The Future of War Is Flying Overhead

Summary

American Power – Episode Summary

Episode Title: The Future of War Is Flying Overhead
Date: June 17, 2026
Host(s): Nat Towsen, Chad Scott, Mr. Global (Matt Randolph)
Special Guest: Preston Stewart (War Stories Podcast)

---

Overview

This episode of American Power dives deep into how warfare is changing, with a special emphasis on the rise of drone technology—military and civilian—and its pivotal role in the ongoing war in Ukraine. Hosts Nat Towsen, Chad Scott, and Matt “Mr. Global” Randolph are joined by Preston Stewart, a military analyst, West Point grad, and the host of War Stories podcast, who shares front-line insights from his recent trips to Ukraine.

Together, the panel unpacks:

• Ukraine's rapid innovation and emergence as a “drone superpower”
• The evolving strategy of drone warfare and its global repercussions
• The intersection of military tactics, energy infrastructure, and international politics
• Broader ethical questions of advanced warfare and private sector involvement

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Introducing Preston Stewart and His Approach to Military Media

• Background: Stewart, a former Army officer, transitioned from active duty to content creation, focusing on military history and making complex geopolitical issues accessible to a broad audience ([04:29]).
• On Accessibility: He discusses the importance of translating military jargon into everyday language, emphasizing clarity and the need to balance depth with accessibility.
  • Quote: “It’s genuinely a balance...you can use [jargon] as kind of speaking code to your tribe...but the number of people...that would understand, that's pretty minuscule.” – Preston ([07:30])

2. Reporting from Ukraine — Frontlines to Drones

• Travel Logistics: Preston details his two trips to Ukraine, the shift from a personally-funded ‘adventure’ via Poland to a more organized group entry through Moldova, and his unique access with Ukrainian military units ([11:53]).
• Operational Security: Discusses precautions around filming sensitive military equipment, typically waiting to post footage until after leaving locations ([14:11]).
• Drone Manufacture and Usage:
  • Ukrainian innovation: “I think I have had better access to Ukrainian military technology and operational security in the last few months than I could get from the US Military.” – Preston ([13:12])
  • Emergence of pre-programmed drones capable of autonomous strike missions, making Russian interception increasingly difficult ([16:03]).

3. Ukraine’s Evolving Military Position and Drone Warfare

• Shift in Momentum: Optimism among Ukrainian forces; Ukraine now putting Russia on “their back foot” with persistent attacks on logistics and infrastructure ([17:55]).
  • Black Sea Security Forum: Highlights high-level optimism about post-war opportunities and the export of drone tech ([19:13]).
• Impact on Russian Supply Lines and Crimea:
  • Focus on isolating Crimea as both a strategic and symbolic aim, forcing Russia to stretch its air defense resources thin ([27:09]).
  • Disruption of fuel and supplies to the front can erode Russian military capacity over time ([29:33]).
• Energy Infrastructure as a Battlefield:
  • Ukraine strategically targeting Russian oil refineries—a tactic made more politically feasible under changing US administrations ([21:11], [25:12]).
  • The global energy market remains volatile but not yet dramatically affected by these strikes due to Chinese consumption and sanctioned oil flows ([23:30]).

4. Drones: The New Face of Combat

• Ukraine as a ‘Drone Superpower’:
  • Homegrown innovation and ground-up development has leapfrogged traditional, top-down military procurement models ([38:53]).
  • Soldiers are empowered to adapt, design, and even 3D-print new drone parts, dramatically shortening technology cycles ([36:58]).
• Tactical Adaptation:
  • “They push the innovation down...soldiers [are] coming up with a new 3D printed design...and these individuals became experts that then worked its way up into companies.” – Preston ([38:53])
• Types and Uses:
  • Transition from aerial to ground drones, including the first-ever documented surrender to a ground drone ([41:42]).
  • Ukraine is now focused on the most critical, vulnerable parts of Russian infrastructure, maximizing the impact of limited strikes ([34:03]).

5. Ethical Considerations and The Future of Warfare

• De-Personalization and Escalation:
  • Drones increase precision but risk making war “easier to wage” and killing more impersonal – potentially eroding barriers to conflict ([46:52]).
  • Non-state actors soon may have the capacity to deploy these weapons in civilian contexts ([48:23]).
• Potential for Fewer Civilian Casualties?
  • Precision can reduce “collateral damage,” but actors like Russia continue to deliberately target civilians. Ukraine, out of necessity and intent, focuses on military targets ([33:05]).
• Morale and the Human Impact:
  • Ukrainian soldiers display profound professionalism and a focus on duty, not triumphalism. The ongoing psychological strain—especially on civilians, like schoolchildren in Kherson forced to avoid drones—was powerfully recounted ([56:39]).

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On the Tech Arms Race:
  “Every single day...the soldiers on the front [are] constantly changing, constantly adapting. And genuinely, something that worked yesterday might never work again.” – Preston ([42:37])

• On Morale in Ukraine:
  “Not celebrated, it's not cheered on. But to me, at least, it came across as very professional every time, every interaction...Very focused on what they have to do.” – Preston ([49:06])

• Striking Personal Story:
  “In that portion of Ukraine, that is the only time [children] can play outside. Because sunny skies mean more Russian drones and Russian drones target civilians. Your kids, man.” – Preston ([57:41])

• On US Policy and Private War Industry:
  “There are private entities that are making this work...I think that’s already there...companies see profits, they see the ability to, to make some money, so they're going for it. In the short term, I think that's going to be a net benefit. But long term, it's probably pretty similar to what we're looking at right now with the general military industrial complex.” – Preston ([67:26])

---

Timestamps for Key Segments

• 00:00–04:29 — Host introductions and Preston Stewart’s background
• 07:30–10:22 — Demystifying military jargon and engaging non-experts
• 11:33–16:39 — Travel into Ukraine, access to military, drone labs, OPSEC
• 17:55–20:24 — State of the war, Black Sea Security Forum, optimism gap between policymakers and soldiers
• 21:11–25:12 — Russia’s energy infrastructure as a target, impact of sanctions
• 27:09–31:05 — Crimea as flashpoint, supply line strategy, prospects for Russian collapse
• 32:03–34:02 — Civilian targeting vs. military precision, ethical differences in strikes
• 36:04–44:58 — Drone innovation, ground-up adaptation, implications for US/West
• 46:44–48:23 — Ethics: civilian risk, ease of killing, psychological impact
• 49:06–51:32 — Soldier morale in Ukraine; why should Americans care?
• 53:51–56:01 — What if Russia wins; global security implications, Baltic risk
• 56:39–58:37 — Unforgettable story: Kherson schoolchildren, life under drones
• 58:37–61:53 — What Ukraine needs: interceptors, logistical support, charities
• 63:43–69:07 — US policy under Trump, the emergence of private sector war profiteers
• 69:58–72:00 — Starlink & the privatization of key military logistics
• 75:57–83:21 — Closing: culture, collective action, personal reflections

---

Closing Reflections

• The hosts and Mr. Global reflect on Preston’s ability to illuminate complex issues and his direct, humanizing insights from the frontlines.
• The episode closes with the “least worst part of my week” segment—offering a rare upbeat communal reflection amid geopolitics.

---

Key Takeaways

• Ukraine’s tactical innovation—centered on drones—is giving it asymmetric advantages, causing visible stress on Russian supply lines and infrastructure.
• Drones and advanced technology change the landscape of warfare, speeding up both escalation and adaptation cycles, and influencing everything from battlefield morale to global energy markets.
• Strategic targeting (vs. indiscriminate bombing) is not just an ideal—it is a necessity for Ukraine and a source of stark contrast with Russian tactics.
• US policy vacillates, but the growing involvement of private companies (for both innovation and profit) is shaping new forms of 21st-century warfighting.
• The ethical implications of drone warfare—and the potential for civilian harm or future domestic overreach—are real, urgent, and unresolved.
• Despite the high stakes, the resilience and focus of Ukraine’s military and civilian populations stand as a sobering testament to the real cost of war.

---

Resources for Listeners

Charities Recommended by Preston Stewart:

• Car for Ukraine — Provides vehicles and non-lethal aid
• Ukraine Aid Operations — 501c3, supplies drones and logistics
• Zygus Paw — Ukrainian-based charity, direct unit support

Find Preston Stewart:

• YouTube: [Preston Stewart]
• X/Twitter & Instagram: @prestonstew_
• TikTok: @prestonstew

---

Final Thoughts

American Power’s episode offers a sobering, detailed, and often firsthand exploration of how technological innovation, policy, and raw human experience are colliding—sometimes literally—above the battlefield, with implications that “fly overhead” but touch lives on all sides.

Transcript

[A]

Foreign. You're listening to American Power. I'm your host, Nat Town. Stand up comedian, speech writer, prose writer, many other kinds of writer, and most likely to be carved in stone upon my death, podcast host. I'm joined, as always, by my panel of experts. Our expert on the military and foreign policy, Chad Scott. Chad, how you doing?

[B]

I'm doing great. Really looking forward to speaking with a good friend of mine here. This is going to be awesome.

[A]

Yeah, this is going to be a great episode. I'm really excited and can't wait to hear what you guys get into as well. And I'll, I'll, I'll be here to explain what the passerby, the, the average American does not understand because you guys are both experts. So I'm excited to, like, really get into it with you both. And joining us, of course, as always, our expert on energy, both renewable oil, global oil markets. You know him as Mr. Global, Matt Randolph. Matt, how's it going?

[C]

Oh, it's great. I'm knee deep in the swamp and the Capitol Police have already seized my yeti cup and I'm sitting here feeling very lonely without it.

[A]

And are you enjoying your complimentary NSA bugged hotel room?

[C]

Yes, I am. That's why we're having all these tech difficulties. No, they did. They took my yeti cup. And if you're from the south, your yeti cup is like your child.

