: other country and then use it for energy if they're
Speaker 2: not unwilling. And we'll find out soon because there's I
Speaker 2: think the deadline is still the two month deadline is
Speaker 2: still tacking. So if there's not an agreement, or at
Speaker 2: least something that's going iron clad toward an agreement, then
Speaker 2: we'll start looking at military options. And I think once
Speaker 2: this trip that we talked about earlier is complete, and
Speaker 2: if there's no solid progression, then we should all be
Speaker 2: looking at whether this is going to end up with
Speaker 2: a military strike on Naton's and for now and all
Speaker 2: these key places that we know are instrumental and nuclear
Speaker 2: weapons productions.
Speaker 1: Ah jeez, I mean we have to concede some stuff
Speaker 1: like they do because I feel like no enrichment in country,
Speaker 1: proxy forces, ballistic missiles.
Speaker 3: Like they're not going for that. I mean, who would
Speaker 3: go for that? Really?
Speaker 1: Even if you want to make a deal like you,
Speaker 1: I know that they see Israel as in that you
Speaker 1: know their their threat, the threat and stuff like that.
Speaker 1: I mean, if you can get jack POA with proxy forces,
Speaker 1: I feel like that's a win. At least overt stuff.
Speaker 1: They're always going to be covert. We know that you
Speaker 1: were in the business, Mith, like, let's be fucking real.
Speaker 1: But if you can get some kind of like that
Speaker 1: where like the at least the the what's the the
Speaker 1: uai A like the whatever the yeah, yeah, sorry, you
Speaker 1: could go in and there's like actual stringent protocols where
Speaker 1: like they could tell what's what and then monitoring is legit.
Speaker 1: I feel like that's a win man. I feel like
Speaker 1: because game it out right. Let's say we bomb them
Speaker 1: and we use our big boy bonker busters and they
Speaker 1: we set them back three to six months. They're not
Speaker 1: going to dig deeper and like get one done. I
Speaker 1: know if I'm them, I would yeah.
Speaker 2: And the other thing is to play up the advantages
Speaker 2: for them, Like if they do this, I mean, sanctions,
Speaker 2: all the sanctions that they've been under for years and
Speaker 2: years come off. They're a very advanced, modern, sophisticated population country.
Speaker 2: I think they would do really well on the global
Speaker 2: economic stage, Like if you just get them to understand
Speaker 2: and it's the regime, right, So it's not the Iranian people.
Speaker 2: It's like, so it's really that much worth it to
Speaker 2: fund groups like Hezbola that cause war rather than you know,
Speaker 2: dramatically increase the standard of living for every Iranian that's
Speaker 2: really worth it. You know, maybe the Iranian people start
Speaker 2: to need to start putting pressure on these folks. It's
Speaker 2: because how the hell is that in the interest of
Speaker 2: the Iranian people to stay completely muzzled economically, just so
Speaker 2: they can fund some assholes that you know, the whole
Speaker 2: purpose in life is to attack Israel until they piss
Speaker 2: them off on us and then the in issuel comes
Speaker 2: and stops them into the ground, like happened you know,
Speaker 2: against Heslo for example. Like that's that I hope, and
Speaker 2: I have no idea I would bring it up. I
Speaker 2: hope there is a concerted influence campaign inside Iran to
Speaker 2: really point to the Iranian people like this, now is
Speaker 2: the chance that the Uranian regime, your regime, your government
Speaker 2: could do great by the Iranian people and agree with
Speaker 2: many of the things that are very reasonable in the
Speaker 2: United States. And I mean there reason we talk about
Speaker 2: if they agree that the US is going to have
Speaker 2: some kind of trade agreement with or on which could
Speaker 2: be hugely beneficial to them. So yeah, anyway, yeah, I
Speaker 2: think I hope they talk more about that. Sorry, jeah no, No,
Speaker 2: I agree with everything you just said. And I think
Speaker 2: this is President Trump's chance to be He likes to
Speaker 2: take credit for the things.
