A Big Mission

Summary

---

Armstrong & Getty On Demand

Episode: "A Big Mission" | May 4, 2026
Host: Armstrong & Getty
Guest: Military Analyst Mike Lyons

---

Episode Overview

This episode centers on escalating tensions in the Middle East, particularly the U.S. response to Iran’s actions in the Strait of Hormuz, and the wider implications for U.S. military strategy and global economics. The hosts are joined by military analyst Mike Lyons, who provides expert commentary on naval operations, deterrence, the economics of warfare, and the limitations of air power. The discussion also explores how current events are being interpreted by U.S. adversaries.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Strait of Hormuz Crisis and U.S. Response

• The episode opens with breaking news on the blocked Strait of Hormuz, with President Trump announcing "Operation Freedom" to support commercial shipping for countries not involved in the war ([00:49]).

• There is confusion about the actual state of the strait — while the U.S. claims it’s open, Iran (IRGC) says it’s closed. A South Korean ship is reported fired upon, highlighting the danger and unresolved situation ([01:17]).

  Quote:

  "The strait is open. The announcement's been made."
  — D, [02:11]

2. The Feasibility of Naval Escorts and Deterrence

• Military analyst Mike Lyons draws parallels to past U.S. naval escort missions, emphasizing the high-risk environment and the difficulty in protecting commercial vessels against coastal missile batteries ([02:29]).

• Lyons and the hosts discuss the two main options for ensuring maritime safety: a major show of force or achieving deterrence through threats serious enough to dissuade Iranian attacks ([03:33]).

  Quote:

  "If they're going to take cruisers and destroyers and put them alongside those ships and actually escort them, that's a big mission and that's going to take a lot of military assets to do that."
  — Mike Lyons, [03:27]

3. Deterrence and Escalation Management

• Lyons references his writing in The Wall Street Journal about the need for clear escalation management and deterrence, suggesting the U.S. has not fully achieved credible deterrence yet ([04:01]).

• There’s concern Iranian coastal batteries pose a significant threat and highlight a gap in U.S. strategy regarding low-level, asymmetric actions.

  Quote:

  "...that one off asymmetrical threat still can do a lot of damage. And I think that's what we've got to be concerned about."
  — Mike Lyons, [04:14]

4. Global Economic Impact

• The discussion shifts to how the crisis affects the world economy. Lyons believes the U.S. has insulated itself to some degree, but global markets, especially China’s energy security, are much more vulnerable ([04:52]).

• The hosts reflect on the interconnectedness of the global oil market and U.S. influence.

  Quote:

  “I think the rest of the world is going to be much more uncomfortable. I think the Chinese are considerably worried about their energy security with this conflict...”
  — Mike Lyons, [05:05]

5. Likelihood of Renewed Kinetic (Combat) Action

• The hosts ask Lyons whether the U.S. might return to active combat operations. Lyons suggests further “kinetic action,” like missile strikes, is likely despite attempts to avoid escalation ([05:55]).

• Political maneuvering, such as giving Congress a 60-day notice per the War Powers Act, is highlighted.

  Quote:

  “I do believe that it's not the last time you're going to see us firing missiles. I do believe you're going to see a lot more kinetic action in the future. Sure.”
  — Mike Lyons, [06:20]

6. Concerns About Ordnance Expenditure and Industrial Capacity

• The conversation touches on the massive use (and cost) of munitions in recent conflicts and the implications for the U.S. military stockpile ([06:31]).

• Lyons rates his concern a “five and a half” out of ten and discusses the need for increased production and the supporting budget.

• He emphasizes the importance of not showing weakness, particularly to China in the context of Taiwan ([06:47]).

  Quote:

  “...the missiles coming from the ships and coming from the Sidewinders, all those things are expensive. They take rare minerals to make.”
  — Mike Lyons, [07:12]

7. Limitations of Air Power

• The hosts raise a common misconception: Why can't the U.S. just use air power ("just bomb them") to achieve its objectives? ([07:50])

• Lyons references a classic book and military wisdom that only “boots on the ground” can achieve and hold real objectives; air power alone cannot secure lasting outcomes.