[B]

It's like your emotional support cup.

[A]

I was about to say that's maybe a real cultural insult to you.

[C]

I'm like, dude, I'm just trying to get into a gift shop. Like, I gotta get my wife something before I leave, like. And they took it and then they lost it.

[A]

Is the logic that yetis are large enough to conceal a handgun? I don't, because I've seen some of that.

[C]

Mine had a handle on it, so that was probably scary.

[A]

I mean, those yetis are. And again, they don't sponsor the podcast. But a yeti cup with a handle on it is a blunt object. You could take out a security guard with that. You, you get past three, you get like three steps closer to the president with a yeti cup with a handle. I'm kind of on their side at this point. For those of you listening who have not gathered this from context, I don't blame you for not being a deep reader. However, Mr. Global is joining us from the swamp itself, Washington, D.C. right now.

[C]

Yeah.

[A]

Where he is. Would you want to tell our listeners a little about what you're doing there or.

[C]

As soon as we're done here. I'm going to sit with the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee and we're going to talk about energy policy and how high energy prices impact people. Right out my window is the Supreme Court of the United States. So like, I'm literally in the middle of the swamp and I need to take a shower. I feel like, I feel a little dirty.

[A]

I like that we've reclaimed that now that Washington has been infected just by the worst people on earth. Well, you heard it here first, listeners. If we do not reach a sensible national energy policy, it's because I went long on this episode of the podcast and Mr. Global was late. So if humanity's doomed, you can blame me. But for this episode, I don't want you to blame our guest because it will be my fault if we don't reach climate if we don't reach 350 parts per million in the atmosphere climate solidary in the next week. However, I'm so excited to bring this guest to the podcast. We're really excited to talk to him. He is the host of War Stories, a podcast that breaks down war, conflict geopolitics in a digestible way, making it easier for everyday people to understand. Sounds familiar. He's a former US army officer and West Point graduate with a degree in International Relations and has served as an officer in the 101st Airborne, the Texas National Guard, the US Army Reserve in Tennessee. He has a massive following across multiple social media platforms and networks and does amazing works of charity for 1 for 198 Ukrainian causes. I'd say that he does amazing works of charity for Ukrainian causes. I'm so excited to bring to the podcast. Welcome Preston Stewart N. Thank you so

[D]

much for the introduction. Looking forward to chatting today with my buddy Chad and getting to meet Matt and chat for the first time here.

[A]

So happy to have you on the show. Thank you for joining us Preston. I was hoping for those of you who might not be for the listeners rather who might not be as familiar with your work. In spite of my stellar introduction that explained almost everything, I was hoping that you could go into a little bit more detail. Can you tell us a bit about your background and sort of how you went from military service to being a content creator who comments on these sort of things?

[D]

Yeah, absolutely man. So left active duty in 2014 so it stopped being my full time job. Then from 2014 to 2025 I was in the Guard and Reserve, so bouncing around between those two. So part time job, still had full civilian employment but wasn't Ever super happy or excited about what I was doing and started making content during COVID of subjects that I was interested in, primarily military history. A lot to do with World War II. My background in college was international relations and terrorism studies. I kind of figured you have to be in the government for that to, to actually be something that you would focus on day to day and started to look in that direction for some jobs. But when the war in Ukraine kicked off, there all of a sudden were a lot of people looking to the Internet, looking to TikTok and Instagram and YouTube for updates on, you know, what is a tank versus artillery, what is air defense mean, fighter versus bomber, all of those little things that for those of us in the military, you take for granted. And there was all of a sudden an audience looking for that information and it just, it just kept going. So started spending more and more time on that. And I've been fortunate now for a few years for this to be my, my full time job. Introduced me to some great people, have made some incredible connections, some, some awesome trips. Yeah, love it. But the primary focus right now is war and conflict around the world. So a lot of that attention right now is obviously focused on the Russia, Ukraine war. And then as other conflicts have kind of come and gone, you know, Iran, U.S. which as of today, I don't know, maybe it's over.

[A]

I wouldn't say it's over. Go on, I'll get into that as well. Yeah, sorry, I didn't mean to interrupt you with my pessimism.

[D]

No, no, that was it, man.

[A]

Yeah, my skepticism. I'm curious, you know, you touched on this briefly, but what's the difference between a tank and artillery? You know, like, I'm sure that when you talk to other people who have served, for example, in the military, or who work with military, know, work with the military and government, there's a lot of jargon, there's a lot of shared vocabulary. And you know, obviously one of the things that we try to do in this podcast is open up these conversations to other people. And I personally, as someone without a lot of military expertise, I find that what often happens when we discuss especially, you know, military action abroad is that we use these same phrases and everyone's kind of parroting each other. And you even hear in civilian conversations people saying these phrases that we don't a hundred percent understand because it's like, okay, someone gave me some building blocks and now I know I have to rearrange these to have an opinion on Ukraine, which is not to say People are like, you know, not trying to understand the situation. But what I'm curious with you is, like, how do you break through that kind of jargon or that kind of established vocabulary to. It sounds like people are really reacting to the clarity of your media. Like, how do you, how do you cut through? And how do you know, as a person who's really on the inside of it, what you need to make available to other people or comprehensible to the average American?

[D]

I'll be honest that it's kind of a daily thought process. Is this too far in the weeds or not? And I try to navigate that with pulling on experts. So we'll do interviews from time to time with people that are. Are very well versed in a certain subject and try to kind of pick their brain rather than my trying to get too far down in the weeds. But it is, it genuinely is a balance. Look, the military jargon can be really cool and can sound awesome, right? Effects on targets and, and target packets and all sorts of things. You can put together the number of acronyms through the roof, like you mentioned, and you can, you can use that. It's kind of speaking code to your tribe in certain ways. But the number of people relative to the, the rest of the audience, that would understand, that's pretty minuscule. So I try to take that information from military sources, be it Ukraine, Russia, or here in the United States, Israel, Iran, and kind of just back it off a step or two. So instead of the model of the missile and the nomenclature of the missile, maybe it's. It's an intermediate range missile that can travel this far with the hope that somebody can hear it for the first time and need no background and kind of get an understanding of what it is we're talking about.

[A]

What I'm curious when you. And this is clearly me, the podcast host, looking for professional comparisons, but I'm curious, when you bring on experts, do you find yourself being the sort of audience surrogate? Like, do you find that you have to ask for a little translation as well, does that help you to translate to a listening audience of not? Like you said, it's like a. It's your personal jargon. So if you want to open it up to people who aren't, who haven't served and aren't the one really weird guy from everyone's high school who memorized all that jargon even though he didn't go into the military, how do you translate from an expert to, to the people who know less than you? Like, do you find that your comprehension is able to filter that sometimes.

[D]

Again, it's a constant thought. And there's a guy we had on recently talking about all the situation in Mali, and it's a great example of, like, I don't even know how to pronounce most of those towns. I don't know what the geography of Mali is. I don't know the history there. I can read some articles on it and get an idea. But he would just dive right in to, like, you know, what's happening on the northern approaches to the capital city. And we had to back out a little bit and say, hey, higher level, what is this group? What is that group? How do they play together? So it's selfishly kind of. I love it because I get to learn and talk to these guys and ask the questions, the very simple questions of like, I don't have any idea what you're talking about. Can you start over at square one? So we try to keep that as a part of it. It's easier in English language interviews. We do some with Ukrainian soldiers. And when you get through a translator or it's a second language, it gets a little bit harder to kind of walk that line. But I think it's important, man. I think it's what you guys are doing here, too. It's just an ability to reach a larger audience. Yeah.

[B]

And it's kind of funny because we'll it even cross services. We run it up because I'll have conversations with Alex, our mutual friend Alex Hollings, and he's like an air power guy. And I'm like, okay, whoa, I'm you. Just because we were both in the military, we can often speak different languages. I mean, I was a ground logistics guy. He's an air power Marine. So it is. It's kind of fascinating, but kind of diving into more of what you've been doing recently as an avid follower of your content. I know you got back from Ukraine, I think it was just a few weeks ago, maybe a little longer based on the release timelines. Before I get into that discussion on the tactics and strategy and all the cool people you met and everything, I do have a question, and it's something I've always wanted to ask you. When you go there, how. How do you actually get in and do the things you do? Like, do you go through Romania? Is it Poland? Do you fly there, then get on a rail, meet with a liaison, and then they kind of prep and you work together? And then the other question is, do you just shoot the footage? Like for, for OPSEC operational security reasons and release it when you get back to your home or are you allowed to just edit on site and show what's going on as. As we're going as you're going through it.

[A]

Yeah.

[D]

I appreciate the commitment to the show because we text. You could have just sent these over. We talk on the phone. Could have just at any point you held it in this environment. Yeah, I appreciate it.

[B]

I'm trying to go with you is what I'm trying to do.

[D]

How do I do it?

[B]

How do I do it?

[A]

And where do you get the ticket? And who ask? So the snacks like been different.

[D]

I've been over two times and the first one my parents actually described as an adventure and the second time more as a business trip. And they were, they kind of matched that. So the first time around we went through. It was all personally funded. Like I bought, bought the tickets and went through Romaine or excuse me, Poland. So we landed in Warsaw. Anybody can get to Poland. Normal flights bounce around a little bit from Warsaw. Then it's a train into Kyiv and that was like 17 hours. So it was an overnight train. Pretty comfortable, all things considered. The second entrance was through Moldova, which never thought I'd ever be in Moldova.

[A]

Yeah.

[D]

And it's like a two lane road. You fly into that airport. It's pretty small. We got on a bus as a group. This time they brought us through kind of a southern entrance into Ukraine down near Odessa. Customs is a mess. Getting in and getting out, it's just, it's a, it's an active war zone.

[B]

It's a war zone.

