Speaker 1: Hey, everybody, welcome to another episode of AI on Geopolitics.
Speaker 1: I'm here with Mick mulroy. I'm dimitrikon takos lot cooking
Speaker 1: as usual. First on the list is, uh, the Ukraine
Speaker 1: Russia talks in Istanbul that took place that just ended
Speaker 1: about a day ago. Uh, with no real I mean
Speaker 1: some movement, but not really much. They've agreed to swap
Speaker 1: a thousand POW's one thousand for one thousand, first talk
Speaker 1: since twenty twenty two since the war started between actually
Speaker 1: Ukraine and Russia together in the room, I mean Putin
Speaker 1: was nowhere to be found, which is not really surprising.
Speaker 1: I'm sorry, I was reading that like Moscow kind of
Speaker 1: sees it as a win. I guess, like doing nothing
Speaker 1: is a win for them, and like the Ukrainians are
Speaker 1: not exactly happy with down. There was some talks that
Speaker 1: there was like ultimatums talked about, and how Russia demanded
Speaker 1: that Ukraine remove their troops from Ukrainian territory, which is
Speaker 1: fucking hilarious. I mean, anyway you slice it, like if
Speaker 1: you're not like part of the FSB or GRU like,
Speaker 1: I don't know how you could spin this at all, right,
Speaker 1: like if you if you're on the payroll, I don't
Speaker 1: know how you spin this. And Russia's Savor Medvedev tweeted
Speaker 1: recently like literally probably thirty minutes an hour ago, like
Speaker 1: threats and stuff like that, like he's another lunatic.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: One other thing I read too that the Pope, the
Speaker 1: new Pope all for the Vatican has like a possibility
Speaker 1: for a place to do negotiations and stuff like that.
Speaker 1: Zelenski did call and they did agree to talk more,
Speaker 1: but like I feel like that's probably Russia just trying
Speaker 1: to stall.
Speaker 2: Mick. What what do you got with this?
Speaker 3: Well, I think do you summed it up there pretty well?
Speaker 3: The the UH summit and instabul was called for, by
Speaker 3: the way, by Putin. It's a president Putin called the summit.
Speaker 3: Then refuse to show up and face President Zelenski face
Speaker 3: to face right shows you, you know, his level of
Speaker 3: a confidence in his position and certainly looking across the
Speaker 3: aisle from somebody who I think is far superior to
Speaker 3: him as a leader. And then they basically did nothing right.
Speaker 3: I mean, this prisoner swaps good obviously for the prisoners
Speaker 3: who getting released, and you know the fact that it
Speaker 3: was if you want to look at, you know, class
Speaker 3: off whole kind of thing at all. A thousand prisoners
Speaker 3: means a lot more to Ukraine than it does to Russia. Yes,
Speaker 3: so generally doesn't doesn't care, doesn't give a damn about
Speaker 3: their troops. Chances are these guys will get you know,
Speaker 3: patched up, fixed up, fueled up, and be back on
Speaker 3: the battlefield for the Ukrainian side. So I think that's good.
Speaker 3: But it's also clear that our Russia is not interested
Speaker 3: at all in a real ceasefire negotiation process. As long
Speaker 3: as they consider themselves winning and they're basically making very
Speaker 3: minor progress in the battlefield, they're not going to come
Speaker 3: to the table. And I think that's that's up to
Speaker 3: the coalition that supports Ukraine to change, right, So we
Speaker 3: need to stop talking about secondary sanctions and releasing Russian
Speaker 3: freeze frozen assets in Europe and increasing security assistance, and
Speaker 3: we need to do all those things. They need to happen.
Speaker 3: If they don't happen, then you know, we're getting close
Speaker 3: to the definition of insanity. We just keep doing the
Speaker 3: same thing expecting a different outcome. It's time now to
Speaker 3: announce these things happening. Give a deadline. Russian could see
Speaker 3: the clock ticking. Secondary sanctions will be you know, going
Speaker 3: to a place on July tenth or whatever it is.
Speaker 3: Whatever they need. You know, there's a process that has
Speaker 3: to take place. So but initiate the process now. And
Speaker 3: if this is the date, we're going to start releasing
Speaker 3: thirty billion dollars a week, I'm just making this up, yeah,
Speaker 3: but these are real consequences from there's a three hundred
Speaker 3: billion plus I think in Belgium alone to Ukraine. And
Speaker 3: you know you're seeing like Italy just donated several hundred
Speaker 3: armored personnel carriers. It's still happening, but they need to
Speaker 3: announce a substantial increase potentially even start getting ready to
Speaker 3: start moving forces around at the border, right, because there's
Speaker 3: a there's there's strong.
Speaker 2: Talk about like NATO forces.
Speaker 3: Well, I mean I wouldn't call it NATO because the
Speaker 3: US would likely oppose it, but countries are allowed to
Speaker 3: move their own forces.
Speaker 2: Yeah, Right, so.
Speaker 3: There is talk about like if if Russia starts making
Speaker 3: significant advances, are the Coalition of the willing, so the UK, France,
Speaker 3: Germany and Poland willing to send troops in the Kiev. Right,
Speaker 3: they don't need permission of Russia to send for Ukraine,
Speaker 3: to invite other European forces into Kiev, especially if Russia
Speaker 3: won't have a seasfire, right so, and the original plan
Speaker 3: of the United States had them go in during a
Speaker 3: ceasefire which Russia, which Russia will posed. So there needs
Speaker 3: to be less you know, talking about what we could
Speaker 3: do and more doing what we could do can do.
Speaker 3: And I think that's what's coming next. Obviously the Pope
Speaker 3: is coming in with a lot of support. It he's liked.
Speaker 3: I mean, he's the Pope, so he expected to be like.
Speaker 3: But he's just this. This Pope seems to be particularly like.
Speaker 3: Not that Francis wasn't, but he could hold negotiations. And
Speaker 3: I think they should call it and they should. We
Speaker 3: should send people and obviously the Ukrainians and European partners
Speaker 3: and see if Russia shows up, if they can't come
Speaker 3: to a ceasefire negotiation hosted by the Pope, right, then
Speaker 3: you got your answer, Yeah, you got your answer. Right.
Speaker 3: It's all smoke and merits. It's all smoking marits. And
Speaker 3: next time they demand that Ukraine withdraw from Ukraine, it
Speaker 3: should be immediately dismissed. It shouldn't have considered a legitimate
Speaker 3: offer or negotiation. It needs to be a thirty day
Speaker 3: unconditional ceasefire. That's first, and then they start talking about
Speaker 3: ending the conflict long term until they get there, but
Speaker 3: they should. I mean, I know it might be some posturing,
Speaker 3: but if the Pope calls for a summit in the
Speaker 3: Vatican on this date, that could be the kickoff of
Speaker 3: all the consequences that come after. When they don't show up,
Speaker 3: or they don't show up and don't don't don't actually
Speaker 3: agreed to a thirty date unconditional spar then security assistance
Speaker 3: goes up, penalties, sanctions, additional sanction, secondary sanctions, and the
Speaker 3: start of the release of the That's what I think
Speaker 3: is the only thing that's going to get Russia's attention.
Speaker 3: They only understand consequences. Compliments and capitulation just makes them
Speaker 3: more bold.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: I also looked at like who attended the meetings too,
Speaker 1: Like so like the Ukrainian defense minister was there, which
Speaker 1: is like got pretty high up, yes, And like for
Speaker 1: the Russians, the guy who's leading it was just like
Speaker 1: one of Putin's like advisors, right, and like maybe he's
Speaker 1: got to sway or whatever. Maybe he does have that wasta,
Speaker 1: but like Lavrov wasn't there. There wasn't anybody there of
Speaker 1: like you know, big big name, big face that people
Speaker 1: know and you know, at least recognize as somebody who's
Speaker 1: substantial in Russia. I mean, I'm sure, like ci An
Speaker 1: and listen all exactly about this dude and stuff like that,
Speaker 1: I'm sure he does have a pull. But to go
Speaker 1: from like yeah, a week before when Putin's calling for
Speaker 1: this stuff to wins Lance, He's like, yeah, I'll be there,
Speaker 1: like I'll be there with ells On right, like I'm
Speaker 1: ready to talk, and then he just like took completely
Speaker 1: fucking balks at it. It's like, what is the strategic
Speaker 1: value for Russia in doing that or Putin and doing that?
