U.S. Intel: Russia Behind Explosive at German Airport | Command Post

Summary

Bulwark Takes — Command Post: U.S. Intel: Russia Behind Explosive at German Airport August 12, 2026 | Host: Ben Parker | Guest: Lt. Gen. Mark Hertling

---

Episode Overview

This episode dives into an explosive new revelation: U.S. and German intelligence services have determined Russia was behind an attempted drone attack targeting a Ukrainian aircraft at Germany’s Leipzig airport—a story that almost led to a major NATO crisis and potentially war. Host Ben Parker and co-host Lieutenant General Mark Hertling break down how narrowly a catastrophe was averted (thanks to a quick-thinking bus driver), analyze the geopolitical implications, and explore what would have happened if the attack had succeeded. The episode also ranges into related global crises—including U.S. responses to Iranian threats, Trump’s Air Force One decoy operation, and how overlapping mutual defense agreements could further destabilize global order. The latter third features a thoughtful Q&A from listeners on topics from drone warfare to the challenges of rebuilding the U.S. military after recent political shakeups.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. The Russian Drone Attack in Germany (01:15–12:07)

• Under-the-Radar Attack: The episode opens with coverage of General Hertling’s article about a Russian drone loaded with explosives, targeting a large Ukrainian AN124 cargo plane at Germany’s Leipzig Halle airport—a crucial NATO logistics hub. A German bus driver heroically intervened, preventing possible mass casualties and a severe escalation.
  • “What if the bus driver hadn’t kicked it aside? ... You now have a potential Article 5 issue for NATO where Germany could go to Brussels and say, we’ve just been attacked and our citizens have been killed by the Russians inside of German territory.” — Hertling (04:28)
• NATO Article 5 Nuances: Deep dive into the often-misunderstood rules around NATO’s collective defense clause (Article 5). It’s not an automatic “we’re at war”—it prompts negotiations and political choices among member states (05:26–06:50).
  • “It isn’t automatic... About 5 or 6 [member] nations provided nothing after 9/11... That’s the part of Article 5 that a lot of people don’t know.” — Hertling (06:17)
• Hybrid Threats & Attribution: Discussion of how modern attacks—cyber, drone, “gray zone” ops—blur lines of attribution, complicating security responses and raising the specter of plausible deniability (07:05–08:32).
• Global Dominoes & Interconnected Crises: The event in Germany is seen in the context of ongoing U.S. commitments in Ukraine, Iran, and Taiwan. Russia, Iran, and China are described as opportunistically collaborating, increasing the risk of coordinated crises that overstretch U.S. resources (09:10–11:42).
  • “It could certainly stretch American defense and American intelligence.” — Hertling (10:35)
• New Mutual Defense Blocks: Parker notes a real-world (not counterfactual) agreement—Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and nuclear-armed Pakistan have signed a mutual defense pact, laying grounds for complex, possibly nuclear, standoffs in the Middle East (10:38–11:38).
  • “It could get pretty sporty real quick. That’s how global wars start, right there.” — Hertling (11:38–11:42)
• Likelihood & Lessons: Both hosts stress this is not fantasy—the world is closer to crisis than media tends to acknowledge.
  • “It’s a little bit Tom Clancy-ish, but it’s plausible. It is not ridiculous to see a situation playing out like this—and it’s very scary.” — Parker (11:42)