[D]

So it takes forever. Yeah. But then getting around the country is a bit different and a bit unique. I was fortunate my first time to effectively be with the military start to finish. So I was with an American volunteer that's fought there since 2022. So we were in a military vehicle and able to just go through checkpoints and go to. Straight to military headquarters. You wouldn't be able to do that if you just showed up. But the weird thing about Ukraine is any one of you guys can just show up right now in Kyiv. You can get there and start walking around. In terms of the OPSEC in the recording, there were a handful of times where they would say no pictures, no phones. Instances where we couldn't even bring phones into an area. Command posts, some drone factories, things like that. And then with no phone, there's clearly no recording with anything else. Most of it was pretty open. Like I was pretty surprised. I think that I have been. I think I've had better access to Ukrainian military technology and operational security in the last few months than I could get from the US Military. Like, I think I would get stopped going on to Fort Campbell, and they would say, you can't go to this command post even during a training exercise. Or you can't look at these screens in Ukraine. They're so proud of what they're doing. They want to show it off, that it's kind of the other way around, where they're like, yeah, record whatever. And then after the fact, somebody will say, you can't show that screen. You got to blur that part out.

[A]

We got.

[D]

Mostly I wait until I'm home to publish, but yeah, yeah.

[A]

Do you ever have.

[B]

I mean, so you. You're cognizant of not wanting to have, like, giveaway positions and things by just record edit. Because we've gotten pretty good at it. We can turn around a video pretty quick. So usually you're back stateside and posting those videos afterwards. Correct.

[D]

A mixed bag at the very least. Not in that location anymore.

[B]

Yeah, for sure.

[D]

Definitely not day of. And depending on the unit or depending who you're with, sometimes they'll ask to see it before it goes public. And you know, it's mixed. We had some where you send it over to them and they say, it's fine, do whatever. Like, we've taken pictures in drone labs where they're fixing up these drones to go to the front, and they say, yes, fine, go for it. Like, zero issue at all. Then there was another one where we talked with some of the guys from the Middle Strike campaign, and it was over the top where they let us record anything, but then they wanted everything blurred to the point where it wasn't really worth releasing. And we respect that. You know, run it through. But in retrospect, I wish they would have given us that information up front. We would have gone about it in a little different manner. But teamwork, I'd say start to finish.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

So when you say middle strike, you're talking about, like, obviously not frontline, but obviously not deep strike hitting Moscow. You're talking about kind of their logistics in the back, the command post. That's when you're. When you say middle strike, that's what you mean.

[D]

Yeah, man, it's getting wild. It's. They. They showed us a drone, that it's a bomber. So fixed wing drone dropped something about the size of an 82 millimeter mortar. And it's relatively autonomous. As in they set the coordinates with the Bombs, they send this thing off it because there's not a direct connection of controlling it. It's very hard for Russia to intercept it. It's very hard for EW to jam it. It has an electronic.5 meters. Yeah, there we go. Thank you.

[A]

Thank you.

[D]

Turn rate on these things so they can fly out past 50 kilometers. And I think they said they're launching multiple missions a night. They've lost one in like the last four months. It's incredible.

[A]

So to be clear, that's like there's no transmission that can be interrupted because they're pre programmed. So they're not exactly detectable in that same way. Interesting.

[D]

Yeah. There are still ways to shoot it down. I mean you can shoot it, shoot it down, of course, but compared with other drones that are being controlled start to finish, there's just fewer ways for Russia to do that. So that's the kind of stuff that's starting to emerge.

[B]

So stepping back from the, the kind of, the drones and we definitely dive into that because I've like, as I've said previously in my videos, they're a drone superpower in my opinion. But I kind of want to get a big picture before we go down the rabbit holes here and, and Matt. Mr. Global jump in. Because I know energy is a big part of that and their infrastructure. But as you said, you just got back from Ukraine. I mean, we're hearing from some of the experts, but it's like the punditry, I mean, I'm one of those, the think tanks. You see map animations showing broadly what's going on in Ukraine. But you were actually physically there talking to those soldiers, the drone operators, the, the, the commanders all the way down to the company level and all the people that are living the war based on that. What is your sense of where this war in Ukraine is really headed as of right now? Like is there an optimism? Is, is it something that we can point to? This is the turning point. And now these drones are, are making Russia less effective in their movements or is this just kind of another flash in the pan tactic where yeah, Ukraine has found some, some distance to, to have tactical advantages, but really Russia will catch up and we'll be back to a stalemate kind of situation. What are your thoughts on that?

[D]

Overall, much more optimistic than my first visit. Maybe it was weather. This was springtime in Odessa, which is a beautiful city in the south. Last time was winter in eastern Ukraine on dirt roads. So I don't, you know, maybe that plays a part into it. But overly optimistic in the sense that Ukraine is now, I would argue for the first time in the war, at least in the last few years, if not in the entire war, they have Russia on their back foot. Russia is trying to adapt and trying to respond, and they're having a hard time doing that now. We should expect that Russia will find a way to stop the volume of these drones flying between 50 and 300km, but they haven't yet. And it's been a growing issue over the last couple weeks. And I'm excited to get Matt's take on this because we're, we're seeing the refineries get hit, but it's very hard to pin down. Like, what does that actually mean for the war effort? I would add that the wounded. The Black Sea Security Forum and in there they were maybe a little too optimistic, I would argue. There was a lot of talk about after the war, especially with technology and innovation, and how they can bring drones to the rest of Europe. And I get the desire to want to start talking about that. I think it's the right move at that level, but shows you how far it's come. Just

[A]

for our listener that was in

[D]

Odessa, it's something called the Black Sea Security Forum. It was a pretty cool event. They have these military conferences essentially around the world. And this is one that's hosted on the Black Sea in Odessa, so a southern port in Ukraine. I want to say this is the third year they've held it, but, you know, kind of a think tank type. Tech companies come in, military companies come in, units come in, politicians. The US Was represented by Senator Kelly, Senator Gallego and Senator Blumenthal were all there speaking. It's pretty wild, a pretty big, big discrepancy when you.

[A]

I don't mean to interrupt. I just want to make sure our listeners understand where, like who are the players having these conversations? And you're saying that they was pretty optimistic or overly optimistic even in the, in the framing of it, you think?

[D]

I think so. But it's also that that's a bit different than the soldiers that we interacted with. We're very much head down. We've got a job to do and we're going to keep doing that job. And as you go up the chain to the politicians that are trying to solicit more investment into their country and to try to paint a good picture. So I understand it, but very optimistic at the higher levels, I would say.

[B]

Matt, you. So you being the energy expert and Preston was alluding to this, is there. I think that's Russia's target, their effort right now is to destroy that, that energy infrastructure is, is between what you saw on the ground, Preston and Matt, you as the expertise, is there something that is this an adequate way forward for Russia? Do you think that their energy can be exploited in a way that is, they may end up. We, we're all talking about the optimism. That is the one thing I think Russia could be effective at is really hurting the Ukrainian people by striking that energy. And you, you know better than all of us, Matt, what that looks like. So do you have any thoughts on that or any, any, any discussion on what you think with the energy situation there?

[C]

So actually one of the things that I agreed with from the Trump administration, I think Preston would agree with me. Under the Obama administration, they really did not want Ukraine striking Russian energy infrastructure. They, I don't know whether it was through agreements, through, you know, the weapons we were giving them or whatever, but Ukraine was really kind of hands off with Russian energy infrastructure under the Obama administration.

[B]

You mean Biden? You mean Biden?

[C]

Yeah, the Biden. Did I say Obama? Yeah, yeah, the Biden.

[B]

Yeah.

[C]

People will use that against me now.

[A]

You're going to go to Congress, the most recent president.

[C]

But no, really, when Trump came in, he was like, you know, have at it, you know. And so since Trump got into office, they've really been hammering Russia's energy infrastructure. And what's amazing is to see, you know, Ukraine will wipe out some refinery and the moment Russia gets it back online, they just wipe it out again. Like so it's just this never ending thing. But what kind of got wrapped up in all of this? So first of all, China was buying the vast majority of Russian oil because it was under sanction. So it wasn't really getting to the market and having much of an effect on prices globally. But then you had the whole, you know, US, Israel, Iran thing kick off and that really muddied everything that was happening everywhere because most of this oil from all these places was going to China. As far as how it, it's not really had a huge impact on energy prices globally, but the lifting of sanctions against Russia by the United States has helped Russia tremendously being able to sell oil to countries that were facing shortages to like, you know, Europe and Southeast Asia. And so that's, that's given Russia a huge boost in, in money. Basically. They've, they've made a lot of money on this. It's going to be really interesting to see how this works with the Iran deal maybe or maybe not wrapping up and, and how. Because the fact of the matter is most, most all Iran's oil went to China, most all of Russia's oil went to China. So it was never absorbed by the paper market.

[A]

Right.

[C]

You know the price you see when you Google oil prices, is that going to continue if Iran's sanctions are lifted? Are Russia's sanctions, what's going to happen there? Because it seems like they're lifted and then put back in place and then lifted. All of that things, all of those things matter. And now Russia or China has been just greatly reduced their imports and that pushes a lot of oil back onto the global market, which has helped oil prices come down because they've got over a billion barrels of really cheap $30,40 oil in storage. And how all this is going to play out is really going to be fascinating because we could get to a point in the near future where oil still hits $150. We could also get to a point where it completely crashes to like $40. Because if we're still dumping all the oil from all the strategic reserves around the world and China continues to not buy any of the Russian or Iranian oil, we could end up in an oversupply scenario pretty quickly. So that's how these markets are here in the United States and in China. So. But it is, it's funny to see Ukraine blow something up and then as soon as Russia fixes it, they just blow it up again. And it just, I'm not a military expert, but it seems like Russia can't stop it. It really feels like they just can't stop it. And is there going to be a point where they just don't fix it? It's like that's where I'm at.