Speaker 1: Is it just like throwing shit at the wall and
Speaker 1: seeing what sticks for them? Like I don't understand like
Speaker 1: the logic.
Speaker 3: I think for them, they think it keeps them in
Speaker 3: the discussion as part of this process for a ceasefire, right,
Speaker 3: so we called it, we showed up, But it has
Speaker 3: to actually have substance, right, So it's if not, it's
Speaker 3: just a stalling deck. We're just trying to see how
Speaker 3: much more they can take on the battlefield. It's it's
Speaker 3: really obvious, and I know it's obvious to everybody. So
Speaker 3: I'm pointing out something, well to most people, I'm not
Speaker 3: putting most most of our people listening, I think right now,
Speaker 3: are like, yeah, no kidding. That's why I say they
Speaker 3: pick a date really early, like as soon as possible
Speaker 3: at the Vatican when we hit that thirty day ceasefire
Speaker 3: goes into place. If they Russians don't show up or
Speaker 3: don't agree to a thirty day ceasefire, then it turns
Speaker 3: into a planning session, obviously out of the Vatican, because
Speaker 3: the Vatican isn't going to be part of the planning
Speaker 3: session for Ukraine winning necessarily, they need to stay neutral.
Speaker 3: Then it immediately it shifts. They leave the Vatican and
Speaker 3: they start planning. You know, Prime Minister Malone, he's a
Speaker 3: big supporter of Ukraine, so they can just go down
Speaker 3: the road to Rome and boom, they start planning. Okay,
Speaker 3: how were we going to win this thing? Then that's
Speaker 3: you got to you gotta play to win, right, You
Speaker 3: can't play to tie, you can't play to capitulate. You
Speaker 3: gotta play to win. And we are so far past
Speaker 3: the time when that needs to happen.
Speaker 2: Hey, guys, it's Jack.
Speaker 4: I want to tell you guys about the sponsor for
Speaker 4: today's show.
Speaker 2: It's Mando.
Speaker 4: Mando makes a whole series of male grooming products. They
Speaker 4: are unique and not There are a deodorant that you
Speaker 4: can use all over your body on armpits if you like,
Speaker 4: but also wherever else you may deem necessary. And I
Speaker 4: have been using these products for about three months now.
Speaker 4: I've been using the body wash it's Bourbon Leather. I've
Speaker 4: been using their bar of soap, which I really enjoyed,
Speaker 4: and also their deodorant. And so I exercise a lot
Speaker 4: and get very sweaty, so I need a deodorant that's
Speaker 4: going to do the job, and Mando has come through
Speaker 4: for me.
Speaker 2: You know.
Speaker 4: The body wash was great. I actually used all of that.
Speaker 4: Need to reorder some more. The bar of soap is
Speaker 4: also very cool. It was very very smooth actually, so
Speaker 4: I hope you guys will go and check them out.
Speaker 4: They have a starter kit that's up there, and they
Speaker 4: have a special deal for Team House viewers, so the
Speaker 4: starter pack is perfect for new customers. It comes with
Speaker 4: a solid, sticky odorant cream tube deodorant, two free products
Speaker 4: of your choice like mini body wash and deodorant wipes,
Speaker 4: and free shipping. As a special offer for listeners, new
Speaker 4: customers get five dollars off of starter pack with our
Speaker 4: exclusive code that equates to over forty percent off your
Speaker 4: Starter pack. Use code Teamhouse at Shopmando dot com. That's
Speaker 4: Shop m a ndo dot com. Please support our show
Speaker 4: and tell them we sent you Smell fresher, stay dryer,
Speaker 4: and boost your confidence from head to toe with Mando.
Speaker 3: And I think even the Trump administration, which came in
Speaker 3: as a different perspective than say, the Biden administration, has
Speaker 3: realized that this is clearly an issue of Russia not righting.
Speaker 3: Ukraine is the grief party. Ukraine was invaded. It wasn't
Speaker 3: because Ukraine was going to join NATO. Rukaina has been
Speaker 3: asking to join NATO fourteen years before the war started,
Speaker 3: and we said no each time. Yeah, and NATO has
Speaker 3: expanded because of the Russian decision to invade Ukraine.
Speaker 1: So also like if let's say Russian never invaded but
Speaker 1: they still have one hundred and fifty thousand troops on
Speaker 1: the border of Ukraine, NATO's not going to be like yeah,
Speaker 1: well accept you with open arms, right, Like, it's not
Speaker 1: like they're gonna take that into consideration of like what's
Speaker 1: going to trigger an Article five And let's say something
Speaker 1: does trigger an Article five Ukraine. This is just a
Speaker 1: thought experiment now. But you know, then you have to see, like, oh,
Speaker 1: is NATO up to snuff? Are they really willing to
Speaker 1: enforce Article five on let's say a new member, right Like,
Speaker 1: so I couldn't. I couldn't believe like it would be
Speaker 1: an easy process for Ukraine to have gotten into NATO,
Speaker 1: even if when like I remember when George Bush was
Speaker 1: talking about Georgia becoming a NATO member and stuff like that,
Speaker 1: Like that's all kind of rhetoric, Like it's not really
Speaker 1: like there's a process obviously that goes goes, goes through it.
Speaker 1: I mean Sweden and Finland they joined, but it wasn't
Speaker 1: really like yeah, you guys are in, no problem. We
Speaker 1: had shit to deal with with Turkey and stuff like
Speaker 1: that to allow Sweden, was it in or whatever?
Speaker 3: You know, like yeah, right, focus, So it's like k
Speaker 3: and all that stuff which is now could put PKK.
Speaker 3: That's an other topic. They've they've basically closed shop. But
Speaker 3: you're right, but there is a scenario where NATO where
Speaker 3: Ukraine could get in to NATO if they agree to
Speaker 3: you know, not seed territory, but stop fighting. And yeah,
Speaker 3: you know, obviously Russia does control part of their territory
Speaker 3: about eighteen percent. I mean, I think Ukraine should be
Speaker 3: the one to decide this, but if they do decide it,
Speaker 3: they should be get instant membership for the rest of
Speaker 3: Ukraine in the NATO, right as a compromise. Yeah, so
Speaker 3: that's it's frozen. It's frozen, doesn't mean that that's part
Speaker 3: of Russia. Like the National Committee should recognize it, but
Speaker 3: they're not going to do anything to take it back.
Speaker 3: So crimea essentially be Russia. But that's there is a scenario.
Speaker 2: That's the security guaranty right, right, So.
Speaker 3: Once again it shows just how strategically bad this was
Speaker 3: for Russia. Right, So they end up with a completely
Speaker 3: demolish section of Ukraine that isn't internationally recognized as Russia.
Speaker 3: And then Ukraine becomes part of NATO, you know, the
Speaker 3: most viable part in the United States moves in in
Speaker 3: large numbers to help, you know, extrapolate the natural resources.
Speaker 3: It's a NATO country and that's good for Russia. I mean,
Speaker 3: Putin makes just bad decisions, but we need to make
Speaker 3: it a bad decision on his part and stop basically
Speaker 3: you know, screwing around.