---

2. Trump’s Secret Air Force One Decoy Maneuver (13:50–21:57)

• The Incident: When credible threats emerged that Iran might try to shoot down the president’s plane as he left Ankara, a decoy operation was implemented: Trump boarded the familiar Air Force One, then was secreted via a catering truck to another plane, while most staff—including Secretaries Rubio and Besson—took the decoy (13:50–14:58).
• Trump’s Baffling Response: Asked about the operation, Trump gave a confused account, misunderstanding the purpose of a decoy:
  • “I think actually the plane that I flew on was at greater risk because that would be the plane I think that they would be more likely to go for.” — Trump (15:29)
• Expert Analysis: Hertling and Parker marvel at both the seriousness of the threat and the President’s apparent obliviousness, highlighting the contrast with competent, coordinated protective actions by the Secret Service and military (15:45–19:04).
  • “Makes no sense.” — Hertling (15:45)
  • “You would think he would...ask, ‘And why are we doing this? What do you want me to do?’” — Hertling (19:21)
• Duty to Warn & Risk to Others: Hertling points out a crucial ethical issue: if the real threat was to Air Force One, was the rest of the senior staff knowingly put at risk? Was everyone informed? (20:57–22:12)
  • “Did Marco Rubio know there was a threat against the aircraft or a threat against the President’s life?... Imagine if Air Force One had taken off with all those people and...been shot down and crashed and X number of people died and the President survives. The amount of scrutiny that would be...the scandal of the millennium.” — Hertling (21:00)

---

3. Presidential Danger & Leadership: The Bush-in-Baghdad Story (22:22–28:54)

• A Different Approach: Hertling recounts President George W. Bush’s secret, dangerous 2003 flight into Baghdad just days after a DHL cargo plane was hit by a surface-to-air missile—at a time when actual enemy cells were targeting outbound planes. Bush insisted on being with the troops and minimized others’ exposure, exemplifying both bravery and responsibility (22:22–26:22).
  • “If the troops are going to have the suffering and the dangers that they have in Baghdad, I want to be with them for Thanksgiving.” — George W. Bush (as recalled by Hertling, 25:46)
• Coordination & Secrecy: Only top commanders knew; the mission showed the seriousness and calculated risk-taking compared to the confusion evidenced in the current administration’s handling of threats.

---

4. Q&A: Reflective and Technical Questions (28:54–44:46)

The Human Side: Military Mortuary Affairs

• A listener’s essay and Hertling’s moving story about Private Jennifer Prowl, who volunteered for the intensely difficult and honorable work of Mortuary Affairs after being inspired by the film “Taking Chance.”
  • “She thought that was the most honorable thing I could ever do... She exhume[d] over 400 bodies during that crisis. This is a young 19-year-old private.” — Hertling (30:23–32:43)

Why Was the West Unprepared for Drone Warfare?

• Learning Curve: The U.S. military’s drone adaptation was slow due to both institutional inertia and peacetime resource constraints. Hertling traces how the U.S. had some tactical drones, but Ukraine's innovative use of drone swarms and quadcopters was a wake-up call. (33:01–37:20)
  • “It’s not because we don’t want to [adopt faster], it’s because there are other dynamics causing us to buy other systems...and we have a certain pot of money.” — Hertling (33:59)
• Historical Parallels: Parker reminds listeners that the U.S. Army had no armored divisions when Nazi Germany conquered France in 1940—innovation often comes only after costly lessons. (35:03–36:37)

Munitions Shortages: Why Can't We Just Make More?

• Production Bottlenecks: The supply chain for critical munitions involves hundreds of global suppliers, highly skilled labor, and long lead times. Each missile can cost millions of dollars, and the process is complex (37:47–42:42).
  • “The components for [the Patriot] missile come from over 400 different companies around the world.” — Parker (41:12)
  • “It’s sort of like building a Lamborghini...not like the World War II production lines...these missiles are very different.” — Hertling (41:50)

Rebuilding After Political Purges and Policy Setbacks

• Restoring Morale and Trust: Question about whether “cast aside” groups (senior officers, women, trans troops, etc.) could/would return to service if military culture returns to normal.

  • “There may be some...who would come back, but most have probably gone off to do other jobs...But the question then becomes, how do you seek a new generation or even some of the ones that left to join this operation?” — Hertling (43:03)
  • “Morale is not as good as it was just a few years ago in the military.” — Hertling (44:24)

• Hope for the Future:

  • “Hope springs eternal, Ben. Hope is a method in some of these things and we will rebuild.” — Hertling (44:40)
  • “Hope is not a strategy but it’s a good place to start.” — Parker (44:46)