[B]

I mean, we see a lot of these. Oh, go ahead, go ahead.

[D]

Well, I was just going to ask it. Where's the line between Russian exports and Russian domestic consumption? How does that play in here?

[C]

Russia exports an enormous amount more than they consume. They're a, they're huge energy positive. They're, they're vastly energy independent. Kind of like Canada, they produce a lot more than they consume. So. And they rely on those exports for, I think it's about a third of their entire economy. That's a huge deal. And it's a huge deal for their war budget. You know, however, they allocate funds for that. So that, that's a huge deal for Russia. And I was, from the beginning, I was like, why isn't Ukraine hitting their energy like that's their lifeblood and, and now that they are, they've been doing it for a year and a half now or whatever, and I think they're, I think it, it's leading to a lot of their success.

[B]

Yeah. So I guess the question though is like, that's one vulnerability they have. And I think right now there's a kind of a big focus on Crimea because you're talking about the impact of energy on the domestic audience within Russia. Russia is largely insulated from their own energy woes, with the exception, it seems, of Crimea. When you were there, did. I'm not sure if you were there when this whole Crimea thing started. They, they closed that land bridge that runs through Mariupol, Melitopol all the way to, to Crimea. Was that something that the, the Ukrainians, they were very much focused on. Is, is it now becoming more of the Crimea as the center of gravity, or is that more of a kind of a, a symbolic victory? Because that's, that, that's kind of Putin's crown jewel. We're seeing these lines for fuel. They have to cross back into Russia and there are 500 vehicles. How, how do you see that with regard to what the Ukrainians are doing on the ground? Is this a very dedicated tactic? They just want to now start inflicting, bring, essentially bring the war to the Russians. So they feel the same thing the Ukrainians do.

[D]

I think there's definitely some symbolism here. We know how important Crimea is to Putin and to Russia. But there's, there's also this dilemma that, that Ukraine is forcing upon Russia by going after Crimea. And that's the relocation of their air defense assets. Whether it's their, you know, large manufactured Tor Panc or things like that, or their mobile air defense teams. Like the, the simplest way to describe it is there are too many targets inside of Russia, not enough air defense systems. Ukraine has been expanding the, the range and the quantity of their drones. So I think there's a refinery north of Moscow. Got hit overnight like that hadn't, I don't know that that had been targeted before. Now they have to defend that. So forcing the conversation around Crimea, opening up the roads, keeping the bridge safe, keeping the airfield safe, and keeping the citizens feeling safe and supplied there is going to eat up some of Russia's resources, and those have to come from somewhere else. I mean, they are manufacturing new things. They do have drone interceptors, they do have these mobile counter drone teams, but not enough for what they have to protect. And I think if this same situation was playing out maybe in Belgorod or Kur other territories of Russia, it wouldn't have the same impact. But it really isn't all that hard to, with drones, at least significantly, disrupt the flow of supplies and personnel into Crimea. I think it's. I think it's multifaceted, but it is playing out right now. I mean, you can see Russia struggling with the decision here.

[B]

You see potentially Crimea as a future building block to our domino, that if they can eject the Russians, potentially even just enough Russians from Crimea, that the fronts elsewhere, because we, you and I, we keep an eye on this. We've seen gains in Zaporizhzhia by the Ukrainians. Up in Donetsk, we've seen some gains. We've also seen Russia take some territory. I mean, I believe they just recently took Costa and Tanivka, and at least temporarily, they love to do that. And you talked about that, that show up with a flag, wave it and say, we got this, and then leave. But are you broadly, are you seeing these small territorial gains and the suffocation of Crimea as a potential for a broader collapse? Are we looking at tactical, just small tactical victories, or is this going to lead to a strategic failure eventually for Russia, do you think? Is that how the Ukrainians possibly see it?

[D]

This is why I think we're in a really unique phase in this war, because you can pretty clearly see how one leads to two, leads to three. And I don't think it's the loss of Crimea or the isolation of Crimea. I think that's just part of what is playing out here, which is the isolation of the southern occupied territories. So to get supplies to the front, there's only a few ways to do that. And it's essentially through Crimea in the south or through Rostov on Don in the east. And while Ukraine is isolating the peninsula, they're also hitting those supply roads in the south. There was a report from a Russian correspondent a few days ago that there was no fuel at gas stations between, I want to say, Donetsk city and Rostov on Don. Those are areas, especially as you go further east. That's traditional Russia. That is Russian territory, not something they took from Ukraine anytime, even since 2014. So it's getting harder for Russia to bring supplies forward, and that is just a matter of time for the front to hold on. You just cannot have troops at the front for very long. If you can't get them water, if you can't get them food, if you can't get them fuel, and you can't get resupplies. Now, it doesn't require going to zero. But if that drops from 100% of what they want to. I mean, Chad, you probably have some insight here, but I don't know, 70%, 80%, and offensive operations are off the table. If that drops to 40 or 50%, you might have to withdraw those troops because they can't be sustained. So the big picture of this, if it continues and if Russia cannot control these supply roads, it will lead to a collapse in the front.

[A]

I have a question that's just jumping off of that, though, which is because you're talking a lot about the front and I'm curious. I should have said this earlier, but we're recording this on Tuesday, June 16th. So right now, the G7 summit is currently happening as we discuss this. And I believe that Ukraine has drone striked an oil refinery today, an oil facility today. According to Zelensky, in response to a couple attacks on Kiev. For the. For the Listener, on Monday, June 15, Russia bombed Kyiv and other civilian areas, destroyed a. I believe it damaged a church in Kyiv. I'm curious, in these kinds of strikes, are these things asymmetrical in terms of it seems like Ukraine's very tactically attacking refineries, military bases, sources of power. Is this asymmetrical in terms of attacks on civilian populations, or am I just reading the news asymmetrically myself?

[D]

We have started to see more of that, and I think you're going to continue to see more. We're back to the point where you're getting the pro Russian crowd screaming. Well, once they start fighting and when they start taking this seriously and actually start going after real targets in Kyiv, then things will change. Well, come on, we're four and a half years into this thing. Clearly been going after a lot of targets. They're not holding back on something. So as Russia runs into some challenges here, it's very hard to clear up the supply lines in the south. And that is having a direct impact on their military capabilities. The easiest thing for them to do is to inflict terror. They're capable of doing that. They're willing to do that. And we've seen that time and again. So whether that involves the direct targeting of civilian infrastructure or just kind of mass fires, you know, kind of comes in different waves. But I don't think that's. I think that's connected to the Ukrainian strikes right now.

[A]

And, and is Ukraine employing the same tactic or is it a little more tactical? As. As my perception was? Because I'm not proclaiming to be an expert. I'm basing a lot of this on

[D]

the reporting that I've seen, Ukraine, generally speaking, tries a lot harder to only go after military targets than Russia. And I don't think it's close. There's some good footage today actually of people standing on their balcony of their apartment complex and recording Ukrainian drones fly overhead and then strike a refinery across the street.

[A]

Wow.

[D]

So like they're very clearly going after. That's a military target, that is a civilian target. Hit the military target now from Ukraine's end. They also have had, historically had fewer munitions, so they've had to be very careful. It doesn't do any good to blow up a Russian apartment complex with the one munition you have. You'd rather hit the command post.

[A]

But it's not entirely because it's tactical as well.

[D]

There's a part of that. Yeah. I mean, I intertwine those there. But no doubt Ukraine has made mistakes. There has been collateral damage, but. But by and large the, the targeting of civilians is a one sided issue in this war.

[A]

Interesting.

[C]

And I would add that one thing I've noticed Ukraine has done, and I don't know if there's, if it's because maybe air defenses are weaker with Russia or. You know, I don't know how this came about, but Ukraine has gotten significantly better at strategically attacking the right parts of the refineries when they hit them. Like in the early days they would hit a refinery and it would just be some random tank or just, you know, and it, it would be a good strike, but it wouldn't be effective in shutting it down for a couple of months. And now every time they hit a refinery, they're hitting a very critical piece of equipment that is basically like the heart of the refinery. And I've noticed that progress. And I don't know if that's from Russia being weaker or they're getting smarter. Maybe it's a combination. But as far as the energy side, very strategic and very tactical in that sense.

[D]

I mean, these refineries are huge.

[A]

Right?

[D]

Like massive facilities. So if, if you just hit the side of it, that doesn't necessarily mean anything.

[C]

Yeah, it doesn't.

[A]

Now this is the Death Star. You got to know where that one vulnerable part is. Hopefully it's on the.

[B]

I mean, basically, yeah, it's huge.

[A]

They probably don't put it on the outside like in the movie. But you know, Chad, I'm curious about that because obviously drone technology is, I mean, it's even increased within the period of time of this conflict. And I'm curious, like, I know, you wanted to talk about Ukraine as an emerging drone superpower. To what extent are we seeing the, their tactics, the technology, the strategies evolve throughout the course of this conflict. And then either Preston or Chad, if you want to speak to this, but how are we seeing that advance as a result of this conflict, throughout the conflict? And how does that position, you know, obviously Russia is this overwhelming force and we're describing Ukraine as a little bit necessarily more tactical and targeted power. How has the emergence of drones in the past five years plus, you know, how has that tipped the power in the struggle? I'm curious to hear you talk about that.

[B]

I'll defer to Preston because he was there, he got to touch him, he got to work with them. So he would.

[A]

What do they feel like?

[B]

Far better because they're, I mean, I would just say that I, I've never seen such amazing resilience and innovation combined in a modern war. The last time we probably saw such innovation and resilience from a battlefield perspective is probably World War I, when they had to figure out a way out of the trench warfare problem. And it was kind of similar. They had to figure out a way of, out of the trench warfare problem in Ukraine. But it's just absolutely credible. So, yeah, if you could just kind of speak on what you saw, not only just the one way attack drones, maybe the reconnaissance ground drones, maritime. And can we, can we or should we really be learning from them at this point? We love to tout ourselves as America, the most powerful military and largely we are in the history of the world. But they have some things I think they can definitely teach us and learn from. So can you, can you kind of speak to that a bit on what they were doing there?