  Quote:

  "You can fly over land, you can pound it, you can bomb it into oblivion, but until you're willing to do what the Roman legions did... you can't hold it, you can't take it."
  — Mike Lyons, [08:25]

8. Adversaries' Lessons and Technological Trends

• A Wall Street Journal article is cited: Adversaries are watching U.S. actions for insights into capabilities and weaknesses; notably, the high cost of U.S. air defense compared to cheap enemy munitions ([09:19]).

• Lyons stresses the arms race to develop cheaper, effective munitions within the U.S. and the need to remain proactive and offensive, not purely defensive.

  Quote:

  “We have a $2 million missile, we're firing at $100,000 missile, trying to take it out of the sky. So that's economics don't work.”
  — Mike Lyons, [09:47]

9. Getty’s “Axiom” and the Challenge of Will

• The hosts humorously attempt (and repeatedly fail) to frame the “Joe Getty Axiom” about modern warfare: In an era of cheap munitions and drones, you can’t remove the enemy’s ability to attack, so you must remove their will to attack ([12:12]-[12:54]).

• They note this doesn’t work with ideologically driven or nihilist opponents who embrace martyrdom ([13:04]–[13:47]).

  Quote:

  "In an era of low cost munitions and drones, you can't remove your opponent's ability to attack, so you must remove their will to attack."
  — D (Joe Getty), [12:54]

---

Memorable Moments & Notable Quotes

• Pragmatism on Air Power:

  “No, you gotta have people on the ground to accomplish what you want to accomplish.”
  — A, [10:58]

• On Adversaries’ Psychology:

  “If I die and you die, we're all in a better place. This is perfect. This is good.”
  — A, [13:42]

• Getty & Armstrong’s Banter:
  The hosts poke fun at their own inability to deliver grand, memorable axioms, laughing about being “old guys who can’t remember what they’re gonna talk about” ([14:19]).

---

Timestamps for Important Segments

• Strait of Hormuz Update & Operation Freedom: [00:49] – [02:20]
• Mike Lyons on Naval Escorts & Threats: [02:29] – [04:32]
• Global Economic Impacts Discussed: [04:52] – [05:46]
• Likelihood & Nature of Combat Action: [05:55] – [06:31]
• Military Stockpiles & Budgeting: [06:47] – [07:50]
• Air Power Limitations Explored: [07:50] – [09:19]
• Cost & Adversaries' Adaptation: [09:47] – [10:42]
• Getty's Axiom on Modern Warfare: [12:00] – [13:47]

---

Tone & Style

• The discussion is insightful, informal, and occasionally humorous, balancing serious military analysis with the hosts’ trademark sardonic banter.
• Lyons brings authoritative expertise, while Armstrong & Getty interject with relatable layman’s questions and self-deprecating humor.

---

Summary for Listeners:
This episode dives deep into the evolving conflict around the Strait of Hormuz, the complexity of modern naval deterrence, why air power alone is not a panacea, and the economic and strategic lessons adversaries are drawing from U.S. actions. Mike Lyons provides expert clarity while Armstrong & Getty keep the conversation lively and accessible, making this a must-listen for anyone wanting to understand the present and future of military strategy.

---

Transcript

[A]

This is an iHeart podcast. Guaranteed Human.

[B]

Most Mother's Day gifts end up in a drawer, but a song lives in the heart forever. This year tryjoybox.com is giving away 1 million free custom songs to celebrate 1 million incredible moms. Just share a few memories and joy. Box produces an original track and greeting card just for her instantly. It's the most personal gift you'll ever give. And right now it's completely free. Make mom the star of her own [e-mail] 1,000,000 songs 0 to only@trijoy box.com

[A]

Protein packed meals in 10 minutes. TikTok's got millions of them. Could you whip one up in under eight? Probably. But hey, it's not a race. Grab the recipes on TikTok and start cooking

[C]

with trade through that critical waterway, the Strait of Hormuz still blocked. President Trump tonight announcing a new plan to help guide cargo ships linked to countries not involved in the war to safety. Posting on social media, the president writing, quote, for the good of Iran, the Middle east and the United States, we have told these countries that we will guide their ships safely out of these restricted waterways so they can freely and ably get on with their business.