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• “It’s a little bit Tom Clancy-ish, but it’s plausible...It is not ridiculous to see a situation playing out like this—and it’s very scary.” (Parker, 11:42)
• “Makes no sense.” — Hertling, repeatedly (15:45, 15:53), in response to Trump’s misunderstanding of the decoy aircraft.
• “Imagine...Air Force One had taken off with all those people and without the president and it had been shot down...the scandal of the millennium, in my view.” — Hertling (21:00)
• “She thought that was the most honorable thing I could ever do.” — Hertling on Mortuary Affairs specialist, Private Prowl (31:23)
• “We are now adapting. But Iran has been having these kind of missiles and drone warfare capabilities for a very long time—and we thought we would have the capability to knock all those down, but we’re finding out very quickly we don’t.” — Hertling (33:59)
• “It’s not like in World War II, where we can say, ‘Here’s how to operate a rivet gun and you’re going to build a ship.’ These are high skill jobs now that we need people to do.” — Parker (41:24)

---

Key Timestamps

• [01:15] Main segment begins: German airport drone incident
• [04:28] NATO Article 5—what if the bus driver hadn’t intervened?
• [09:10] “Global is local”—how crises intersect
• [10:38] New mutual defense pacts and Middle Eastern complexity
• [13:50] Trump’s Air Force One decoy episode explained
• [15:29] Trump’s confused reaction to the press
• [20:57] Moral risk to others on Air Force One
• [22:22] Bush flies to Baghdad—leadership in the face of danger
• [28:54] Listener Q&A—Mortuary affairs, drone warfare, munitions production, restoring the military

---

Tone & Style

The episode expertly blends informed, detail-rich military analysis with a conversational, occasionally dry-witted style. Parker serves as a sharp, curious interviewer; Hertling combines deep expertise with storytelling flair—his accounts are candid and sobering but anchored by professional humility and respect for military service and sacrifice.

---

For listeners who missed the episode, this summary covers all major topics, key moments, and illuminating perspectives, providing a comprehensive snapshot of a tense, rapidly evolving world.

Transcript

[VRBO Advertiser]

What makes a Vacation Rental of the Year Stays guests love and host with the most discover top quality homes like the Vacation Rentals of the Year. Using the Loved by Guests filter, it highlights top rated vacation rentals with near perfect ratings for cleanliness, location and all the good stuff. So no more walking into a surprise. We've done the heavy lifting so you can get straight to relaxation. Book your next stay with VRBO now.

[Lieutenant General Mark Hertling]

Forget whatever plans you have this weekend

[Ben Parker]

because you're staying at home and playing on Spin Quest. And there's never been a better time to sign up than right now. New users get $30 coin packs for just $10. All the table games you love with hundreds of slot games and real cash Prizes.

[Lieutenant General Mark Hertling]

That's at spinquest.com S P I N Q U-E-S-T.com Spin Quest is a free

[Narrator / Ad Voice]

to play social casino void where prohibited. Visit spinquest.com for more details.

[Ben Parker]

Hi, I'm Ben Parker from the Bulwark. Welcome to Command Post, joined as always by our very own Lieutenant General Mark Hertling. General, good morning.

[Lieutenant General Mark Hertling]

Good morning, Ben. How are you doing? I. I like the way you say our very own lieutenant General. It's like Bulwark is starting to create an army of people.

[Ben Parker]

We do have an army of people. If you want to join that army, you can go to bulwark.com sorry the bulwark.com look at bulwark plus member we'd appreciate your support. We've got a lot to talk about today. First, you have an article that's up on the Bulwark this morning about this really underreported story about how what seems like a Russian explosive drone almost blew up a Ukrainian jet at a German airport and it only didn't because a bus driver at the German airport kicked it out of the sky. So we're going to talk about that first and how we may have averted a major war. Then we got to talk about this story of Trump using a decoy, Air Force One when he was coming back from overseas because they were he was afraid that there was a threat that the Iranians were going to try to shoot down his plane. He's finally responded to that story and what he said is wild, of course. So we'll get to that. And at the end, I think we promised this a couple weeks ago. We're going to do a Q and A because you saw you all sent some really great questions and we are excited to answer them. But let's start. You saw the story out of Leipzig in Germany about a bus driver who kicked a Russian explosive drone out of the sky. And you sort of teased that out and gave. It gave a counterfactual of what could have happened if that guy had called in sick. It's kind of scary.