[D]

Man, this is, this is a deep one. So we could go for hours on this one, just to be clear. But at a high level, the best way to frame this is at the beginning of the war. Russia and Ukraine started fighting. Russia wanted to achieve air superiority, so shut down the skies. They run control over Ukraine like we did in Iraq and Afghanistan and to a degree did in Iran. They did not achieve that. What that led to was rather positional ground warfare, a lot of artillery strikes. And if you recall at the beginning of the war, a lot of the conversation was can the United States or can anybody produce as many artillery rounds as Russia? That was the calculation. And it was crazy stats of like 20,000 Russian shells fired a day. Just devastating stuff to live through. Ukraine can't fight that fight. They don't want to. We don't want to. To be clear, nobody wants to get into an artillery war with Russia. So Ukraine started innovating. Now both sides did this, but Ukraine found a way out of the trenches through the use of drones and they really pushed the innovation down to where it's not a headquarters or a company saying this is the munition and this is the type you're going to use. It was soldiers coming up with a new 3D printed design and what type of battery works better in these conditions and how far does it fly in the winter versus the summer. And these individuals became experts that then worked its way up into companies that started to mass produce these things. So they've been able to leverage kind of a wide range of expertise, whereas we generally in the United States it's a bit more top down. Right. Lockheed says this is your new system. Good luck figuring it out. So a very ground up approach and that's something 100% we should learn from. Now both sides are doing this throughout the war. This is not a Ukraine, unique to Ukraine by any stretch. And we've seen waves, the fiber optic drones that are on a cable. So one of the challenges nat in this conflict is there's electronic warfare jammers. You can turn it on. Nothing works. Or at least certain frequencies don't work.

[A]

Got it. That's as in like transmission doesn't work. Like you can't communicate to something. It's not like an emp. It's preventing like everything. It's oh, okay, okay.

[D]

You can be in and all. Yeah.

[A]

Oh, interesting.

[D]

It can take control of enemy drones depending how secure it is. It can just remove nav. It can jam navigation. So the drone doesn't know where it is. It can just force it to crash. There's effectively like it's a, it's a force field of sorts of one of the ways around that was Russia started by putting little cables on the drone, which means you couldn't jam this thing anymore because it's hardwired to the operator and they were flying these things 10 plus miles to carry out a strike.

[A]

You're talking like game changing a cable going back to the source.

[D]

Yes. It spools out of the drone. The drone carries the spool and it.

[A]

Like a tape measure.

[D]

We're describing like a fishing.

[B]

Fishing.

[D]

Okay.

[A]

Fishing line. Well, like a spool though.

[B]

Yeah, yeah. How it spools off.

[A]

Interesting. Interesting. A really. If you want a very 1990s solution, just, just give the phone a longer cord, take it into the other room,

[B]

you know, watch, watch. Preston's content. It's incredible.

[A]

I did not know about that. That's interesting. That's like.

[C]

That was on Preston's channel.

[B]

I mean, they did. They've done some really cool things, like. And I don't know if you saw any of this stuff kind of. Obviously their aerial drones are impressive, but I'm starting to get more impressed with what they're doing on the ground. Like, we're seeing a lot of firsts out of this war. We saw the first drone shooting down another drone. We've seen suicide drones hitting other drones. But one thing that blew me away, and I'm not sure if any of you guys heard this, was Russians in a town surrendered to a Ukrainian drone, a ground drone that had machine gun on it. And the Russians came out waving the white flag to a drone on the ground with tracks and everything and say, showing them on the camera. And it was the first time in history Russia had basically surrendered to a ground drone. And it's just incredible what we're seeing. I. I see a lot of the. The unmanned surface vessels, the boat, the drone boats. Obviously Iran learned from that. So I just. It's very, very fascinating. And I'm geeking out of this because it's just. I think it's just really, really, really fascinating. It's the one thing that Ukraine has had a very good PR campaign. And so I guess the question I have is, from your perspective when you were there, are they. Are these drones really as good as we're being shown? Because me and you love to show all the cool footage. I showed the flamethrower drone got like 10 million views on that video and all these cool stuff. Is it. Is it really? Are they. Are they really as good as. As they're showing, or is it a very good propaganda PR campaign coming out of them?

[D]

So actually, what we see is not the top of the line. So we see, yeah, we see very limited releases of what is capable at the front.

[A]

Makes sense.

[D]

And by the time it makes it two footage, because anybody can learn from that and see, like, this is what the targeting mechanism is or this is the range. So generally speaking, there are better systems in use before that stuff comes out. Now, it's not like night and day, but increased range, increased clarity, bigger payload, things like that. It's. Yeah, every single day. This is one of the challenges that we have for the United States is we're not in a war. So the innovation cycle is going to be nowhere near as fast. They are weeks, like in a matter of weeks. And Nat this goes back to the electronic warfare issue. So it's not static. You find out that they're using certain frequencies, so you start jamming those frequencies.

[A]

So people keep adapting.

[D]

The soldiers on the front constantly changing, constantly adapting. And genuinely, something that worked yesterday might never work again. So it's that type of innovation that's happening every single day.

[A]

Sorry, just jump in one thing, because you guys are both military geeks in a very interesting way. And I just want to. I just want to provide a small civilian perspective, which is the idea of a drone landing in a civilian population and people surrendering, or in a civilian area, people surrendering to RoboCop is terrifying. So I'm just curious, like, what's your perspective? And I understand you guys are. You're, you know, have a lot of military experience. And so I'm just saying this as an average civilian, like, all of this innovation is interesting. And I always also fear the imperial boomerang and that these things will end up in American cities that will be patrolled by autonomous robot police or military. Military presence. Obviously, this technology is advancing rapidly no matter what. And we're talking a little bit about the Russian and American overwhelming force strategies versus this very targeted drone warfare strategy. Is there a degree to which. I'm very much of the. As someone who didn't serve in the military, I'm very much of the opinion that there are no good wars, that war is absolutely a last resort. And I also understand that military conflict. Conflict is sometimes inevitable. Is there any way. And maybe I'm being too optimistic, but is this leading to a style of war that would mean fewer civilian casualties? Like, is. Is there any. I don't. You know, obviously there's no. There's no good conflict, but obviously some of these conflicts need to happen. And Ukraine has remarkably defended itself against this massive, overwhelming occupying force, which, you know, in theory, I very much support, and I don't want it. I don't want civilians on either side to die. There's still people. But is this innovation leading us to a style of warfare that might not require so much civilian casualties? Or, you know, I mean, like you said, Russia's still inflicting terror no matter what, but how has this changed the. The timbre and style of warfare? Or. And. And how do you predict it will continue to do so?

[B]

It's all you, Preston.

[D]

Oh, gee, Chad's way here.

[C]

I'll.

[A]

No one's gonna hold you to these predictions, but in your. In your opinion, how is this progress? Because like you said, it's like an arms race. Not an arms race race. I mean, it is literally, but also like it is a constant race of innovation. So, like, what direction is that?

[B]

I'll say it's a wonderful theory. It's a theory that we've iterated in a way that, yes, we aren't carpet bombing, we aren't firebombing Dresden anymore. We aren't doing those things, but. Except for collateral damage. Yeah, except for in a lot of places, unfortunately. Whether you're looking at Gaza, whether you're looking at Iran, whether the Iran, what we're doing in Iran justified on striking the potentially for civilian infrastructure, there's going to be civilian casualties. The idea is try to mitigate that with drones, but understand that the deadliness of warfare is only going to get more easy. So if we have, it's, it's like when you're on the front line and, or even like when I was on a convoy running through Iraq and we had kids with like, that would run, they would be pushed out in front by their parents for, unfortunately for propaganda purposes, they'd be pushed into our front of our vehicles. It really just boils down to, yes, technology is nice, but at the very basic level, you're still killing people, unfortunately. And that is not, not something. And Preston can probably echo this. The, the people that probably want war the least would be soldiers. I mean, I can guarantee you that like, a lot of us don't sign up just because we're going to be like, I want to go shoot that guy in the face over there in that other country. No, it's the, I mean, they're the famous quote, I'm going to ruin it is something along the lines of those who have seen, or those who've never seen war, those again, are the ones that experience it. And so I just, yes, drones are going to help in that regard, but it's also going to depersonalize killing even more.

[A]

Yeah, I mean, that's kind of, and I don't mean to, to like deflate the excitement about the technology, but I, I.

[B]

No, no, no.

[A]

Frames your, you know, opinion.

[B]

Absolutely. I mean, what are your thoughts? What are your thoughts, Preston? Because I do think that it's good we're limiting collateral damage, but also it makes war easier to wage. I mean, part like one big pro thing, I think of why Trump is now going in and hitting things with ease is because he's like the easy button. Drones, strikes, missiles. We're not sending our people in. If we were sending our people, we'd be thinking twice. About it, but just because we're not dying, someone is. So I don't know. What are your thoughts in that regard?

[D]

It's mixed, man. I. There's a level of precision involved here that is good. Like it's a good trend of. I mean, we've seen videos where a drone is flown into a guy and the people next to them get up and move away. Like that's very difficult to do 30 miles away. So. And you can see it on camera until the last second and make a decision. Right? So like a Hellfire missile, once that thing's going, you're not, you're not really pulling that back. But with a drone, you can come in and say, wait a minute, that's a school bus, not a fuel tanker, and veer up and maybe go like. There's a lot of good possibilities there. However, the stuff is also very inexpensive right now. And I'm kind of concerned of the non state actors flying these things into a stadium or a building here. Like, it's like very, very simple to build. I mean, you just buy a drone, strap a cheap homemade explosive to it and that would be, that'd be pretty terrifying the first time. First time when it does happen, there's no doubt that's going to happen, right?

