Podcast Summary: Armstrong & Getty On Demand
Episode: Destroyed Means Destroyed. Mike Lyons Talks to A&G
Date: December 2, 2025
Host: iHeartPodcasts
EPISODE OVERVIEW
This episode features military analyst Mike Lyons joining the Armstrong & Getty team to discuss the controversy surrounding alleged U.S. military actions—a follow-up strike on a boat off the coast of Venezuela that resulted in casualties and political fallout. The conversation dives into military protocols, legality, politics versus procedure, and broader implications for military conduct. In the second segment, Lyons examines potential Ukraine “peace” negotiations, drawing analogies with the Korean War armistice and exploring risks, Russian strategy, and NATO’s role.
KEY DISCUSSION POINTS & INSIGHTS
1. The Venezuela Military Strike Controversy
Background:
- The focus is on reports that several follow-up missile strikes, after an initial attack on a boat connected to narco-terrorists, killed 11 people. There is public debate regarding whether these were legitimate military actions or unlawful targeting of survivors (02:01).
Military Orders & Legalities:
- Mike Lyons emphasizes the importance of understanding exactly “what was ordered, when, by whom, and whether it was legal.”
“You want to know what the facts are, and then you want to compare that with the relevant [procedures] and figure out what’s the correct lawful way to do things.” – Mike Lyons, 01:45
- The current scrutiny is unprecedented, with significant political overlay, and past similar missions have faced far less attention.
Destroyed Means Destroyed – Legal and Ethical Considerations
- Mike Lyons asserts that once a target is legally approved, “destroyed means destroyed,” and if there are survivors still considered part of the original target (i.e., combatants or adversaries), subsequent strikes are not inherently unlawful.
“This is a military target...the initial target was approved legally and the target is to be destroyed. And destroyed means destroyed.” – Mike Lyons, 04:15
- Lyons stresses that U.S. forces are not targeting “sole survivors waving their hands in the water,” separating wartime targeting from classic war crimes scenarios.
“We're not going to target sole survivors waving their hands in the water, let's say. Right. Especially with a Hellfire missile.” – Mike Lyons, 05:42
Context & Political Fallout
- Lyons sees the uproar and congressional investigation as highly politicized, linked to ongoing conflict between military necessity and civilian oversight.
“This is a Shame. Now, we've seen the Secretary of Defense throw this over to the SOCOM commander and this admiral now will testify in front of Congress. But these missions go on all the time. They're approved legal.” – Mike Lyons, 04:55
- He points to the timing of a video released by politicians, suggesting it has influenced the current narrative and political hearings (07:04).
Professionalism within the Military
- Lyons reaffirms the professionalism and adherence to rules of engagement by U.S. operators, relaying the sentiment of former JSOC commanders.
“The people that are on these missions are professional, they're doing things exactly by the book. And if they thought for one second that that was an illegal target...they wouldn't have fired again.” – Mike Lyons, 08:27
Memorable Exchange:
- Co-host presses on Nuremberg precedent about not targeting non-threatening survivors; Lyons contextualizes why he believes that doesn’t apply here, pending further evidence.
- Lyons is clear: the situation is murky, and more facts are needed (05:42–07:33).
2. The Proposed Ukraine Deal – Lessons from Korea
Nature of the “Peace” Proposal
- Lyons describes any upcoming deal as a “freeze” akin to the Korean armistice, not a genuine peace treaty.
“It’s a freeze. And you know, it’s a classic trading land for some kind of freedom or immediate relief from stopping the war. We all want the war to stop, but there’s no guarantees...” – Mike Lyons, 11:45
- He doubts Russia will genuinely accept any deal as written and sees the arrangement as a likely prelude to future conflict—a setup for “round two.”
Comparative Dangers with Korea
- Co-host points out that unlike Korea’s DMZ and robust defenses, the Ukraine arrangement would weaken Ukrainian security, making future Russian aggression more likely.
“This is calling for Ukraine to more or less disarm...It wouldn't take 10 minutes for Putin to violate the agreement and...take even more land a year or two hence.” – Co-host, 13:37
- Lyons calls for NATO to enforce a “security umbrella” or risk perpetual instability; suggests air defenses or a no-fly zone, but acknowledges this could escalate conflict (14:05).
- He references 1938 appeasement and its failures, arguing that such “freezes” often breed further war instead of preventing it.
Battlefield Technology & the Future of War
- Notably, Lyons highlights that Russia and Ukraine are now at technological parity with drones, emphasizing the need for U.S. innovation and adaptation in future conflicts.
“The Russians have caught up with the Ukrainians when it comes to their drone technology...We've got to leapfrog this technology...look over the horizon...” – Mike Lyons, 12:53
NOTABLE QUOTES & TIMESTAMPS
- “This is a military target...and destroyed means destroyed.” – Mike Lyons, 04:15
- “We're not going to target sole survivors waving their hands in the water...Especially with a Hellfire missile.” – Mike Lyons, 05:42
- “The people that are on these missions are professional, they're doing things exactly by the book.” – Mike Lyons, 08:27
- “It’s a freeze...classic trading land for...immediate relief...but there’s no guarantees...” – Mike Lyons, 11:45
- “This is calling for Ukraine to more or less disarm...It wouldn't take 10 minutes for Putin to violate the agreement...” – Co-host, 13:37
- “The Russians have caught up with the Ukrainians when it comes to their drone technology...” – Mike Lyons, 12:53
IMPORTANT SEGMENT TIMESTAMPS
- Background on Venezuela strikes and political controversy: 01:39–03:24
- Mike Lyons’ assessment of military protocols and legality: 03:24–05:27
- War crimes precedent and context: 05:27–06:54
- Analysis of political motives behind controversy: 06:54–08:05
- Professionalism in U.S. military operations: 08:05–09:27
- Ukraine “armistice” analysis and comparison to Korea: 11:30–14:51
FINAL THOUGHTS
Mike Lyons delivers a forceful, nuanced perspective, distinguishing political posturing from military professionalism. The episode underscores the complexity of modern warfare, the perils of politicizing military action, and the immense challenge of crafting viable, lasting peace in geopolitically fraught regions like Ukraine. The Armstrong & Getty team aims to clarify, not sensationalize, these issues, offering listeners both sober analysis and a sense of the high stakes involved.