[Lieutenant General Mark Hertling]

Yeah. It's interesting because when I saw the story, it wasn't receiving a whole lot of coverage. As you know, Ben, early on, it wasn't it, since it's gotten a little bit more because of what the Germans are doing with it.

[Ben Parker]

But.

[Lieutenant General Mark Hertling]

But it reminded me. I immediately thought to myself, oh, my gosh, this is exactly the kind of thing I used to need when I was a trainer at our National Training center to develop a scenario. What if this happens? You know, I mean, a lot we were kidding before about saying this was almost like a Clancy novel, but that's how the military prepares war gaming. They take unique circumstances and then expand them into the what ifs, and then they train their forces to counter what happened. So I thought this was a perfect what if scenario for some kind of NATO war game where, you know, it starts off as a very minor thing at an airport in Germany that not many people know about. And I talk about this in the article. The Leipzig Halle airport is actually a military hub for transport airplanes. And the plane that this drone was circling around before the. The Ninja Warrior bus driver kicked it was an AN124, which is one of the biggest transport planes in the world, built by the Anatov Aircraft Company, which is. Was at one point in Ukraine. So all of these huge airplanes, bigger than our C5 aircraft in the US Air Force, are at this airport doing transportation for NATO forces. They're rental aircrafts. And, you know, the US Uses them sometimes to take big cargo pieces. So the point was, this was a potential attack on a Ukrainian aircraft at a German airport, knocked aside by a German bus driver at a military transportation hub. And the immediate assessment is who could have done this? And most likely it was the Russians. And sure enough, that's what's been determined now from the German Intelligence service. So the what if is what if the bus driver hadn't kicked it aside luckily and it hadn't exploded? What if it had hit the aircraft, burned the aircraft down, killed a bunch of Germans, wounded a bunch of other Germans? You now have a potential Article 5 issue for NATO where Germany could go to Brussels and say, we've just been attacked and. And our citizens had been killed by the Russians inside of German territory.

[Ben Parker]

Let's pause there for just a second because as you point out, so American Intelligence is now it's, according to reports, determined this is a Russian drone. This is not the first Russian drone that has been.

[Lieutenant General Mark Hertling]

And the Germans have to.

[Ben Parker]

The Germans have as well. Yeah. Thank you.

[Lieutenant General Mark Hertling]

Yeah.

[Ben Parker]

This is not the first Russian drone that's been seen over Europe. And you talk in the article in detail about what Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty, the treaty that created NATO actually says. And, and we tend to think of it as like this automatic mechanism. Someone's attacked, we're at war, happens just like that. But that's not really how it works.

[Lieutenant General Mark Hertling]

That's not how it works at all. You know, a country can go to NATO or other countries that see an attack like the NATO alliance did when we were attacked on 911 and said, this is an attack against one, therefore it is an attack against all. But at that point, it turns into negotiations. Who's going to send forces to fight this attack? Who is going to be involved at the civilian government level? How many of the 32 nations now are going to join into countering this attack and going against the person or the government that did it? So it isn't automatic. And there have been many countries in the past. In fact, the 911 portrayal of the Article 5 adherence had everyone voting for it, but about 5 or 6, as I recall, Nate nations provided nothing. They said, hey, yeah, we support attack against one is attack against all. But, yeah, we're not going to give you any forces or do anything for you, so have fun, you guys. That's the part of Article 5 that a lot of people don't know.

[Ben Parker]

Yeah, that's really interesting. So in this counterfactual, you say Germany says we have an attack sponsored by a foreign government, killed a bunch of Germans. So we're going to Article 5 and then you have 31 other countries sitting there at the table and what happens?