[B]

Yeah. So kind of, I do want to kind of pivot because you have some really amazing insight because you got to actually talk to these people. And I, I trained Ukrainians in Germany at Hohenfels, at the Joint Multinational Readiness Center. So I have experience, unfortunately, I, I've been made aware a few of them have lost their lives in this war. It's the nature of the beast. But you've been able to go there recently and talk to these soldiers. What, what are you seeing from a personal level, these soldiers, what's their morale? What do they, they look like? Not, not so much the public relations version kind of their, their real morale. Are they exhausted and just wanting this war to end no matter what? Or are they feeling pretty good about things, more optimistic, thinking they can hold on and eventually drive Russia out permanently?

[D]

It's interesting because my experience with war has been on deployments to Afghanistan where everybody's got the, the countdown. They generally know when they're coming home or they know when they're going over. And it's such a different mindset in Ukraine. We, I made the mistake early on a couple years ago asking soldiers in interviews what they planned to do when the war was over. And to a man, they said, not thinking about it, I've got A job to do. And in this most recent trip, I was with some guys that also asked that question. It was the exact same answer. It's like they've got that dialed in. So they're very focused on what they have to do. They're serious about it. They understand the risk. They don't want to do it. You can tell. They just rather be doing anything else. And they're very happy to talk about what they did before the war. It's not celebrated, it's not cheered on. But to me, at least, it came across as very professional every time, every interaction. And I want to stress, this wasn't like, go sit down with the brigade commander or something. Like, we would just randomly bump into units and, like, go to a drone facility and talk to a private that's building the drone. So we got a pretty wide range and very professional, very. Just committed to seeing this through, recognizing that it might. It might not be over in the near future.

[B]

So I just kind of want to look at. When you hear those stories, when you're actually face to face with what I'm saying personally, and this is my bias, are really just defenders of definitely European democracy, if not Western democracy, from a massive aggressor. I get frustrated with the United States, and you've probably seen my videos where I'm very frustrated. I was frustrated under the Biden administration, frustrated on the Trump administration. It doesn't matter, matter. I got very frustrated. So what. What do we need Americans to know right now? What do they need to hear? Why should Americans care about this war? I mean, if you had, like, five minutes to go on TV and speak directly to the American public, you've been there, you've seen the battlefield, you've seen their faces, you've talked to them. What would you say to the American people who are very much not a part of it? I mean, there's the famous saying is when we.

[D]

When.

[B]

When we went to Iraq and Afghanistan, America's not at war. Their military is at war. America's at the mall. That's so kind of that. That idea of their. The. The criticality of what they're doing versus our disconnect of it.

[A]

And I do think that's tough just to jump in. Also, that is exacerbated by the drone culture that you're describing. So I'm curious, Preston, if you think that that disconnect is even greater now? Sorry to. I just want to add to Chad's question.

[D]

Well, I think this. This goes back to the initial beginning of the war. I Think there's bad messaging in the United States under the Biden administration about what to expect and why we were doing this. And that just became harder and harder over time. So I think there is a disconnect with the American people. I don't know if that gap can be bridged at this point. It's. And we get distracted. Now we've got the Iran war. That's. That clearly has more of a direct impact on us, if for no other reason than we have our sons and daughters in harm's way. I think the message that I would try to get across is Ukraine is not asking for our soldiers. They're not asking for us to fight their war. They're not even asking for us to fight alongside them. But allowing them, providing for them the opportunity to defend themselves reduces the likelihood that we would end up in that situation. So they have a fight on their doorstep. What can we do to make them successful? Because their success pushes down the road even further the possibility that we get directly involved in a conflict. And. And to that, Chad, I would say that the. On the ground, it's just not a consideration. Like, as you don't think about it, it's like a. They're just moving on. Right. One of these drone. One of the aspects of drone warfare is Ukraine is so focused on this because they're not getting enough supplies from the West. So they said, we'll have to figure this out ourselves. And that's kind of what led to a lot of these innovations. I wish that they could be flying these drones alongside us. Tomahawks and more F16s and more Abrams and more Bradley's. They're not. So they're finding their own way to do it. Yeah. I just strangely have noticed. Maybe not strangely, but I've noticed anytime there's a major Ukrainian success, there tends to be more support in the United States. So I think one of the ways to get more Americans on board is showing how well they're doing. The other side of that, of, look how bad Russia is. Look at these awful bombings. Look at these casualties. It seems like folks just tune that out.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

So, Matt, do you. I mean, I have a couple more questions. I know we're starting to run long on time here with Preston. His time's super valuable. Did you have any other questions for him, Matt? Energy wise or whatever curiosities.

[C]

It's not really energy wise. It's. I don't think the vast majority of Americans understand the potential implications if Russia wins that war. Like on the rest of the world. Would you like to give your opinion on that as far as further Russian aggression, or do you think they would stop there? I haven't heard anybody yet that thinks they would stop there. What do you think about that?

[D]

It's a tough one because it's very hard to look at the Russian army right now stuck in Donetsk and say if they win, they're going to roll into Poland next, because it's a little bit of what army. Like, if they're not getting through Ukraine, do we really think they're going to be able to take on NATO? So I kind of try to thread the needle on that. I don't think that we are a year or two away from the Russian army, even a reconstituted Russian army rolling into NATO territory with their militaries. What it would do is it would free up the Russian military to start to reconstitute, start to rebuild, start to innovate in this drone space. And I think that they would see the biggest piece here is that the west is not standing by some of these commitments. So before of tanks rolling into, into Poland, I think we'd probably see something very similar to 2014, the little green men moving into some of the Baltics where, look, if the US And NATO is going to stand by in eastern Ukraine and not even provide funding and equipment, why wouldn't Putin roll the dice on some of these Baltic states that they will also view as historically Russian? That I think is the next thing. Now, if they never get through Ukraine, I don't think they have the opportunity to consider that. And certainly if they lose in Ukraine, it's off the table. So to me, that's the thing is if we allow this to continue, if Putin is able to achieve some degree of success, I think it would embolden him to push further. And I'm biased. I think NATO has been a good thing. I think the post World War II order has been good for the United States, selfishly. And if we start to see NATO questioned like that, I think it, it would run the risk of kind of changing the entire world as we know it.

[B]

Just two final questions for you. The first one, before we get into some of what Ukraine could be needing, from your perspective, is there anything that really stuck with you there? Like the specific conversation doesn't have to even be with the soldier. Maybe you met with just someone in the city somewhere. Was there something that was like, yeah, this is, this is why this is good. This is, is that we need to support them. Why there's, this is the moral Fight to support Ukraine, or maybe, maybe somewhere in the other direction, something that stuck with you as tragic or something. Is there. Do you have a moment that you can talk about that drove home what's going on with this war specifically while you're there?

[D]

Absolutely. So we got the opportunity to go down to Harson, a city in kind of the southeastern portion of Ukraine now, right along the Dnipro River. And it's a unique place because the forces are separated by that river. Across the river are Russians. On this side of the river are Ukrainians, to include civilians who, as an act of defiance against Putin, have said, we're not leaving our home. And this territory was occupied by Russia for a period at the beginning of the war. We went there. It's an area known as the drone safari, the human safari, where Russians are actively using every single day, using drones to kill Ukrainian civilians that remain there. We went to a school to drop off some supplies, and it was a beautiful day outside. So we walked out and the kids were nowhere to be seen. We went outside and we're checking out the playground, and the drone detector went off, meaning there is a Russian drone somewhere nearby. And they said, well, clear skies, it means more Russian drones. So the kids are in the basement all day. So school kids, you know, here in the US for my daughter, she's, she's going into third grade. When it's a rainy day or an overcast day, they might have inside recess because they don't want to get dirty and wet in that portion of Ukraine, that is the only time they can play outside. Because sunny skies mean more Russian drones and Russian drones target civilians. You're kids, man.

[B]

So based on that, what do you, what do you think? We all hear the headlines. I, I hear the, broadly, Patriot missiles, things like that. What specifically do the Ukrainians you talk to say they need the most? And it can be either pieces of equipment or some of the cool charity stuff that you do with the vehicles, or even just broadly Americans to understand, hey, we are a shield right now against a really terrible autocratic government. What do you think the Ukrainians have as their most urgent need? Whether soldiers or diplomatically or whatever, Interceptors,

[D]

first and foremost, that's the, the measure of, versus the method of Russian terror. Right now, they're doing a pretty good job of shooting down Russian drones, but the missiles are another story. They could use more interceptors, whether that comes from the United States or anyone else abroad. Ukraine is working on developing their own, but that's a, that's a shortcoming, right now it's been a while since I've heard anyone in Ukraine ask for offensive type munitions. I don't know the last time we heard about more Bradley's because they're not really that used or high Mars or ATACMs, because they found other systems to fill that gap. Something that I didn't really hear from anyone in Ukraine, but kind of is in my mind is some assistance in the drone production. If we're able to move some of these facilities into NATO territory, ramp up production, move it out of the. I mean, some of these facilities get hit by Russian missiles and they have to rebuild them and move them to a new location. That's an incredible choke point in their manufacturing line. So even opening up some NATO territory to mass produce these, the Ukrainian drones, hire Ukrainians, bring them there to build these things and ship them back into the country by the tens of thousands. I think that could be a big difference as well.