Speaker 1: You think that he made this decision to go into
Speaker 1: Ukraine because like his his intel and his defense guys
Speaker 1: were just like feeding him bullshit like, oh, we're going
Speaker 1: to smoke these guys in like a week or two.
Speaker 3: That's a good question because like to be the analyst
Speaker 3: in this are intel with Sammy, we're going to take them, right,
Speaker 3: So I mean, okay, so yes, I'm sure that they
Speaker 3: have a bit of the tail the boss what he
Speaker 3: wants to hear things in Russia. Yeah, but I do believe,
Speaker 3: just like we believe, that they would be able to
Speaker 3: take Russia. I mean it is the difference in size
Speaker 3: of military postulation resources, solid alliances to be honest, because
Speaker 3: Ukraine had no alliances other than you know, the United
Speaker 3: States and the UK and Russia that said that they
Speaker 3: wouldn't get invaded when they gave up their nuclear US, right,
Speaker 3: But it wasn't a real alliance because proven we don't
Speaker 3: keep our work unless it's an actual treaty. So if
Speaker 3: you look go back to February at twenty two, we
Speaker 3: were almost in line with what I think Russia and
Speaker 3: tel just was telling Pootin, Yeah, you're going to win.
Speaker 3: It's going to take three weeks around that, and keep's
Speaker 3: going to fall and the government's going to flee into exile.
Speaker 3: And they have it, and they completely underestimated, as did we,
Speaker 3: the well of the Ukrainian people, the incompetence of Russian
Speaker 3: military planners and executors for that matter. Their logistics system
Speaker 3: couldn't even keep up with an invasion of a country
Speaker 3: that was right next to them.
Speaker 2: Crazy.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I mean it's it's you know, the US can
Speaker 3: can invade and supply a force on the other side
Speaker 3: of the world that's completely landlocked Afghanistan for example. Yeah, Russia,
Speaker 3: couldn't you get kings and ship? Yeah, you bring America lines? Yeah,
Speaker 3: you know, twenty five miles in from their border.
Speaker 2: That is a job. Yeah. Yeah.
Speaker 1: I mean everyone's been talking about how like, well, ever
Speaker 1: since this like Russia's armies essentially a paper tiger, They're
Speaker 1: not not going to sneeze app But I mean, if
Speaker 1: you can't take over, it's like US not being able
Speaker 1: to just a bad example given the times but it's
Speaker 1: US not being able to like invade and take.
Speaker 3: Over Canada, right, I don't know you could. Actually it
Speaker 3: might be a similar size difference.
Speaker 1: Yeah right, well like population wise yeah yeah yeah, and
Speaker 1: military size.
Speaker 3: I mean you have to look it up. Yeah, I
Speaker 3: think it really showed. And the Russia has had to
Speaker 3: rely on North Korean troops potentially Chinese troops Russia, I mean,
Speaker 3: Iranian drones, and now it looks like I might provide
Speaker 3: short short range missiles and North Korean artillery by the millions. Yeah, right,
Speaker 3: So if they didn't have that manufacturing, they're very cheap
Speaker 3: manufacturing in North Korea, they'd be they'd be in bad place. Yeah,
Speaker 3: because they're losing troops, like it's literally unheard of in
Speaker 3: modern warfare. You know, after World War Two, they're losing
Speaker 3: troops thousands a week. It's just they just generally don't
Speaker 3: give a damn about their people.
Speaker 1: It's kind of incredible, right, like right, how Russian like
Speaker 1: the population puts up with it because like it's unbelievable
Speaker 1: how insulated and protected I guess that regime is. Because
Speaker 1: if you've lost one hundred and fifty two hundred thousand
Speaker 1: guys plus like another double that or more in casualties hurt,
Speaker 1: like guys who are hurt. I don't understand how a
Speaker 1: regime like that could stay in power. It's fucking insane
Speaker 1: to think in this modern day because like, yeah, right,
Speaker 1: they have control over the internet and the information, but
Speaker 1: at the same time people are getting information too, right, Like,
Speaker 1: at some point you're gonna notice, Shit, we've lost one
Speaker 1: hundred and fifty thousand, two hundred thousand guys.
Speaker 3: Guys are coming back, uncles, they're not coming back. You
Speaker 3: don't need to be posted on Twitter, You're you're seeing it.
Speaker 3: So and all the people that, you know, one of
Speaker 3: the big issues in Russia is all the people they
Speaker 3: could do a different, can make Russia difference, that are competent,
Speaker 3: that are want to see you know, freedoms and free
Speaker 3: economies and stuff, they leave right because they'll be crust immediately. Yeah,
Speaker 3: So it's a vicious cycle where the people who are
Speaker 3: would most advanced the country leaving come of the United States. Yeah,
Speaker 3: you're right, and it leaves only the people that profit
Speaker 3: of the regime staying in place, you know, the oligarchs.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: Man, it's just incredible, Like in this day and age
Speaker 1: is going on between two year, Like you know, in
Speaker 1: Europe there's a fucking human civil hand who are going on?
Speaker 1: What do you think happens next in terms of like
Speaker 1: talks and stuff like that. Give me a little bit
Speaker 1: of speculation.
Speaker 3: So I think I think obviously the Coalition of the
Speaker 3: Willing they calls for main actually it's all Europe, right,
Speaker 3: But those are the ones that are most engaged, you know,
Speaker 3: bout Karl, every everybody that's I already referenced. I think
Speaker 3: they're ready to do this. They don't need, you know,
Speaker 3: Mick mull Ry from Montana to tell them, like it's.
Speaker 2: Time to move out.
Speaker 3: You got to start secondary sanctions, you got to start
Speaker 3: freezing assets. I think that's the next time discussion. I
Speaker 3: think we'll hear that soon. If not, then I would
Speaker 3: be uh surprised.
Speaker 2: Do you think.
Speaker 1: The reason why this is being held up? Do you
Speaker 1: believe it's got something to do with the Trump administration
Speaker 1: and like Europe trying to play it like I don't,
Speaker 1: for lack of a better word, like hand holding a
Speaker 1: little bit to be like we have to do this,
Speaker 1: we should do this, because like you said earlier, you know,
Speaker 1: the Trump administration compared to the body administration came in
Speaker 1: with a little bit different thought process, and when it
Speaker 1: comes to in terms of like Ushia and stuff like that,
Speaker 1: and who invaded who, and like whose faultness is, do
Speaker 1: you think that like that might be a little bit
Speaker 1: of why there's some drag to this and it's not
Speaker 1: really happening as fast as we'd like it to happen.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I think there was that caused the drag where
Speaker 3: people were I mean, we saw some of the stuff
Speaker 3: that I just was really shocking, you know, repeating Russian Yeah,
Speaker 3: very discredited talking points for example, this idea that we
Speaker 3: were trusting Russia. It's not the first administration who is
Speaker 3: wrongfully came to the conclusion of trusting Putin. And we
Speaker 3: can all remember the whole President Bush not.
Speaker 2: The ranch thing.
Speaker 3: Well, you know, I looked into his eyes and all
Speaker 3: that stuff. I mean, the guy's a KGB spies, right,
Speaker 3: I mean, he knows how to make you.
Speaker 2: I think that was at his ranch in Texas through.
Speaker 3: And then you know Secretary Clinton with the giant reset
Speaker 3: button and all that stuff. I mean, I think I think,
Speaker 3: you know, there's plenty of things to point out in
Speaker 3: the past that we're very misplaced when it comes to
Speaker 3: trusting Russia. But I think we're in a spot right
Speaker 3: now where the administration right understands just who needs to
Speaker 3: be trusted and who needs not to be trusted, and
Speaker 3: that you can't just convince President Putin to do anything
Speaker 3: that he doesn't want to without force, you just can't,
Speaker 3: or some kind of coersion, right, it doesn't have to
Speaker 3: be a military force, but it can be economic pressure
Speaker 3: sections and such that has to That has to be
Speaker 3: what leads or we're going to be stuck in this.