Speaker 4: You know, the positive things, which is fine whatever, you know,
Speaker 4: it's gonna be pay but it's fine, but this is
Speaker 4: I believe his opportunity to take real credit for something
Speaker 4: positive by being the by appealing to the people. Because
Speaker 4: the regime knows, I mean, the thought of a revolution
Speaker 4: is right here in their ear. It's always in the
Speaker 4: back of their mind. So if they allow it to
Speaker 4: get to the point where, whether it's US or Israel,
Speaker 4: or US and Israel that hit them, the devastation that
Speaker 4: could be brought by that, that could be enough to
Speaker 4: spark another revolution. And I think if President Trump appeals
Speaker 4: to them the positives that you said, Mike, you know,
Speaker 4: possible trade, clean energy, you know, a boosted economy. If
Speaker 4: he can appeal to those things, I think that might
Speaker 4: be enough pressure. Along with the thought of hey, these
Speaker 4: people might rise up against us, might be enough to
Speaker 4: get this thing done. Going with what D said, I
Speaker 4: don't I don't also don't believe that we're going to
Speaker 4: get everything that we want. I don't believe our ballistic
Speaker 4: missiles will be off the table. I don't believe. I
Speaker 4: do believe proxies would be off the table, But temporarily
Speaker 4: I think they'll be like, yeah, yeah, yeah, put it
Speaker 4: in their back pocket to use later on. And I
Speaker 4: also don't believe. I don't believe that they will. I
Speaker 4: think the biggest thing will be that they shut down
Speaker 4: their program completely, like nuclear power completely or nuclear energy,
Speaker 4: I should say completely. So I think if we can
Speaker 4: lock down even temporarily, taking proxies off the board and
Speaker 4: limiting their production to civilian use as well as monitoring
Speaker 4: strict monitoring, I think that's a big win. So, you know,
Speaker 4: I think this is the President's chance to shine if
Speaker 4: he does it right.
Speaker 1: Absolutely, the first agreement was a monitoring pretty stringent and
Speaker 1: like on the level as far as you know, Nick, far.
Speaker 2: As I know, yes, I mean you don't know what
Speaker 2: you don't know, so you see the ports of secret facilities,
Speaker 2: but certainly it have to be you know, the International
Speaker 2: Atomic Energy Agency needs to have full access. I mean
Speaker 2: these are things that I think the technical experts would
Speaker 2: know of how we can be competent that they're not
Speaker 2: going toward a nuclear weapon. And then you know, if
Speaker 2: they're seemingly if they're integrated with the international economy. Again,
Speaker 2: why were they all yeah, I man, like they're I know,
Speaker 2: like a lot of these regimes, they like like the
Speaker 2: Huthis themselves, right, they exist to hate another country, right,
Speaker 2: that's with the you know, the Ayatola and the whole movement.
Speaker 2: It just seems like it would get pretty damn old
Speaker 2: to have a revolution that lasted for three four decades
Speaker 2: and they don't focus at all on the plight of
Speaker 2: the people, you know. So I think we should publicly
Speaker 2: I think that the administration should be talking about the
Speaker 2: benefits to the Iranian people, not necessarily have like regime change,
Speaker 2: but it's called you know, basically the people that live
Speaker 2: there influencing the people that supposedly govern them to like,
Speaker 2: why wouldn't we agree to this? Why is it Ron's
Speaker 2: interest to go around being the pariah of the world
Speaker 2: and you know, causing all these groups that do nothing
Speaker 2: but fight and kill people and their terrorist organizations. How
Speaker 2: is that the benefit of the Iranian people? It is not,
Speaker 2: it's not, so I think just not manipulate them, but
Speaker 2: just state the facts and explain that the positive consequences.
Speaker 2: I would hope that that's part of part of our
Speaker 2: plan to get them to an agreement.