[A]

Yes, it's a new operation called Operation Freedom, though it wasn't specifically said how we're going to guide the vessels through. And it doesn't include US Sailing warships next to them or something like that, if that's what you were picturing. It's what I was picturing. We're specifically not going to do that. So then it was news reports that a couple of US Flagged boats, big ships that had been there since the start of the war, got out for the first time. Well, that sounded like good news. But then like just a couple hours ago, a South Korean flag, the ship was fired upon. The latest news being that it was fired upon in its engine room on the port side, which would be the side facing Iran on an outbound transit. So somebody in Iran fired on this South Korean flagged ship, probably to say, how serious are you Trump, about this whole guiding ships out of the strait?

[D]

I don't know why you're nitpicking. The strait is open. The announcement's been made.

[A]

Well, IRGC announced like two hours ago that it is. The strait is closed.

[D]

Oh, boy. What is the situation? What's it likely to turn into? Let's discuss with military analyst Mike Lyons, who joins us now. Greetings, Mike. How are you?

[E]

Hey, good morning, guys. Thanks for having me back.

[D]

Is it safe to say confusion reigns Today?

[E]

Yeah, no, I think it does. It's hard to say what specifically this naval mission would look like. I mean, we've done it before. Back during the Iran Iraq war In the 80s, the United States used naval assets to escort tankers, Kuwaiti oil tankers in particular, through the straits there to make sure that they weren't attacked by Iran back then. And it's, you know, the results were mixed at, you know, kept some of the lanes open, but it did led to some direct clashes. There were minefields and the like. And again, I'm not sure we're that concerned about that. I think we'll respond right to them. But the point that was just made about that ship that was hit on that side, the real threat is coming from these coastal batteries that are almost indefensible from, you know, they've got the standoff, they've got this capability to hit the ships without us having any way to protect those real ships. So we have to see what happens. If they're going to take cruisers and destroyers and put them alongside those ships and actually escort them, that's, that's a big mission and that's going to take a lot of military assets to do that.

[A]

Yeah, well, we were talking about it earlier. Is, is really the. Unless you're going to do what you just described, like have a whole bunch of big warships go through there and, you know, fight, fight the people on the, on the, on the beach. The only way to do it is to, to threaten such retaliation that they don't want to fire on the ships. Like it's a bigger picture. It's the people that would make the decision, say, do not do this. And apparently we don't have that deterrence yet.

[E]

Yeah, no, I mean, that's, that escalation management, you know, I talked about in my Wall Street Journal article. I think that needs to be proven again that they'll do that. It'll take incredible bombardment along that coastline of naval assets in order to destroy anything that's there. But if the IRGC still wants to do that, that one off asymmetrical threat still can do a lot of damage. And I think that's what we've got to be concerned about. And it doesn't still show a deterrence yet. Even the lack of this, us being afra of escalating it to higher levels, not deterring them enough.

[D]

We know you take in a wide variety of inputs, news, et cetera. Mike, what's your perception of how much a squeeze on the world economy this whole thing is Is it merely uncomfortable or is it uncomfortable leading toward like severe discomfort and counter reaction?

[E]

No, I think it's uncomfortable, but I think it's part of this administration's overall plan to somewhat inoculate the United States from the problems of the rest of. I think the rest of the world is going to be much more uncomfortable. I think the Chinese are considerably worried about their energy security with this conflict, especially what happened in Venezuela when we took over that operation or have more control over it. But Trump says the US Is energy independent and we are. The challenge, though, is that the US Oil market is still petrodollars are tied to US Dollars. The whole economy runs on that, which is why we have to benchmark everything off the price of Brent crude oil. And that creates the challenge for economically because if we had to turn inside, we could do what we can to lower gas prices like the Biden administration did when they were trying to win an election. Right. So. So there's things that the United States can do to help inoculate itself. It's the rest of the world, I think, that's got the challenge.