Speaker 2: Pure but it's not going to advance. Yeah, it's not good.
Speaker 3: They're just going to keep making incremental advances and eventually
Speaker 3: the rest of Europe as Europe will have to make
Speaker 3: a stand and they might do it and keep it
Speaker 3: yeah and say, okay, so now you're attacking French, German,
Speaker 3: Polish and Great Britain's forces. So how you're fighting all
Speaker 3: of us? And then we'll have to decide, you know,
Speaker 3: as an Article five situation, right right, if they start
Speaker 3: attacking countries in Europe, not just in Ukraine, then it
Speaker 3: definitely would.
Speaker 1: Be well that there's like, no, there's no interpretation for that.
Speaker 1: I wonder what would happen if like there was a
Speaker 1: coalition of like UK, France, Poland and you know the
Speaker 1: rest of Europe that sent like a division into Keith.
Speaker 2: What would happen? Like, how would Putin react to that?
Speaker 3: How he do standard? Like we're you know, we're going
Speaker 3: to use nuclear websits. But he's done that before. Yeah,
Speaker 3: he's done it so many times. I mean, not that
Speaker 3: we're not concerned about that, of course. I mean, does
Speaker 3: he want to start a nuclear war with with Thenato?
Speaker 2: No, he knows he's cooked at that point.
Speaker 3: I means essentially, it's like having a you know, guns
Speaker 3: to each other's head, right, and no matter who pulls
Speaker 3: the trigger first, the other one's gonna gonna go off.
Speaker 2: Yeah, everyone's get Yeah, everyone's gonna die. Right.
Speaker 3: So the reason why we have this nuclear triad is
Speaker 3: you know see air and land based nuclear weapons, is
Speaker 3: because we're going to ensure that our weapons are expended
Speaker 3: and in TAE some of the nuclear war, even if
Speaker 3: they strike first, like even if they try to take
Speaker 3: out they don't know where our subs are. They basically
Speaker 3: don't know where a craft are And the same can
Speaker 3: be said about Russia. At least they do a lot
Speaker 3: to try to and in the sub based nuclear weapons
Speaker 3: are the ones that are most secure, just so everybody knows.
Speaker 3: They simply can't keep track them. Yeah, great, right, so
Speaker 3: how do you take it out? You don't, so it
Speaker 3: just comes at you from a direction you don't expected. Yeah,
Speaker 3: but I think everybody realizes and you can google it
Speaker 3: as it's not classified. It's just even a limited nuclear
Speaker 3: war ends up in catastrophic consequences world. So yeah, a
Speaker 3: strategic level nuclear.
Speaker 2: War, forget it. It's one hundreds of millions of people that.
Speaker 3: Yeah, it could be extinction, it could be an extinction level.
Speaker 1: Yeah, nobody wants that, not even fucking Putin right, because
Speaker 1: he knows he's got his name.
Speaker 2: There's an his name is on one of them. Like
Speaker 2: they're gonna first thing is.
Speaker 1: Drop it wherever he hangs his hat, right, which we
Speaker 1: definitely know where it's not probably not the Kremlin, but
Speaker 1: we know exactly where he sleeps every night, probably and
Speaker 1: I hope.
Speaker 2: So, yeah, I should be a prime.
Speaker 1: If they don't, i'd be I'd be a little bit
Speaker 1: upset with where my money's going for tax dollars for
Speaker 1: the CIA, and then say, d I a whoever? Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: like that should be priority number one. It's interesting too.
Speaker 1: I know this is like a little bit more of
Speaker 1: a broad talk, but like China obviously aligned with Russia,
Speaker 1: not totally but pretty much, I'm sure covertly.
Speaker 2: You know, they were there at the victory parade.
Speaker 1: In Moscow and stuff like that, which Putin probably loved
Speaker 1: because he probably was like, Okay, they're not going to
Speaker 1: blow me up because Jijiping is next to me, so.
Speaker 2: I think I'm safe. Right, they're not.
Speaker 1: But like China tries to be this like developed, you know,
Speaker 1: like how we are, right, they put their soft power
Speaker 1: out there, they spend money in developing places, or they
Speaker 1: help allies, but when things go down, they don't really
Speaker 1: take a stand.
Speaker 2: On anything.
Speaker 1: They kind of just like roll with the punches and
Speaker 1: keep like doing it covertly, they don't really take a
Speaker 1: stand on anything, if you know, you know what I'm saying.
Speaker 1: Compared to the United States anyway, yeah, yeah.
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, I mean there is a strategic alliance between
Speaker 3: Russia and China, you know there can't remember the name
Speaker 3: they use, but it's kind of over the top language
Speaker 3: for their you know, forever friends of highest order and
Speaker 3: all this. But there's always been a bit of us off,
Speaker 3: and we've probably exploit that. They used to be called
Speaker 3: the Sino Soviet split Bler and co. Right, it never
Speaker 3: really materialized in a way that was what we wanted,
Speaker 3: and it still hasn't and it probably won't. And now
Speaker 3: we're at a in a trade war with China and
Speaker 3: the rest of the world, so there's even less of
Speaker 3: a reason for China to separate from Russia, right, Right,
Speaker 3: So maybe we could use some kind of new agreement
Speaker 3: as a way to leverage that. That's a possibility, but
Speaker 3: certainly right now, I know it's not their intent. Obviously
Speaker 3: the intent is the lower tariffs and get into that economists,
Speaker 3: but it is pushing China probably more toward Russia because
Speaker 3: they viewed they view probably whether it's trade or kinetic
Speaker 3: it wars a war, it's some they're looking at, you know,
Speaker 3: potentially reconfiguring who they sell to, right, trying to get
Speaker 3: new alliances to traditional non traditional partners or China like Japan, right, yeah,
Speaker 3: South Korea, which is insane. Yeah, it's like madness to
Speaker 3: think about that.
Speaker 1: Like they're kind of like you know, playing footsi a
Speaker 1: little bit because of what's going on with the tariffs.
Speaker 3: And stuff like that, because there's tariffs on everybody.
Speaker 1: And frankly, I can't really you can't really blame them,
Speaker 1: you know, because at the end of the day, they
Speaker 1: want to make sure that they're citizens, are you know,
Speaker 1: things aren't super expensive, and their economies keep growing or.
Speaker 2: Don't completely crash. I mean you kind of get it.
Speaker 1: Also, I have a prediction in the next twenty years
Speaker 1: everyone remember, like Russia used to was the biggest, like
Speaker 1: one of the biggest and after the United States exporter
Speaker 1: of like arms. Uh, and that's like crash because they
Speaker 1: needed to consolidate for Ukraine. China is going to become
Speaker 1: number two for if they're not number two already, and
Speaker 1: they're going to start it's applying Russia with fighters, fighters,
Speaker 1: you name it, all kinds of like arms and stuff
Speaker 1: like that. Because sure, the Chinese industrial defense industrial base
Speaker 1: is like.
Speaker 2: Scary.
Speaker 3: How they have over a billion people cheap labor and
Speaker 3: they steal our technology so they don't even put in
Speaker 3: the requisite funds to develop the technology, right we do.
Speaker 3: They steal it and then they come up with a
Speaker 3: cheap way to manufacture.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it's scary. I mean, just their shipbuilding capacity is unreal. Yes,
Speaker 1: it's we're like squirting out like two battleships or whatever.
Speaker 1: Destroyer is like of a year, they could bang out,
Speaker 1: like I think it's I think the last thing I
Speaker 1: read was about seven times that. Yeah, that's it's scary
Speaker 1: to think anyway, all right, segueing hopefully putin just you
Speaker 1: know croaks right, like we just hear a news story
Speaker 1: tomorrow that is he had a stroke and he died.