Speaker 1: I mean, do you think the regime just doesn't give
Speaker 1: a shit about you know, making more money, making the
Speaker 1: country more prosperous and.
Speaker 2: Well, I mean the funny thing about you know, every
Speaker 2: country you go to that has a major conflict or
Speaker 2: has these huge sanctions because their prize, the people that
Speaker 2: govern and are still rich. Right, Yeah, it's like how
Speaker 2: the you know, yea, So do they personally care? Apparently not,
Speaker 2: because that's where we are we are. But I do
Speaker 2: think there's been a lot of pressure recently put on
Speaker 2: the regime, real legitimate internal organic, you know, just total
Speaker 2: dissatisfaction with the regime. And that's what they know now.
Speaker 2: But if if the Trump administration and quite frankly, the
Speaker 2: Europeans and everybody else that's involved in this, because remember
Speaker 2: the JCPOA was also included, well included Russia, China, Germany,
Speaker 2: and France, right the United States, it's p five plus one,
Speaker 2: so Germany. I think maybe somebody could correct me if
Speaker 2: I'm wrong on that. But everybody should be talking about, like,
Speaker 2: this is the benefit the Iranian people, this happens, Yes,
Speaker 2: your standard of living? Could you even show a projected
Speaker 2: trajectory on that your educational system can go up? Of course,
Speaker 2: so that what's happened when your economic system because in
Speaker 2: the positive directions, So I think they should be talking
Speaker 2: a lot about that and most of what we see
Speaker 2: is just the internal debate on what they can and
Speaker 2: can't have. And I think that's a valid those debates,
Speaker 2: but we should be talking about the positive much more.
Speaker 5: Yeah.
Speaker 4: I also think a positive of at least getting monitors
Speaker 4: in there would be it would might give Israel pause
Speaker 4: about military action because now you're talking about possibly killing
Speaker 4: you know, international monitors. So I think, you know, we
Speaker 4: have to at least get one of those things in there,
Speaker 4: solidified in lockdown, you know. And I think the monitor
Speaker 4: and the agreement that it would be you know, for
Speaker 4: civilian use only are two of the big things.
Speaker 1: I'm very cynical, and I mean, it doesn't seem like
Speaker 1: that Israel really cares about smoking international Yeah, workers of
Speaker 1: any kind. Uh gonna be honest, But that's for another day.
Speaker 1: I hope they do make a deal because it makes sense.
Speaker 1: I mean you, I mean, I'm sure they're smart people
Speaker 1: gaming it out at the O, d n C. I
Speaker 1: A like, what happens if we do make a deal
Speaker 1: but Israel still fucking hits them?
Speaker 3: What is deal's gone?
Speaker 2: Yeah?
Speaker 3: I don't know.
Speaker 1: It sounds like a nightmare and I'm glad I don't
Speaker 1: have that job. Podcasting is enough. Yeah, just talking about
Speaker 1: it is stressful enough for me.
Speaker 3: One more thing.
Speaker 1: Trump's doing a Middle Eastern tour this week, heading towards
Speaker 1: making all the itinerary.
Speaker 2: I think it's ri Odd first, then Alba Dab in
Speaker 2: the Emirates, so Saudi Arabia, the Emirates, and then Guitar
Speaker 2: Doha is what I'm hearing. Interesting things apart, Well, it's
Speaker 2: important for people to know we have a lot of
Speaker 2: military assets in these regions and they're there at the
Speaker 2: you know, posted by these countries. So Allo Daid for
Speaker 2: example in Qatar is our ford command post for Central
Speaker 2: Command and it has a major air component to it.