[Lieutenant General Mark Hertling]

Well, and some may say, as I point out in the article, some may say, yeah, we don't think this is enough to put our nation at risk, so we're not going to join in, in terms of condemning Russia. Or you might have another country say, yes, this is a critical instance and we've seen other countries in Europe already, excuse me, Poland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, all say they anticipate the Russians doing more to press NATO countries since the war in Ukraine started, in other words, entering another country's border. But when we talk about that, Ben, as you so rightly pointed out when we were editing this piece, you know that doesn't necessarily mean a bunch of tanks, Russian tanks rolling across the border, it can be something like this. And in terms of a hybrid attack, a drone attack on an airport, a cutting of a telecommunication cable, a cyber attack against banks in a country, those are all hybrid attacks, which could certainly cause major effects in an enemy that Russia could do. But sometimes you don't really know who's doing it. And until they pointed out that this was a Russian drone with demolitions on board, you don't really know that it's a Russian drone. If it had exploded, could they have determined from the pieces that it was a Russian drone? We don't know.

[Ben Parker]

Yeah, for the, you know, sometimes these residue from the explosives, but if it burns with the airplane, I don't know if that's really possible. So there's one last part of this article that I thought was super interesting that I want us to talk about, because one of the themes we have on this show is that the world is round. It's all connected to every other part. So you draw out, you have an ongoing war in Ukraine, and then you have this article 5 Crisis in NATO. You also have an ongoing war in Iran, and you have a very tense situation in across the Strait of Taiwan. So how do all these things sort of fit together in the scenario you us you spell out?

[Lieutenant General Mark Hertling]

Well, you talk about the intelligence agencies and perhaps the militaries of those different countries you just named coming together and saying, hey, we' been trying to defeat the United States for years and they are currently in a precarious position. They are not supporting Ukraine as much as they should. They are deeply involved in a war in Iran. They have forces all over the world based to execute contingency plans like the defense of Taiwan, essentially. So the three nation states, Russia, Iran and China, are somewhat compatico. They are partners. They are not allies per se, but they certainly share a lot of information. And you could see potentially, and this is where it gets into the Tom Clancy novel, the three nations talking to each other and say, let's use these attacks to our advantage. And Iran says, hey, I've got a good idea. I'm going to have one of our proxy forces. As an example. The Houthis attack another NATO ship. So in the article, I pieced together that they attack a French ship and French sailors are killed. So now you have German citizens, French sailors, Americans in the, in the port, potentially China doing an exercise in the Taiwan Straits. It's that closes the sea routes. All of those things could come together at once. And it could certainly stretch American defense and American intelligence.

[Ben Parker]

The other thing you pointed out was this is, this is real news. This is not counterfactual. Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan have just signed a mutual defense agreement. Pakistan is, of course, a nuclear power. They have nuclear weapons. So I guess that means that in a situation where Saudi Arabia felt like it was under threat from or under attack from Iran, Turkey could be pulled into two possibly conflicting mutual defense arrangements of nuclear powers.

[Lieutenant General Mark Hertling]

How does that, how does that happen? Well, Saudi Arabia and Turkey are now part of this consortium. So the, the Houthis in Yemen who have been fighting the Saudi Arabians for decades now, attack a French ship. NATO claims it's a Article 5. Saudi Arabia says, hey, we need to get the Houthis once and for all, so Turkey, come and help us. Oh, by the way, Pakistan, you could set up some things, too. And like you said, Pakistan is also a nuclear nation, so it could get pretty sporty real quick.

[Ben Parker]

Sporting.

[Lieutenant General Mark Hertling]

That's how global wars start, right there.

[Ben Parker]

Yeah, that's what I thought was the real value of this piece is that it's a little bit Tom Clancy ish, but it's plausible. I mean, it is not ridiculous to see a situation playing out like this. And it's very scary.

[Lieutenant General Mark Hertling]

Well, first of all, can I say, as my editor on this piece, for you to say it's not ridiculous is a great compliment to me. So thank you very much.

[Narrator / Ad Voice]

Yeah.

[Ben Parker]

Well, I mean, it seems serious. No, as you said, it is the kind of war game that, you know, people use to think, okay, what would we actually do if these things happen? Not like a, you know, sci fi, you know, aliens to send on earth or something. I don't know, that might actually be helpful at this point. And the good news is, when all this is happening, we have Donald Trump as president and Pete Hegseth as Secretary of Defense. And we have to play a short ad. But we will talk about them more when we come back on the other side.