[B]

So before I let Nat kind of close out with you on stuff, just you do all this charitable work. It's incredible stuff. I admire everything you do. Where can Americans who listen to us are, whatever number it is, 20,000 subscribers to this podcast, whoever, I think it's probably more. Where can they. Yeah, it's all Mr. Global, he's the one driving it. But where can they. Well, now we got Preston, so. But where can they Just tell us, where can they help? Where can Americans who are listening to this listen to the story, the terrible stories about the schools, whatever. Where can they come in and say, hey, I want to donate money or time or whatever you think is the best. What can they do?

[D]

So there's, there's three organizations that I've worked with that I find to be very transparent and very good at what they do. Car for Ukraine. And I'm happy to give you guys the links to each of these. We're doing a year long campaign to provide trucks because things get hit by drones and they can't get soldiers to and from the front. So these trucks are used to get people to and from dangerous locations, to evacuate the wounded, to bring supplies forward, food, water, medicine. So it's a non lethal type of aid. There's Ukraine aid operations, which is a 501C3, so tax deductions for charitable donations there. They do everything. A lot of drones through that organization. Very, very transparent on exactly where the money is going and how it's being spent and very effective. And then Zygus Paw, which is actually a Ukrainian organization based and built in Ukraine, based in Lviv and the, one of the founders is a drone pilot now in the Ukrainian armed forces. And they just do incredible work. So, again, very transparent. They team up with specific units and will provide drones or medical supplies or vehicles. Even during Christmas time, they do this thing where they have a wish list from the soldiers and you can log in and choose a gift for a soldier and it'll be, you know, from Chad, and it might be a $35 thing, it might be a $200, who knows, right? Whatever the soldier wants. And they go out and they deliver the Christmas presents from the donors with your card to these soldiers all across the front. That's Ziggus Paw. And they do a great job as well.

[A]

So I'm curious, again, coming from a bit of a civilian perspective, right. I, I've never donated to an international military. I. This is all very new in my cultural perspective. And one of the things that I think is complicating my perception of this, and I think this is true for a lot of Americans, is the fact that Ukraine essentially seemed to be potentially overwhelmed at first and has, has fought back in a way that was unexpected. I think people in general understand Russia to be an autocratic superpower and that their consolidating power is overall, globally bad for the cause of freedom globally. Although I think the average American may not think about Russian aggression all that commonly. Now, the complicated thing for the average American following, who is not necessarily a Trump zealot, who is following the news, is that it does appear as if our commander in chief has a massive hard on for autocrats and will let them do anything and is sort of nominally supporting Ukraine while still admiring Vladimir Putin. And I shouldn't make that sexual. I just mean that he actually, really, really admires. I know it's, it's too cheap to call him gay. It's not about that. It's about he, he admires sociopathic autocrats. And I'm curious, you know, we're at the G7 summit right now, and Trump's, Trump's position on Ukraine and Russia seems confusing to me. And so I'm curious, like, what is it like as a member of the military, former member of the military, as a military expert, and what advice would you give to average Americans for, like, how does that complicate this conflict? And like, and because I think that makes it a lot harder for a lot of people to understand that they're not really even sure where our country stands on this.

[D]

I think that's a good point. It's, it's frustrating I wish we were pursuing a different policy right now with Russia and Ukraine. I think that would be better for the United States. And some of the guys on this trip actually were from pretty right leaning news organizations and their whole point is to show how supporting Ukraine is actually a net benefit to us for our national security and for our economic interest abroad. So I wish we were pursuing different policy. We're not. That said, so undermining Trump literally said

[A]

today that he has nothing to do with a war that's thousands of miles. So I mean, he's always saying stupid shit, but I think it has a lot to do with another war that's thousands of miles away, if I remember correctly. But, you know, essentially seems to be trying to distance himself from Ukraine at the summit right now. Is that I guess I don't understand enough quite about military operations. Like how much of that is top down from his philosophy and how much of the it does that restrict the ability to provide aid to Ukraine both from our military and from, you know, other aid operations that still require visas and other forms of, you know, transportation that go through the federal government?

[D]

Officially, yes, it's harder across the board. He limits. I mean, we've got the Ukraine aid package that I believe passed the House a week or two ago, and everybody just assumes that it's going to get vetoed by the president, which is absurd. So a lot of that is.

[A]

And that's your loyalty to Putin or what's the, what's his state? I mean, I know he doesn't have to state logic, but what's the, what is your calculation as to why the veto is so such a foregone conclusion?

[D]

My understanding is he views that, that Trump views that that takes negotiating power away from him. As in this needs to be done, he needs to have the full say in what can and can't happen and that takes it out of his hands. I'm in the camp that I think that would add pressure and help his cause. Probably not going to happen. But there are private entities that are making this work. So some of the drones that are critical right now to Ukraine are being provided by Eric Schmidt. I think the founder or former CEO of Google stood up a drone company. They're hammering Russian logistics in Crimea right now. That's a private entity working with the Ukrainian military. So while we are not providing, I think very much, if at all, direct military support from our government, we haven't yet hit that switch of private citizens and private corporations cannot interact with Ukraine. So companies are to go back to Mr. Global's point a few minutes ago about certain areas within these refineries getting hit. Two weeks ago, report came out that there is a US Satellite provider giving or selling their real time intelligence to Ukraine. They're using that for their analysis to say, oh, we hit something a little too far to the right. Looks like the more sensitive target is there on the left and they're the next day launching a strike. So it has made it more complicated. Nat, I wish it wasn't this complicated, but there are still plenty of ways with companies and with individuals to assist this effort.

[A]

Okay, so then let me ask you one more question, which is when American companies learn to profit on something, they refuse to let it go ever until forced to. So is there a risk of letting the private sector increase their grips on the war machine, profit from it more and be unwilling to relinquish those profits because these are publicly traded companies?

[D]

I don't think I understand. Yes, I guess I'm questioning does this

[A]

create, does this create a vulnerability either militarily or just culturally to like, does this move us towards a culture of profiting off of war? If our like. Is Trump's unwillingness to help allowing for a new industry that of profiting off war to, to emerge?

[D]

I think it's already there. And I, I think what we're seeing are some of these private companies move into Ukraine and move into this space because they see an opening. And like I, I wish it was for any number of different reasons of, of the morally right thing to do or, or, you know, it helps the United States. But it's, it's kind of how this space works is they see profits, they see the ability to, to make some money, so they're going for it. In the short term, I think that's going to be a net benefit. But long term, it's probably pretty similar to what we're looking at right now with the general military industrial complex.

[A]

So those companies are out of there. This is just the emerging market for it, unfortunately, or fortunately.

[B]

Yeah, they've been doing this for. This is a product of going all the way back to Vietnam, the Iraq war. We got three different types of MRAP because contracts were made. I think that the military industrial complex is going to be opportunistic to any war. And whether we like it or not, we've seen our military industry, even outside of wars that we are directly involved with as a government. They will obviously, with the permission of the government, sell their munitions and it's all a money making endeavor for them. So I Think of course when it comes to things like Ukraine kind of as Preston was saying, I think it, it does have a benefit in the near term. The concern as you brought up Nat is if these really high tech drones they are starting to be used against American citizens in certain ways and surveillance and things again though that's where we've got a political system that we unfortunately got to lean on that hopefully in the future becomes a little bit more effective.

[A]

But yeah, I think that's not also tumbling towards autocracy.

[B]

But yeah. So I just do, I do think that it is. It's one of those where I do believe that I'm glad that these companies can help. Whereas I where I don't like a lot of Elon Musk's stances. I do, I am happy that he is Starlink is providing.

[A]

Oh just because he's the world's most famous white supremacist.

[B]

Well and there's that.

[A]

So there's that I don't know.

[B]

But there's for sure the, when you look at the. The benefit I wish he would open it up to be allow strikes into Russian territory with using Starlink, but he's at least allowing them to communicate internal to Ukrainian territory. That is a prime example of yeah where you have a singular individual that can control an entire mode of communication which is a pillar of military operations. You shoot, move, communicate and his ability to do that.

[A]

But yeah so someone accountable to no one also it is, it is an

[B]

unfortunate almost like Tony Starkist like in that realm of they are the creators of the weapons we use. We can only try to govern our way into more control.

[C]

We'll see.

[A]

But I do Only Elon Musk would become an alcoholic and have a panic attack and see the error of his ways. Like Tony Stark.

[B]

Yeah, there you go. Put him in a cave.

[A]

But I think we got Preston Stewart, thank you so much on that note for joining us. This has been a truly enlightening discussion. I've learned a lot. And Chad also thank you for humanizing a lot of this for me. I think this was. I hope that you guys were able to talk on your level as well. This has been really interesting. I hope you can come back and join. Join us. As we've discussed, there's a lot up in the air especially because the G7 summit is happening as we record this right now. So I'm sure that we'll have the next month or two will reveal a lot of execution of what we're talking about right now. So I hope you can Come back and join us again sometime. Really appreciate you joining us here on the podcast. Listeners, check out Preston Stewart on YouTube. He is Preston Stew Underscore on X and Instagram and he is at PRESTON Stew on TikTok. Find them everywhere else. Preston Stewart, anything else you want our listeners to check out before we let you go?

[D]

No, that's great, Matt, Chad, thank you guys so much for the conversation and thank you so much for the work you're doing here. It's incredible stuff.

[A]

Hey, you too. We really appreciate your channel and all your work to make this, to elucidate this for people and make it easier to understand. Love your work. Thank you so much for being on the show and come back and chat with us again.

[D]

Absolutely.

[A]

Preston Stewart, ladies and gentlemen. And that's our conversation with military expert and content creator Preston Stewart. Again. Check out his multiple channels on every social media platform that you subscribe to. Chad. Matt, how'd you feel about the conversation? Chad, did you feel like you were able to get some clarity on things you were interested in?