Speaker 2: And Bahrain, for example, is the head corners of the
Speaker 2: Fifth Fleet, so the US Navy for the Middle East
Speaker 2: and Central Command. There's plenty in Saudi Arabia and the UA,
Speaker 2: so it's important for us to get out on a
Speaker 2: national security front. Economically, of course, everybody expects major deals
Speaker 2: for lack of a better term to be agreed to
Speaker 2: on trade et cetera, investment primarily as these countries, Saudi
Speaker 2: Arabia especially have a huge amount of capital that they
Speaker 2: can infest, so we expect to see that. I'm sure
Speaker 2: they're going to play a part in the discussions on
Speaker 2: how Gaza is going to end, how the nuclear negotiation
Speaker 2: with Iran is going to go forward, all of that.
Speaker 2: They're very key of the Houthis, of course, and remember
Speaker 2: the Saudi led coalition primarily Saudi and you fought the
Speaker 2: Huthies for years and years and years for the same reason.
Speaker 2: So this idea that they're only doing this is because
Speaker 2: of Gaza. They were doing all that stuff way before
Speaker 2: Gazo was a you know, before October seventh. So a
Speaker 2: lot of things to discuss, economically, security wise, diplomatically. Very
Speaker 2: important trip, I believe, and we'll have to see what
Speaker 2: comes from it, but I think, I think, and then
Speaker 2: the potential as a side note, I'm hearing that Ahmed
Speaker 2: al Shara, the President of Syria, well mete with President
Speaker 2: Trump on the sides of discussions in Riad. At least
Speaker 2: that's the room or I don't you know, don't take
Speaker 2: it as fact. It's just a but it's a one
Speaker 2: that's coming from multiple different journalist friends of mine who
Speaker 2: we're talking to officials, So that would be a big,
Speaker 2: big deal, And they apparently are floating the idea of
Speaker 2: a cooperative deal with the United States on natural resources,
Speaker 2: plus potentially joining the Abraham Accords. So they these folks
Speaker 2: know how to sing President Trump's tune right now. So
Speaker 2: if that's the case, then we'll see if there's a meeting.
Speaker 2: But that could also be pretty interesting.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and al Shara has been doing the kind of
Speaker 1: world tour thing. He met mac cron and stuff last week.
Speaker 1: I mean, I guess legitimizing his rule. I guess it's
Speaker 1: a dictator that we like.
Speaker 3: So it's good.
Speaker 2: Yeah, of course that's part of the list we gave them.
Speaker 2: It's gonna have real elections. Man, just because you were
Speaker 2: the strongest, you know on the block, does it mean
Speaker 2: you get to ultimately be the you know president forever.
Speaker 2: I'm not saying he's a goon, because apparently everybody that
Speaker 2: I know has met him that he's really really smart.
Speaker 2: But he needs to do what he said he's going
Speaker 2: to do, which is incorporate all aspects does of the
Speaker 2: country and have a legitimate election so that the people
Speaker 2: of Syria can choose the leader and if he's it,
Speaker 2: great or maybe not great, but that so be.
Speaker 3: It, right, right, and also keep smoking ices for us please.
Speaker 2: Yeah, help us let the continue smoking isis who's the best?
Speaker 1: Yeah? Yeah, so it's a busy week. We'll see what
Speaker 1: goes down. I'm sure we'll have a lot to talk
Speaker 1: about next week. I'd love to get an Iran specialist here,
Speaker 1: like a former analyst or something like that, because I'd
Speaker 1: be very interested in like just hearing about like the
Speaker 1: demographics of what goes on in there, because I know,
Speaker 1: like I've heard that it's a relatively younger country, and
Speaker 1: I'd just love to know what, you know, like kind
Speaker 1: of like the atmospheric's on the ground are there. Because
Speaker 1: there's no way people are happy with how this regime
Speaker 1: is doing things right, Like everybody wants to have a
Speaker 1: little bit of a better life. I wants to do
Speaker 1: a little bit better for their family and stuff like that,
Speaker 1: and it's clearly hamstringing them all the sanctions, right, So
Speaker 1: I'm sure there's got to be some kind of like
Speaker 1: economic frustration in that country. Yeah, anything else, guys, Oh, Mick,
Speaker 1: is there any truth that the rumors are going to
Speaker 1: be the next National Security Advisor?