Speaker 2: People like that.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, they lived to like one hundred right, all right, Uh,
Speaker 1: segueing now to Trump's trip to the Middle East. Busy
Speaker 1: last week for him. Uh was in Saudi Arabia, was
Speaker 1: in Cutter, was in UAE, I believe too. There was
Speaker 1: talk about him going to Israel. He didn't up going
Speaker 1: to Israel, so there was some stories about like Israel, Uh,
Speaker 1: United States kind of split, which you know, I don't
Speaker 1: believe that ever will be the case, but anyway, there
Speaker 1: was you know, it was kind of he and Trump
Speaker 1: got his new cool, four hundred million dollar jumbo jet,
Speaker 1: which is nice.
Speaker 2: I guess, Mick, what are your what are your thoughts
Speaker 2: on that? Man?
Speaker 3: There's a lot of talk about there. Yeah, So I
Speaker 3: mean there is I agree, there's the US in Israel
Speaker 3: will not split, you know, our alliance partnership. But there's
Speaker 3: definitely something going on between the administration and our Prime
Speaker 3: Minister nan Yah because the US is unilatterally negotiated to
Speaker 3: get last US hostage out Don Alexander, which is great.
Speaker 3: Israel didn't like it because we've basically partitioned the negotiations.
Speaker 3: That might be the end because there's no other Americans
Speaker 3: left alive. There is romance that needs to be recovered.
Speaker 3: They unilaterally, bilaterally came up with the seasfire with the
Speaker 3: hoo Thies that didn't include attacking Israel. They apparently, according
Speaker 3: to reporting, presented a nuclear agreement to Iran that was
Speaker 3: not coordinated with Israel, and they left the Israel off
Speaker 3: the trip. So, I mean, those are data points that
Speaker 3: I think suggest that there is a change and a
Speaker 3: strained relationship between the States in Israel. I mean, I
Speaker 3: don't even think israelis would could sugarcoat that. Right in
Speaker 3: my Israeli friends aren't sugarcoating that, I can tell you.
Speaker 3: So I don't think it's going to rupture anything like that,
Speaker 3: but it is important to point out and that like
Speaker 3: as the war procede in Gaza. There seems to be
Speaker 3: more pressure by the United States than there has been
Speaker 3: during this administration to bring it to an end. But
Speaker 3: it looks like Prime Minister Nan Yahoo under this operation
Speaker 3: uh Gideon, Yeah, Yeah, is going to substantially escalate the conflict.
Speaker 3: So there's a difference obviously there. And there's a difference
Speaker 3: when it comes to the long term negotiation to get
Speaker 3: to another JCPOA two point zero that it doesn't look
Speaker 3: like it will meet the standard for the Israelis because
Speaker 3: it's they have a pretty extreme standard on that. So
Speaker 3: but that doesn't I think Trump administration is still going
Speaker 3: to move forward. So there's there's something there, I would say.
Speaker 3: The other part, of course, I mean this was a
Speaker 3: primarily an economic based trip, which right, you know, that's
Speaker 3: not a bad thing, that's a good thing. They've got
Speaker 3: six hundred billion dollars worth of pledged investment by the
Speaker 3: Saudi or the Saudi's in US technology and energy sector
Speaker 3: and defense sector. Huge like one one hundred and forty
Speaker 3: three billion in you know, weapons sales.
Speaker 1: Boeing I think too Boweing, like ninety billion something something astronomical,
Speaker 1: two hundred planes or something I don't. Yeah, I think
Speaker 1: it was like ninety something billion, ninety six billion.
Speaker 3: Right, and then uh, and then obviously the aircraft, which
Speaker 3: I mean ethical and legal standards. I think we need
Speaker 3: to rethink having ethical laws for everybody. It's not focusing
Speaker 3: on than a drum on what one can and canning.
Speaker 3: Except but from the security side, I mean they're gonna
Speaker 3: have to re They pull this thing all the way
Speaker 3: down to the to the river cost a billion dollars, right,
Speaker 3: because the way we build I don't think you should
Speaker 3: look at Air Force one as an aircraft. You should
Speaker 3: look at it as the aerial command post for the
Speaker 3: commander in chief of the most powerful military an intelligence
Speaker 3: service in the world.
Speaker 2: Right.
Speaker 3: So you know, we already talked about our scenario where
Speaker 3: there's a nuclear weapon. They're gonna put the president up
Speaker 3: in an Air Force one to get him to a
Speaker 3: secluded location, right, so he has to be So it
Speaker 3: has all sorts of things that no other aircraft had.
Speaker 3: Commercial aircraft like that, the seven forty seven eight, I think, whatever. Yeah,
Speaker 3: So it has air little reviewing like like a military aircraft.
Speaker 3: They can pull up to a tanker, you know, RC
Speaker 3: one and refuel.
Speaker 2: It has.
Speaker 3: Fuel tanks in the plane. It has a surgic suite
Speaker 3: with all the mixed gas uh and all that. It
Speaker 3: has a the protective measures that you've used. Yeah, some
Speaker 3: of them are classified. I don't know, but we know
Speaker 3: the obvious ones like flares and such. Right. And it
Speaker 3: has a unpenetrable communications suite, right, so you can hide
Speaker 3: you know, and you know that Mic, you gave me
Speaker 3: to do these podcasts. You can hide all kinds of
Speaker 3: things in there. Now, think about how much is in
Speaker 3: the wiring of a seven forty. Yeah, Like I don't
Speaker 3: even know. It's to a technical technology inflection expert, but
Speaker 3: I don't even think you can determine whether there's something
Speaker 3: in there. Yeah, with all wires, panels and circuits and
Speaker 3: such that are in a you know, a seven seven.
Speaker 3: So I mean maybe they could, I don't know. You
Speaker 3: can't even use it for anybody that's in a situation
Speaker 3: like that. Would that would rate craft?
Speaker 2: Right?
Speaker 3: I'm not a president, but like the secretary of State.
Speaker 1: Yeah, Defense, anybody, defense, sky director, why would they want
Speaker 1: to ride in that plan? I know it's nice and
Speaker 1: there's like gold stuff and like a cool bathroom, but
Speaker 1: like it's like we can't even speak on this without
Speaker 1: thinking maybe they're fucking listening.
Speaker 3: Right, So I don't even know what we'd use it for.
Speaker 3: So maybe I don't know. But it's a security issue,
Speaker 3: and obviously it's a controversial one for the ethical and legal.
Speaker 2: Yeah, all right, So talking about the other thing, I think.
Speaker 3: The last stop huge investment in us AI by a
Speaker 3: company called I think it's an Amarati deal. So, and
Speaker 3: they're going to be the like one of the biggest
Speaker 3: hubs in the world for AI databases. So this, I mean,
Speaker 3: I don't focus a lot on the economics because I
Speaker 3: don't I don't know it, but it is hugely important
Speaker 3: and defense is essentially just part of it if you
Speaker 3: think about it. I mean, ultimately it's the economics that
Speaker 3: rules today for most decisions of a nation state, and
Speaker 3: defense is basically there to protect the citizens, of course,
Speaker 3: but also its ability to fully conduct trade and advance
Speaker 3: in society and all that. It's it's in support. So
Speaker 3: I think it was successful, is my point. And I think,
Speaker 3: you know, President Trump brought a lot home for the
Speaker 3: American people when it comes to investments.
Speaker 1: Yeah, on the other side of the golf or whatever,
Speaker 1: the straight the Iran nuclear deal. You mentioned it a
Speaker 1: little bit right now, and I was talking to Mark
Speaker 1: Pola Moroppolois on the last episode. It was a bit
Speaker 1: of Iran hawk which I'm sure you are more on
Speaker 1: that side as well. I mean, we have to assume
Speaker 1: that we're not going to at the perfect deal where
Speaker 1: like they completely don't enrich any uranium and we at something.