[A]

So this is asking for, I guess, I suppose, as opposed to analysis. Are we going to get back into the kind of kinetic action that we saw at the beginning of this war, do you think?

[E]

I wouldn't be surprised. I think Trump is trying to do everything he can not to do that. He gave the 60 day notice to Congress that he's ended combat operations, but all that's really done is restart the clock again. If you look at the War Powers act, he has this capability to go to war 60 days at a time and by 90 days the Congress can force him out of it. Well, he's told Congress that he's done with that first part of the conflict so he could start the clock again. I do believe that it's not the last time you're going to see us firing missiles. I do believe you're going to see a lot more kinetic action in the future. Sure.

[D]

On that topic, there's been a great deal made about the amount of ordinance we've spent in this conflict. Some of it's sincere, some of it I think just this sort of partisanship we're used to. Scale of whatever you want, 1 to 5, 1 to 10. How concerned are you about how much we've spent?

[E]

Probably five and a half. I mean, the thing is, Ukraine for the last three years, it took us a couple of years to revamp our artillery rounds as we've used a lot of the DPICM the rounds from the 80s and 90s that were sitting in shelves and we've sent them to Ukraine. So that manufacturing capability has now increased. But the missiles that we've used here, the missiles coming from the ships and coming from the Sidewinders, all those things are expensive. They take rare minerals to make. And so when this is over in the next few months and the planning has already started, there's got to be a much bigger increase in the military industrial complex. And I think that's why this trillion and a half dollar budget he's trying to put forth next year is going to do a lot towards rebuilding a lot of those stock. I mean, I still don't believe the Chinese will, because of this, will look at this as a weakness on our side and decide to invade Taiwan. And I don't think that will force us there. But I do believe we're going to have to have a reset in the next two years once things go and we're going to have to rebuild a lot of our ammunition stocks.

[A]

Here's a question I think a lot of US laymen have and you can answer it because you're a guy who's, you know, part of the military fighting on the ground. I don't think most of us can understand why we can't get the to where we want to get accomplish our objectives with just air power. It seems like we ought to be able to bomb out, bomb regime change or bomb opening Straits or whatever. And apparently, and apparently a lot of presidents also, I was reading that the other day, presidents fall in love with air power. The fact that we have so much of it and think they can accomplish our goals, but we can't. And why is that?

[E]

Yeah, it was a book written back in, during the Korean War, a guy named Fehrenbach in this kind of war, and he basically said you can fly over land, you can pound it, you can bomb it into oblivion, but until you're willing to do what the Roman legions did was put your men on the ground, you can't hold it, you can't take it. And I don't think we're trying to hold or take Iran here, but you still really can't have any kind of impact until you do something on the ground in order to move that forward. So the air power can bomb them back to civil, you know, back to their civilization and can really set them back. And I think that's what Trump is looking for now, that visual sign he keeps talking about that their nuclear program is 20 years setback and all of the likes like that. But for all practical purposes, to change things, you have to occupy it. If you want to hold it, you got to occupy it. And that's where the army comes in. And again, we're not going there anytime soon. So this is going to continue to be an air war, I think, for the very near future and long future.

[D]

One more angle on this, Mike, if we might. The Wall Street Journal has a piece about how our adversaries are watching what's going on and learning about our capabilities and limitations, militarily speaking. And they point out one of the big takeaways is that they see the power of small, low cost munitions even in the midst of all this technology. What do you think of that? And what else would you add? What are our advertisers taking or, I'm sorry, adversaries taking from this?