Speaker 2: I don't think so. I think some of my friends
Speaker 2: were sending that rumor out to screw with me. No,
Speaker 2: I haven't been asked. I'm super happy doing I would
Speaker 2: be an honor, of course, to be asked, but I'm
Speaker 2: super happy doing what I'm doing, which is, as some know,
Speaker 2: these humanitarian enablement around the world, and we're we keep
Speaker 2: getting more and more requests. So are our dance card,
Speaker 2: unfortunately is filling up because of just the level of
Speaker 2: continuous conflicts around the world. The precipitous cut and foreign
Speaker 2: aid not just from the United States but from many
Speaker 2: other countries happening at around the same time in the
Speaker 2: UK just about everybody. And then I was looking this
Speaker 2: morning up and you know, obviously you can tell I
Speaker 2: think we should continue our foreign aid. But the one
Speaker 2: thing I would say that's a legitimate point of discussion
Speaker 2: is the United States is one of one hundred and
Speaker 2: ninety five countries in the world. We contribute forty percent
Speaker 2: of all international foreign aid. I think we should be
Speaker 2: proud of that. I don't think we should admit we
Speaker 2: should reduce our amount of aid, but I think we
Speaker 2: should see our percentage reduced. And what that means is
Speaker 2: other countries stepping up. So I looked up. As long
Speaker 2: as this information is accurate, the United States is about
Speaker 2: ten billion dollars a year, maybe less, maybe one point
Speaker 2: five nine point five in four and eight. China for example,
Speaker 2: is according to this, and I chat gpt'd if you
Speaker 2: want to say, I got it twenty million really twenty million,
Speaker 2: Like that's pathetic. And Russia's right around there and India's
Speaker 2: right around there. So yes, you could say, well, we
Speaker 2: got a bigger economy. Yeah, we have about one and
Speaker 2: a half times the economy of China, yet we spend
Speaker 2: more than ten times what they contribute to international direct
Speaker 2: critical food.
Speaker 3: Aid where you don't really expect anything back.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, yeah, because like somebody can argue that Belton
Speaker 1: road stuff, but the Belton road stuff.
Speaker 3: Is like that's all on their finance.
Speaker 2: Right right right, credatory in nature, Yeah, and it ends
Speaker 2: up sucking out every bit of you know, natural resources
Speaker 2: from especially in places across Africa, countries across Africa. So anyway,
Speaker 2: I'm just I know, I know we're talking about that,
Speaker 2: but I think there's a time maybe it's interesting Walls
Speaker 2: gets to the UN. He could say, okay, like we're
Speaker 2: proud of the contribution as US makes to global humanitarian crisis.
Speaker 2: Where is everybody else at? Right? So it would be
Speaker 2: good to see that country started committing to a certain
Speaker 2: percentage of their GDP. And I'm not talking like these
Speaker 2: kind of one off programs that we hear. I don't
Speaker 2: know if true the US age was running. I'm talking
Speaker 2: about direct like there's a stage, there's a there's a
Speaker 2: catastract of the hunger going on in Sudan, Like who's
Speaker 2: contributing to that? They were talking at babies dying? So
Speaker 2: you know, I'm not to be too hyperbolic, but like,
Speaker 2: who can't get behind saving a baby? Yeah, I mean
Speaker 2: if you might want to rethink your you know a
Speaker 2: whole lot, Like.
Speaker 1: I don't even think that's hyperbolic, bro, Yeah, it's real simple.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 4: So the United States.
Speaker 2: Should be proud of what we do, but they we
Speaker 2: should also say, like where's everybody else?
Speaker 3: I mean, how is?
Speaker 4: How is?
Speaker 5: Like?
Speaker 2: You can look at the contributions and I lose number two.