Speaker 1: There has to be some kind of plan where it's like,
Speaker 1: you know, some kind of like arbitrary line where like
Speaker 1: we're gonna take this up to this and we're going
Speaker 1: to make a deal. It sounds like they're more more
Speaker 1: open to making a deal in terms of like wake
Speaker 1: cough and the Trump administration as a whole. I know
Speaker 1: the old school gop Iran hawks are freaking out, yes,
Speaker 1: and you know Israel's definitely pouring some lighter fluid on
Speaker 1: that one too for them. But man, I mean a
Speaker 1: deal to not have a nuclear weapon and to be
Speaker 1: the monitoring, to be like real stringent and actually do it.
Speaker 1: I think it's a good thing.
Speaker 3: Man.
Speaker 1: I don't think we should bomb Iran unless we know
Speaker 1: they're either very close to making to developing a nuclear
Speaker 1: weapon and making it, you know, weaponizing it, or you know,
Speaker 1: just to like I want to. The only time I
Speaker 1: would be like, hey, let's bomb them is if like
Speaker 1: we're on the brink, because like we've said, and we've
Speaker 1: seen that even bombing them with our stuff will bring
Speaker 1: it back three to six months. It's not going to completely,
Speaker 1: you know, derail their entire program. I don't know what
Speaker 1: the endgame is. This is really what I'm saying, besides
Speaker 1: making a deal.
Speaker 3: So yeah, and I think ultimately a diplomatic path board
Speaker 3: is almost always the best Pathboward right. I mean, the
Speaker 3: people that you know talk about military action and go
Speaker 3: into war and all that stuff are generally people that
Speaker 3: never took part in military action went to war because
Speaker 3: it's not the answer to everything. You don't can't just
Speaker 3: say pull the trigger and then they just don't have
Speaker 3: a nuclear weapons. It's not the way it goes. And
Speaker 3: there's all sorts of potential consequences, like a large scale
Speaker 3: regional war, like the blocking of the Straits of Hormuz
Speaker 3: with c minds, which Iran can definitely do, the attacking
Speaker 3: of our bases in the region vi our. I'm not
Speaker 3: against a military option as kind of the last option,
Speaker 3: but we really ought to exhaust all diplomatic efforts before
Speaker 3: we do that, because it's not an.
Speaker 2: Answer to all.
Speaker 3: It could be an answer and part of the issue
Speaker 3: or solution, so to speak, but it's not what I
Speaker 3: think some people think, which is like we'll just pull
Speaker 3: the trigger, they'll go away and they won't have a
Speaker 3: bomb for now, an attorney. So the big issues with
Speaker 3: the negotiations, one can Iran a rich at all enrich
Speaker 3: uranium at all their stance, they want to be able
Speaker 3: to enrich up to the rate needed for nuclear power,
Speaker 3: civilian nuclear non weapon power. The United States has already
Speaker 3: said that we do not, Secretary Rubio, and I think
Speaker 3: that was magnified by a resolution of the House and
Speaker 3: said that we don't.
Speaker 2: Want them to.
Speaker 3: Be able to enrich any uranium because in the event
Speaker 3: they have all this capacity and then they decide to
Speaker 3: race toward it, they would be able to do it.
Speaker 3: If they don't have the capacity, then they have to
Speaker 3: rely on an outside source, which I think other countries,
Speaker 3: for example, like the UAE, I think Saudi has already
Speaker 3: agreed to like they could get enriched uranium for a
Speaker 3: country that's already doing it right right, and so so
Speaker 3: could a run and obviously they have an alliance with Russia,
Speaker 3: so they could get up to that level so they
Speaker 3: can use it for civilian military energy, not military civilian
Speaker 3: energy resources. That's one of the sticking points. The second
Speaker 3: sticket point that's always been an issue for the United
Speaker 3: States is ballistic missile programs and support the proxy forces
Speaker 3: by iron particularly the IRGC cood So Force, so they
Speaker 3: support AMAS has able uh who. It seems like the
Speaker 3: especially on the proxy forces, runs hardline. They're going to
Speaker 3: keep their alliances. So we're going to have to decide
Speaker 3: what that's a game change. It was one of the
Speaker 3: reasons why we pulled out of the JCPOA in twenty eighteen,
Speaker 3: So that's going to be controversial if we do not
Speaker 3: include it. But I don't think it will be included
Speaker 3: from the Rinian's perspective. And maybe we just make sure
Speaker 3: that we just keep supporting our partner like Israel and
Speaker 3: crushing them. Yeah right, Israel is crushed as well, has
Speaker 3: seriously crushed a moss and you know, yes there's still
Speaker 3: woth these but there's always going to be hoothis around
Speaker 3: the mountains trying to shoot in US. In Israel. The
Speaker 3: issue of ballistic missiles. It really comes down to a
Speaker 3: ballistic missile that can carry a nuclear warring, So maybe
Speaker 3: we should focus on that, right the sunset provisions in
Speaker 3: the past. One of the criticisms of the twenty fifteen
Speaker 3: jcpoway is that at sunset it like it just ended
Speaker 3: and then Iran could go back to doing what wanted.
Speaker 3: So the US is going to want this to be permanent,
Speaker 3: no nicular.
Speaker 2: Way and men it we're no nuclear Yeah, right.
Speaker 3: I think that's one area that we could improve on
Speaker 3: the twenty fifteen Yeah, because you know, politically they want
Speaker 3: to improve or they're going to be asked why they
Speaker 3: hell did you get out of in twenty eighteen? Then
Speaker 3: if you just basically went back to two thousand and fifty.
Speaker 1: I don't think they give a shit. Trump specifically, I
Speaker 1: don't think cares. So I think it might be the
Speaker 1: same exact agreement. He's going to tiet it as a
Speaker 1: victory and better than Obama.
Speaker 2: Well he probably will. He probably won't tell it.
Speaker 3: But there's there's some places where they could improve.
Speaker 2: Sure.
Speaker 3: Yeah, well there's a lot of places where they can.
Speaker 3: But that's one like it doesn't sunset for Yeah, it's
Speaker 3: permit and then you know there's other provisions. They're going
Speaker 3: to want the sanctions to come out immediately. We're going
Speaker 3: to want to stagger them because we're going to want
Speaker 3: to prove that they're not. We want proof. So the
Speaker 3: you know, IAEA needs to be have full access not
Speaker 3: just to the sites we know than a Toons, the
Speaker 3: Ford Ows, the other places that we know, but they're
Speaker 3: going to have to go around and look for places
Speaker 3: that we don't know because obviously if they have some
Speaker 3: kind of covert site that's doing this, ye have to
Speaker 3: peachical purpose of the agreement. So there needs to be proof,
Speaker 3: and then the sanctions new need to come out. And
Speaker 3: if you think about it, the further that Aron gets
Speaker 3: away from being the most one of the most sanctioned
Speaker 3: countries on Earth and their economy develops and gets more
Speaker 3: incorporated and integrated into the world economy, the less they're
Speaker 3: going to want to turn around to go in the
Speaker 3: other direction. Right right, because we already talked about ultimately
Speaker 3: economics rules and you know, sometimes not so much for
Speaker 3: the regimes that don't need it like a democracy does,
Speaker 3: but I think even they will see less pressure on
Speaker 3: their regime for sure, it'd be great if the regime
Speaker 3: just went away and the Iranian people overthrew it, but
Speaker 3: that's up to the Iranian people. But ultimately there'll be
Speaker 3: less pressure on the Iranian regime I think if the
Speaker 3: people feel like their economy is going in the right
Speaker 3: direction and their standard deliverance. So there's there's a reason
Speaker 3: for both sides to want to do this, and I
Speaker 3: think we should be rooting for diplomacy. And yes, I mean,
Speaker 3: I to myself pretty hawkish on Iran, and there'll be
Speaker 3: people that just won't accept anything, whatever the agreement, but
Speaker 3: those people generally aren't part of.