[B]

I mean, for sure, yeah, I, like I said me and Preston or Preston and I have conversations about this throughout. Texting and things. We have an outside relationship separate from social media, but just a super good dude. All of the charity that he does, it's easy for me because we align very much on a lot of the things I'm very much in. If you watch my, my feeds and things, I'm, I'm for all intents and purposes quite anti Russian. And it comes from my, my history of dealing with them and training Ukrainians in Germany and stuff. And so we align very much on those things. And it's just super cool to get someone with the, the firepower, the knowledge, the, the ability to go and see the actual front line. So I'm just super glad that he was able to come on and I definitely want to bring him on because if you haven't seen his channel, he's a wealth of knowledge on everything Iran, the he made just he had discussions on Venezuela. So he's kind of like that all around foreign policy guy like I am as well, with a military background. So just super glad that he was able to get on and whatnot. And I know we don't have a Matt's got to get going first his congressional visit. So I'll let him do his thing.

[A]

Yeah. Matt, any closing thoughts?

[C]

Yeah, you know, one thing that's great about Preston, he does something very similar to what I do. He has a talent of explaining very complex things in A very simple way where any person can understand it. And that's something that I work really hard on. And you can just tell it comes naturally from him. And that's why, you know, I'm a scroller. I don't watch a lot of content because I'm busy making content, usually. But if I'm scrolling and I see Preston, I stop because I know I'm going to learn something. Right. But he is really good at that. He's really good at taking something nobody understands and making it and breaking it down and make it simple for him. And that's what I really appreciate about Preston, because when people do that, there's like, this vibe that they really care about what they're saying because they're working hard to ensure you understand it. And I really appreciate that about him.

[A]

Yeah. And it's essentially what we talked about in the beginning. Like, it's. It's demystifying the jargon. Jargon's useful for shorthand, but also it is a way of even, you know, I hear myself saying terms I don't totally understand because they were in the news. And that he does a really good job of, like you said, creating something that. Speaking in a way that creates an image in your head of, oh, I know what I'm talking about now. I know what I'm. What you're. What's being described. Chad, did you have something you want to add?

[B]

No, I just. I was just gonna say, did you have. What were your feelings on. On his visit next?

[C]

I know.

[A]

I feel like I know a lot more than I did an hour ago. You know, essentially, like I said, I've been reading up on the G7 summit, and you're following all this through Trump's twisted perspective. And I'm a very anti war person, but I'm also anti autocracy, and I don't think that Russia should just be able to annex territories. So I think I appreciate his willingness to not only talk to me about logistical questions, but the ethical ramifications of war. And I, you know, I am extremely concerned with the imperial boomerang, especially in an authoritarian administration that been would have happily use drones on its own citizens. It's happily sent federal troops to, you know, civilian areas already. So I think I appreciate, you know, I know some people with military service who are much more zealots for the military and really believe in everything that the US Military has ever done. And I really appreciate. I don't mean to undermine, but I appreciate his willingness to entertain me on, you know, ethical Questions and the real world ramifications of this kind of thing for civilians. And not only the US But Russia and Ukraine, of course. So I. I thought it was a really even conversation. And I mean, I want to know more. But, yeah, like I said, it helped. It certainly helped me get a firmer understanding of the situation even in just the hour. So happy to have him on for our listeners again. He is Preston Stewart at Preston Stew, or at Preston Stew underscore, depending on the platform, because that's how the Internet works. And on that, I'd like to take us to our final segment. We end every show with a segment in which we highlight, if not the best, the least worst story or part of our week. And it's called the least worst part of my week. Anyone want to go first?

[C]

I feel like I'm stealing this from someone, but the Knicks winning,

[A]

I'll have

[B]

you know, before you get into this, you guys said talking about the Knicks in four and they lost that night.

[A]

They lost that night. When I called it Donald Trump, it was his fault.

[C]

But they did win in five.

[A]

They sure did.

[C]

Look, I. I initially told the spurs people like, yeah, I'll root for the spurs, whatever. I gotta. I gotta be honest, they're so dirty, I couldn't root for them. I've never seen a dirtier team in my life. But watching this, watching the Knicks beat the spurs on their home court and then smoking great big fat cigars on the middle of their home court was one of the greatest things I've ever seen. And I thought it was awesome. It made me feel warm inside to see that. That cigar, like, and standing on that, like your mascot is literally a boot accessory. Like, you didn't even qualify for the whole boot. You got an accessory to a boot that's meant for kicking San Antonio horse animals. And. But no, all kidding aside, very happy for the colonialism.

[A]

But it's good when we do it, you know? Yeah. Symbolically.

[B]

I loved it.

[C]

It was a great series. It was. I. I loved it. It's fantastic.

[A]

I'm a Thunder fan, you know, I'm happy with that one. Thank you, Mr. Global, and I will. I do want you to know the restraint it took to not come to this recording wearing a triple quadruple XL bootleg Knicks championship T shirt. I try to be professional because we had a guest. Chad, what was the least worst part of your week?

[B]

Yeah, so, I mean, it happened. Actually, this. The least worst part would be. Happened just like in the last hour or so actually, on this show, European leaders at the G7 summit, something I did not expect, came to a consensus about once again implementing sanctions on Russia. And by consensus I mean Trump was on board as well. Surprisingly. I made a video yesterday on TikTok where I talked about how I think the G7 summit was going to be a big nothing burger of just kind of, of placating and talking about Iran. But I was pleasantly surprised to find out that it seems that whatever Putin has been doing to piss Trump off, who knows, whatever the reason is, I don't even care what the reason is. The fact that the G7 leaders have once again come together and decided, yeah, what Russia's doing needs to be addressed at least in the near term. Right now this may change in 12 hours based on the whims of leaders, obviously, but it looks like Russia is going to get hammered with some major sanctions here soon, which is good because as Mr. Global was alluding to, I think if, if oil, whether it goes up or down, it's going to go up probably in the near term because this is not going to be fixed. But eventually, if it does go down, it can be a double whammy for Russia where Russia is losing revenue because of cheaper oil versus and then adding sanctions on top of that. It could really crush their economy and drive away. That's the, the only way we're going to see an end to this war is if Russia's pain level internally outweighs Putin's zealotry, quite frankly. So that is going to help. We'll see if it sticks. But I am optimistic there, so I want to do.

[A]

I'm going to piggyback off Matt's a little bit here. I. Because he did steal it directly from me. No, I. My the least worst part of my week, obviously I slightly inaccurately read the future tea leaves of I should have predicted that Donald Trump's presence would be so toxic as to even interrupt the Knicks historic winning streak and really just ruin the vibes surrounding Madison Square Garden due to the amount of necessary security, which is why no other president has gone and made it about themselves in that way. However, the part of the Knicks winning, obviously the Knicks took the final first time in my entire life that that has happened since before I was born. Obviously I'm thrilled. But the thing that's really the least worst part of my week is the reaction in New York City to the finals. This. People keep saying this feels like a movie. It feels like the end of a movie. And I want to remind you in our media saturated culture that this is the kind of thing that movies try their hardest to replicate. Life doesn't feel like a movie. A movie would be lucky to feel like New York felt in the last week. I'm not a big scroller, but I was addicted to Instagram because I'm watching everyone watching in every bar in the city. Watch party. My local deli put up a piece of cardboard that's got to be 4ft wide and projected the game onto that. And now they have written the World cup schedule onto the piece of cardboard that I guess they're going to start projecting the World cup over. But, like, these watch parties sprung up everywhere and now they're having them for other things. And now all of a sudden, you know, this is a city that was devastated pretty hard by the pandemic. And not just, just. I mean, we lived with a lot. We were the epicenter. We lived with the. With, you know, a lot of presence of death and trauma in our lives for a long time. But it also dealt a really big blow to community in New York because a lot of community spaces closed. Things stopped staying open late. People with less traditional schedules weren't able to gather as much, and, you know, everything got more expensive, so it made it harder to gather. And this was really the biggest confluence of culture and of community I've seen in New York since the lockdown. And it was really amazing to see people come together and, you know, not just for these watch parties, but for celebrations, Dancing, people are wearing costumes, people are climbing up street lamps. I'm glad, for the most part, people are safe. And, you know, I'm always going to throw this element in of collectivism. The nypd, which is the world's fifth largest military force, I'm calling them that because they have military equipment, bases on five continents, and a budget larger than every military in the world, other than four of them. The NYPD couldn't stop New Yorkers from launching fireworks and climbing all over the city and taking over city buses. And it is a wonderful reminder. I've heard people say, oh, I wish people would show up like this for Palestine, for Gaza. I absolutely agree. But it is a really good reminder that the people of New York are stronger than any other part of New York. That people, when they gather together, it's not always in anger, it can be enjoy, but that we have this power and community. And I think it was really amazing to see all these people, a lot of who moved to New York in the pandemic or graduated or went to college in this time when they were really suppressed socially, learning the value of community. And it doesn't have to always be angry. It can be silly. It can be celebratory. And I just hope that people realize that in a year in which a million of us got together to elect Zoran Mamdani, in which thousands of community events sprung up organically, that we can, we can point this at the change that we want to make in the world. And I know it sounds silly to say that about the Knicks winning because we had no control over that, unless you believe in the collective unconscious, which I only do when it comes to sports, but I do think it was an amazing depiction of the power of collectivism and of the culture of this city reawakening. And that's the least worst part of my week. Week.

[B]

That's awesome.

[C]

Awesome.

[B]

I'm happy for the Knicks.

[A]

I hope to get some sleep this week. I'm so tired and this has been. Sorry.

[B]

Go ahead, enjoy. Enjoy your sleep. And on the other side of it, Matt, enjoy talking to Congress. Good luck with that.

[A]

Yeah. Can't wait to hear more about your visit next week. And this has been American Power for chad Scott and Mr. Global, Matt Randolph. I'm Nat Town. We'll be back next week to hear all about Matt's trip to D.C. and recap the G7 summit and all sorts of other things. This has been American Power. And remember, power corrupts, but American power corrupts. American League.