Speaker 2: I'd have to go back to and find it. But
Speaker 2: if you google like highest contributing by you know, dollars,
Speaker 2: it'll tell you the list, and as you expect, it's
Speaker 2: a lot of the Western folks, but you looking close
Speaker 2: to the bottom. I don't know where they were on
Speaker 2: the list, but thirty plus plus. I mean some of
Speaker 2: the biggest countries in the world, to include India. I mean,
Speaker 2: Indian is the biggest country in the world, and they're
Speaker 2: talking like fifteen and fifteen million. And yeah, I get
Speaker 2: to have a lot of poor folks, but you can
Speaker 2: still have a lot of poor folks and contribute. I mean,
Speaker 2: you're spending money on an aircraft carrier, right, so anyway,
Speaker 2: and I'm all about it, you know, spending money on defense.
Speaker 2: But anyway, you get my point. I think I think
Speaker 2: that they could get more in line with their economy.
Speaker 2: And if it's the US is ten times more on
Speaker 2: humanitarian but only one point five times more on the economy.
Speaker 2: That's that's something these countries should have to answer for.
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, absolutely right.
Speaker 1: All right, guys, No, that was great. Guys, do us
Speaker 1: a favor? Would you like a subscribe? Check out everybody's
Speaker 1: links in the description. Mick Moulroy, fog Bow, Lobo Institute, Uh,
Speaker 1: grab the book, All the Glimmering Stars, Crazy amazing story.
Speaker 1: H Jason Lyons His links are in the description as well.
Speaker 1: What else I gotta plug stuff? Sorry, just Patreon dot com,
Speaker 1: slash the Teamhouse. You get both The Team Asks and
Speaker 1: Eyes On Geopolitics ad free. Shout out to Jay Beautiful
Speaker 1: t shirt on. Yes, you get to two podcasts for
Speaker 1: the price of one ad free. If you pick you
Speaker 1: picked a ten dollars here you get a patch from
Speaker 1: us and Andy Milburn of course is great book.
Speaker 3: Another book coming out about the Warren Gaza going on.
Speaker 1: So help support the show Patreon dot com slash Teamhouse.
Speaker 3: Guys, We'll see you next week. Thank you, Thanks sir.
Speaker 5: Hey guys, it's Jack.
Speaker 6: I just want to talk to you for a moment
Speaker 6: about how you can support the show. If you've been
Speaker 6: watching it, enjoying it, but you'd like to get a
Speaker 6: little bit more involved and help us continue to do this,
Speaker 6: you can check out our Patreon It is patreon dot
Speaker 6: com slash the Teamhouse, and for five dollars a month
Speaker 6: you can get access to all of these episodes of
Speaker 6: The Teamhouse ad free.
Speaker 5: The same goes with.
Speaker 6: Our affiliated podcast eyes On with Andy Milburn Jason Lyons mcmulroy.
Speaker 6: That one you will also get all of those episodes
Speaker 6: ad free, and you support the channel and the show
Speaker 6: and we really appreciate it. The Patreon members are literally
Speaker 6: what has helped this company, this small business survive, especially
Speaker 6: during our early years, and you are what continues to
Speaker 6: help this thing going even as we navigate the turbulent
Speaker 6: world of YouTube advertising.
Speaker 5: So we really appreciate all of you. Guys.
Speaker 6: There's going to be a link down in the description
Speaker 6: to that Patreon page, and there is also going to
Speaker 6: be a link to our new merch shop, so if
Speaker 6: you guys want to go and get some Team House merchandise,
Speaker 6: we got stickers and we also have patches, and I
Speaker 6: should mention if you sign up for Patreon at ten
Speaker 6: dollars a month, we will mail you this patch as well,
Speaker 6: so we really appreciate that. But they're also for sale
Speaker 6: on the merch shop and additionally, they got t shirts
Speaker 6: up there, water bottles, a tote bag, coffee mugs, all
Speaker 6: that good stuff, So please go and check them out
Speaker 6: and support the show.
Speaker 5: We really appreciate it, guys. Thank you,