Speaker 2: The solution there. They're just you know, magnifier, right, yeah,
Speaker 2: right on, Yeah, I mean.
Speaker 1: They I mean they could kind of like the regime,
Speaker 1: I don't know, and Aaron probably could see what's going
Speaker 1: on in Syria as like an example of like you
Speaker 1: can maybe be accepted into the international community, you know, relatively,
Speaker 1: because like we just let those sanctions we opened kimono,
Speaker 1: the sanctions on Syria that we've had for forty years
Speaker 1: during this past you know trip.
Speaker 2: Yeah, which you know, I get it, I get it.
Speaker 2: I understand why they're doing that.
Speaker 1: And you know, maybe a little bit of like, uh
Speaker 1: development and you know, economic growth will help like make
Speaker 1: people a little bit more and not as like you know, homicidal.
Speaker 2: Against us.
Speaker 1: But I get like it's such a complicated thing, Like
Speaker 1: I really would love especially Syria, because Syria, over the
Speaker 1: last fifteen years, it is a shmortgage board of different alliances.
Speaker 1: You know, who's cool with who, who's not cool with who,
Speaker 1: But we're cool with them now for a little bit,
Speaker 1: and we'll see how that goes. Somebody can write an
Speaker 1: incredible book about what goes on in Syria because like, yeah,
Speaker 1: obviously Bricharlotte's side.
Speaker 2: Is a big part of it, but it's like so
Speaker 2: much more.
Speaker 3: So.
Speaker 1: And I don't know how I feel about this guy
Speaker 1: who was in the al Qaida, Yeah he started, it's
Speaker 1: now the is now the president, the indefinite president. Until
Speaker 1: we see the difference and we see something happen being
Speaker 1: accepted into the you know, I don't know how I
Speaker 1: feel about MBS and him given each other pounds like
Speaker 1: they're the best of friends, you know, because we all know.
Speaker 1: And you don't have to say anything about Sadi's role
Speaker 1: in nine to eleven, right, we don't have to say
Speaker 1: anything or they're on the periphery at least, So I
Speaker 1: don't know how I feel about that.
Speaker 2: It's it's like mixed feelings, right, because I live in
Speaker 2: New York.
Speaker 1: I remember the data towers came down, right like, so
Speaker 1: it's very interesting. But at the same time, I do
Speaker 1: understand that you know, you have enemies and at some
Speaker 1: point you need that. You know, you make peace and
Speaker 1: you make the deals and you you negotiate with your
Speaker 1: enemies at some point, right, So.
Speaker 3: So yeah, you're right, Syria's extraordinarily complicated. I would say
Speaker 3: from this Syria perspective that it is trending now in
Speaker 3: the right direction, and you know that's starting from a
Speaker 3: very deep hole.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 3: Yeah, It's been completely torn apart at war, hundreds of
Speaker 3: thousands killed, fled, massive immigration issue Europe. I think the
Speaker 3: book is still out on achamedel Shara or Gilaunie, depending
Speaker 3: on your perspective. He seems to be able to impress
Speaker 3: people that he meets worldwide. Obviously an intelligence person, intelligent person.
Speaker 3: He you know, he's he's staying the right things. He
Speaker 3: has doing a lot of the right things, and Syria
Speaker 3: needs that right now to go to the next phase
Speaker 3: and the idea of sanctions removal I do think was
Speaker 3: fair because they were imposed because of the Asad regime
Speaker 3: who was dominated by Russia and Iran and brutalized the
Speaker 3: civilian population. So the Caesar's anctions, for example, so they
Speaker 3: Syria cannot and I think President Trump said this, they
Speaker 3: cannot advance without with these sanctions on there.
Speaker 2: Absolutely I agree. Yeah, so the.
Speaker 3: Syrian people deserve that. Al shara I would look at
Speaker 3: it more as a as a need for the Syrian people, right.
Speaker 2: And then we gave him a list.
Speaker 3: The Trump administration gave him a list I think the
Speaker 3: Biden administration too, but of what they expected to see
Speaker 3: and now we expect to see it. And part of
Speaker 3: that is leading as a leader for a comprehensive Syria,
Speaker 3: you know, all of it. So that's a positive, and
Speaker 3: there needs to be elections, right Ultimately Syrians. He decided
Speaker 3: who's going to be the leader, not just the person
Speaker 3: with the strongest military faction, and maybe maybe he'll do
Speaker 3: so good that they'll elect him and then he's an
Speaker 3: elected leader and that's it.
Speaker 2: Right, So.
Speaker 3: That's that's certainly a possibility, but it's going to come
Speaker 3: down to his individual actions and keeping his word other
Speaker 3: positives PKK. You know, the US Designated Kurdish Terrorist Organization
Speaker 3: is essentially disbanded. Right, So there's a lot of things
Speaker 3: trending in the right direction in Syria, again starting from
Speaker 3: a very deep hole that I think the world should
Speaker 3: be happy with.
Speaker 2: Right.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it's definitely better than a right yeah. Yeah, a
Speaker 1: low standard for sure. Yeah yeah, a low standard. But
Speaker 1: that doesn't mean that.
Speaker 3: I mean, Seria could be a bustling, burgeoning place like
Speaker 3: it once was in the past, not so just in past.
Speaker 3: So I think it's a good thing. And but I think,
Speaker 3: you know, trust but verify this kind of thing when
Speaker 3: it comes to you. He'll show president.
Speaker 1: Yeah, we'll see what happens. I mean, listen, honestly, I'm
Speaker 1: kind of okay if he keeps a lid in Syria
Speaker 1: and like he helps us with ISIS and doesn't fuck
Speaker 1: with the SDF that much, which I'm assuming we'll probably need.
Speaker 2: A new name. Yeah.
Speaker 3: The other issue, that's another issue of tension between the
Speaker 3: US and Israel. Israel didn't want us to remain protection
Speaker 3: and didn't want the president an Well.
Speaker 1: It's really is operating in Syria pretty heavily that we
Speaker 1: don't really talk about because there's just so much happening.
Speaker 1: Kind of gets swept under the rug a little bit
Speaker 1: because it's just, I mean, how many fronts can he
Speaker 1: fucking have, I guess, but Israel's trying to find out,
Speaker 1: uh So I would love to get into that too.
Speaker 1: I'm gonna have to. I'm gonna get Charles Lister on
Speaker 1: and see what the story is with like why are
Speaker 1: they hitting you know, areas in Syria and stuff like that.
Speaker 1: They are having talks too, just you know the I
Speaker 1: guess secret talks. There were secret talks between Israel and
Speaker 1: all Shara's uh government and stuff like that to try
Speaker 1: and figure it out.
Speaker 2: Did uh.
Speaker 1: Uh say that he would be open to like joining
Speaker 1: the Abraham Accords and stuff like that and opening up stuff.
Speaker 1: So he's definitely saying the right things. And I think
Speaker 1: he needs to because like he wants to be a statesman, right,
Speaker 1: he wants to He doesn't want to know.
Speaker 3: He knows how to play to his audience for sure.
Speaker 3: The negative he's talking to President Trump was one of
Speaker 3: the bigger accomplishments of his first term was Abraham Accords, right, Right,
Speaker 3: So I think there is a possibility they could, but
Speaker 3: it's really going to take Saudi Arabia, I think moving first, right,
Speaker 3: and I don't think Saudi will move until there's a
Speaker 3: permanent UH ceasefire and gossip and some movement on the
Speaker 3: Aliston in the front, you know too state solution. We're
Speaker 3: far from that, but I do think that's certainly a
Speaker 3: ceasefire and Gaza is going to be required for Saudi's
Speaker 3: really start talking about the Abraham Accords.