[E]

So two issues. The first one is, right, the economics don't work on air defense as well. We have a $2 million missile, we're firing at $100,000 missile, try to take it out of the sky. So that's economics don't work. And we'll do whatever we have to to defend and protect. So it shows you that we have to go on the offense. We can't be in the air defense system. We have to go on the offense and make sure our enemies don't have the capability. But number two, there's a huge undercurrent right now to develop the same kind of low cost munitions and technology within our country with entrepreneurs and the like. And I think you're going to see more of that in the next few years. You know, the United States is just always going to outmuscle anybody. We can still do that based on our economy and what we're willing to spend. And so again, our enemies are looking at us and are trying to figure out a way to defeat us. But, but we're, we, we've been able to stay one step ahead of them in most cases. And I think, I think we'll continue to do that.

[D]

Military analyst Mike Lyons. Really interesting stuff, Mike. Heck, it could be completely different tomorrow. We appreciate the time. Thanks very much.

[E]

Great guy. Thanks for having me.

[D]

Yeah, yeah. I think maybe what warfare looks like in five years is just anybody's guess.

[A]

No kidding. I think maybe the biggest misunderstanding that regular people have about war is what you can accomplish by bombing with planes. And apparently, like I said, presidents fall for that too. Yeah, we can just bomb our way toward whatever objective we have. And according to Mike Lyons and reality based on having observed many wars now in my adult life. No, you gotta have people on the ground to accomplish what you want to accomplish.

[B]

Most Mother's Day gifts end up in a drawer, but a song lives in the heart forever. This year, tryjoybox.com is giving away 1 million free custom songs to celebrate 1 million incredible moms. Just share a few memories. And Joybox produces an original track and greeting card just for her. Instantly, it's the most personal gift you'll ever give. And right now, it's completely free. Make mom the star of her own [e-mail] 1,000,000 songs. $0 [e-mail] which brings us to the

[D]

Joe Getty would it be an axiom or a. What would it be Joe Getty principle? There you go.

[A]

Creed motto.

[D]

Mmm. Creed. I like creed. The Joe Getty creed is in an era of low cost munitions and drones, you can't remove their ability. Your opponent's ability to use those weapons. So you must review. Geez, if I could spit it out. I mean, as axioms go, this one's pretty incoherent so far. Let me have a second. Do we have enough tape? Michael, can I have a second tape?

[A]

As razors go, this is a difficult one to follow thus far.

[D]

If somebody is carving this in granite, they're getting pissed off. They're wasting a lot of good chisel time.

[E]

Let me rewind it real quick.

[A]

Zooey, I don't know if you may have. Freezewer.

[E]

Let's go.

[D]

Let's not.

[E]

All right.

[D]

In. In an era of low cost munitions and drones, you can't remove your opponent's ability to attack, so you must remove their will to attack.

[A]

Yeah, the.

[D]

Oh yeah. Counter to the Getty axiom is

[A]

how

[D]

are you gonna do that without exacting such pain? Did you have to send in ground troops and. And. And complete warfare? Especially if you're dealing with a religious death.

[A]

That's what I was gonna throw in that your.

[D]

Your.

[A]

Your Axiom Creed motto. Razor works. If you're not dealing with nihilists who are perfectly okay with dying and they're. They're people dying and on all their people dying. Right.

[D]

Yeah. Or starving to serve Allah.

[A]

Yeah, that was a good thing. If I die and you die, we're. We're all in a better place. This is. This is perfect. This is good.

[D]

So let's go ahead and die.

[A]

Super.

[E]

Wow.

[D]

What the hell's a boy to do?

[A]

Get that carved in the granite. Put that up on a pedestal. People can check that out at their leisure.

[D]

I'd appreciate an obelisk.

[A]

Oh, gotta love a good obelisk. What's the other thing? We got another thing coming up this hour that's worth mentioning.

[D]

Oh, it's so good, so amazing.

[A]

It is.

[D]

I don't remember.

[A]

Deep, yet funny.

[D]

Oh, oh, oh, wait. What? What was it? I was excited about it. I said, let's do it. There.

[A]

Have you listened to that show with the old guys who can't remember what they're gonna talk about?

[D]

The one guy so mushmouthed he announces grand sayings and you can't even understand them?

[A]

Okay, whatever it was, it was on the way, so. Here.

[E]

Armstrong and Getty.

[A]

That's funny.