Speaker 2: But it can happen.
Speaker 3: There's there's It definitely can happen, and yeah, you gotta
Speaker 3: you gotta go in with that. Which will you know?
Speaker 3: Once if this all happened, it would it would stabilize
Speaker 3: the Middle East, and that is a very good thing
Speaker 3: for the Middle East and for the United States.
Speaker 2: I hope it does happen, man, Jesus anything else? Oh shut.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I watched before we started the podcast, I was
Speaker 3: asking you about this restaurant that I saw a movie
Speaker 3: last night, me and my wife did called did I
Speaker 3: texted to you?
Speaker 1: Known as known as is the name of the movie
Speaker 1: right on his foot, Yes, And the restaurant that it's
Speaker 1: based on is called Anoteca Maria.
Speaker 4: Yeah.
Speaker 3: So the concept of the movie and It's got Vin
Speaker 3: Fan is always Awesome is a true story about a
Speaker 3: guy who started a restaurant, you know, midlife, named it
Speaker 3: Honor for his mother, and then used all grandmothers, which
Speaker 3: known as I think it's Italian for grandmother, right, no, no, no, yeah, yeah,
Speaker 3: you guys call yours yah yah right, Greek day. Yeah,
Speaker 3: but Nona's is an Italian for grandmother. He just brought
Speaker 3: grandmothers and the cook They're like, that's cool, famous their
Speaker 3: favorite dishes, right, So it was all grandma's cooking, which
Speaker 3: is exactly the kind of food.
Speaker 2: Out one, which is hilarious.
Speaker 1: See, because I'm a cynical maniac, I just picture them
Speaker 1: like sweatshop labor just have like these eight year old
Speaker 1: grandmothers in the back fucking making sauce, sweating.
Speaker 3: No, I think I think that restaurants.
Speaker 2: Yeah, obviously they're not going to pick that. No, of course,
Speaker 2: you know at the end of the movie.
Speaker 3: Although I could probably live forever on Italian grandmother's cooking,
Speaker 3: but they also have other grandma's, right, probably Greeks.
Speaker 2: And you know Lebanese come in and oh that's sick.
Speaker 2: That is cool. Yeah, there's I didn't know that. I
Speaker 2: thought it was just Italian. No, that's cool.
Speaker 3: I think it's primary in the Italian At the end
Speaker 3: of you know, when they do the credits at the end,
Speaker 3: they talk about you know, oh that is cool and
Speaker 3: other I mean that is I mean, how could you
Speaker 3: not like that movie?
Speaker 2: Right?
Speaker 3: No, So next time we go to New York.
Speaker 2: There, all right, we'll go, We'll go to us. I'm
Speaker 2: gonna you're gonna make me go to Staten Island. That's right.
Speaker 3: I didn't know that was such a big deal.
Speaker 1: It's not a big deal. It's not a big deal.
Speaker 1: But we like in Brooklyn, we like to make fun
Speaker 1: of Stanton Island. We like to make fun of all
Speaker 1: the other boroughs because there's a reason it's called King's County.
Speaker 1: So just everybody remember that. It's because we're number one
Speaker 1: after Okay, that's right, I tell everybody for possible, every place,
Speaker 1: any kind of arbitrary thing. Yeah, there's gonna be a
Speaker 1: rivalry of some sort. But I mean everyone's coming together
Speaker 1: because the Knicks are playing well, because I can't. I
Speaker 1: am from Brooklyn, but I'm not a Brooklyn Nets fan.
Speaker 1: They're from Jersey. Yeah, they just they're just uh, they're
Speaker 1: just visiting.
Speaker 3: All right, so we'll be able to get you out
Speaker 3: of Brooklyn and.
Speaker 1: Absolutely I get I'll cross that bridge, I'll pay the
Speaker 1: toll to tolls on me. Don't worry about it. Guys,
Speaker 1: don't forget. Check out the movie, check out the place.
Speaker 1: If you're in a Stanton Island or in the area.
Speaker 1: It's that that first one's tough. Uhecha Maria on stant Island.
Speaker 1: Don't forget to check out Mick Lobo fog Bow. So
Speaker 1: all the mixed publications and links will be in the description.
Speaker 1: You can check it out there. All the other guys,
Speaker 1: every ny and all information about the show and the
Speaker 1: guys links are in the description. Do us a favor,
Speaker 1: like and subscribe. If you're listening to us even on audio,
Speaker 1: you could rated five stars and subscribe there as well.
Speaker 2: It helps.
Speaker 1: Any kind of engagement helps, and the best way to
Speaker 1: support the show Patreon dot com slash Teamhouse. You get
Speaker 1: both the Teamhouse and as on geopolitics, absolutely add free,
Speaker 1: get early access to it, both video and audio, and
Speaker 1: now you help support the show.
Speaker 3: So that's not that we didn't sell it enough already.
Speaker 3: But Anoteca means in Italian means wine library.
Speaker 1: Okay, interesting really fuck all right? No, that's yeah, that's
Speaker 1: a tough name. That's a tough name, but I like it.
Speaker 1: Nonahs is a better name, let's be honest. But there's
Speaker 1: a lot of Nona's like restaurants and pizzerias that are.
Speaker 2: Called Nona's, right.
Speaker 1: Yeah, And I'll shout out my my old my family's
Speaker 1: restaurant in Brooklyn. I've lead Greek kitchen. All of our
Speaker 1: recipes are from grandmother's too. Well, my family does.
Speaker 2: Yeah. Yeah, it's on the street in Brooklyn. Yeah, it's legit,
Speaker 2: it's legit. Good.
Speaker 1: We don't make our grandmother's work like these Italians, though,
Speaker 1: but we use their recipes. Check out the places that
Speaker 1: I'm just walking around, buddy, all right, maybe, well we
Speaker 1: got two places to visit.
Speaker 2: Yeah, no, we're gonna eat good guys. It's Jack.
Speaker 4: I just want to talk to you for a moment
Speaker 4: about how you can support the show. If you've been
Speaker 4: watching it, enjoying it, but you'd like to get a
Speaker 4: little bit more involved and help us continue to do this,
Speaker 4: you can check out our Patreon. It is patreon dot com,
Speaker 4: slash the teamhouse, and for five dollars a month, you
Speaker 4: can get access to all of these episodes of the
Speaker 4: Teamhouse ad free. The same goes with our affiliated podcast
Speaker 4: Eyes On with Andy Millburn, Jason Lyons mcmulroy that one,
Speaker 4: you will also get all of those episodes ad free,
Speaker 4: and you support the channel and the show, and we
Speaker 4: really appreciate it. The Patreon members are literally what has
Speaker 4: helped this company, this small business survive, especially during our
Speaker 4: early years, and you are what continues to help this
Speaker 4: thing going even as we navigate the turbulent world of
Speaker 4: YouTube advertising.
Speaker 2: So we really appreciate all of you guys.
Speaker 4: There's going to be a link down in the description
Speaker 4: to that Patreon page, and there is also going to
Speaker 4: be a link to our new merch shop, so if
Speaker 4: you guys want to go and get some Team House merchandise,
Speaker 4: we got stickers and we also have patches, and I
Speaker 4: should mention if you sign up for Patreon at ten
Speaker 4: dollars a month, we will mail you this patch as well,
Speaker 4: so we really appreciate that. But they're also for sale
Speaker 4: on the merch shop and additionally, they got t shirts
Speaker 4: up there, water bottles, a tope, coffee mugs, all that
Speaker 4: good stuff, so please go and check them out and
Speaker 4: support the show.
Speaker 2: We really appreciate it, guys, thank you.