[Quince Advertiser]

Message is sponsored by Quince. August is the perfect time to hit reset before the autumn rush begins. And honestly, I can't think of better place to start than my closet. That's why I love shopping at Quint. Quint specializes in everyday staples that work harder, like their ultra soft organic cotton tees and their premium magnolian cashmere sweaters. They're versatile, timeless, and transition seamlessly from a casual workday to dinner out. Few of the favorite things I've gotten from Quint are their short sleeve linen shirts. They're lightweight, comfortable, and they make it easy to look put together in the summer without feeling like I'M trying too hard. And if your closet is hanging on to some basics that have definitely seen better days, well, Quince is a great place for an upgrade. Their premium denim and Taylor Chino started just $60. Kid you not 6060 with the kind of fit and quality you normally expect to pay a lot more for. Upgrade your everyday Download the Quints app for app exclusive offers or go to quints.com bulwarktakes get free shipping on your order and 365 day returns now available in Canada and the UK too. That's Q U I N C E.com bulwark takes

[Ben Parker]

so we got to talk about this Air Force One story. Just to summarize for those who missed it. When the president was flying back from the NATO summit last month in Ankara, Turkey, there was a what was deemed to be a credible threat from the Iranians that they were going to try to shoot down his airplane. So they had Trump get on the normal Air Force One jet, the one that says United States of America on the side, the big 747, and then secretly get into a catering truck that was pulled up next to the jet that then drove to a different jet that he then rode on with Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, while all the White House, most of the White House staff and the White House press corps and Secretaries Rubio and Besson all road on the normal Air Force One, which I guess was still under threat of Iranian attack. Kind of a, you know, bait and switch operation. Pretty clever. For those of you who want to hear more about the details of this, our friends Michael Weiss and Mark Polymeropoulos just recorded a Bulbourg take about that. So you can find that on this channel. I highly recommend watching that. And just yesterday someone finally asked President Trump about this decoy operation and here's what he had to say.

[Narrator / Ad Voice]

One still flew out of herkey with trash with White House officials on it. How much? Well, this one went over to England where it was shown to the soldiers still at risk even though no, I know. But this one went over to England because the soldiers wanted to see it and it stopped and they showed it to the soldiers and we did a switch over there and it was really as per the military and I guess have to do with they say they go for safety and I have to do what they say.

[Lady Luck (Spin Quest Advertiser)]

Why was it too dangerous for you to fly on Air Force One but

[Narrator / Ad Voice]

not I think actually the plane that I flew on was at greater risk because that would be the plane I think that we that they would be more likely to go for.

[Lieutenant General Mark Hertling]

Makes no sense. Makes no sense.

[Ben Parker]

He appears not to understand the concept of a decoy.

[Lieutenant General Mark Hertling]

Right, yeah, yeah. Makes no sense.

[Ben Parker]

Is there anything else to say about this?

[Lieutenant General Mark Hertling]

There's so much to say about this, Ben. You know it. First of all, if, if the Secret Service is going through this kind of drill to get the President to another aircraft using a airport catering truck that has the forklift, that lifts the car, the thing up to the aircraft, he walks on and then walks into the container and then goes down to the truck and takes off to another airplane, then that's pretty good planning actually by the Secret Service, I would say. But the background to it is what were the threats that they were receiving? And from what we're hearing so far, a New York Times report said this morning that they knew exactly what hotel rooms that all the Cabinet members and the President were staying in and the hotel where they were staying. They knew exactly when the airplane was going to take off. They had the potential or they had seen the Secret Service that either seen pictures or had informants of individuals with a shoulder fired missile like a SAM 7 or Estrella or one of the, those techniques to hit an aircraft. And you know, it's interesting all of those things when you get one piece of information in the Secret Service because they get literally hundreds, if not thousands of threats against any President or officials on a daily basis. But when you start matching it up with a bunch of other things, then you say, hey, we've got a real threat here. We've got to take action. And they, they don't play games when there's at least a chance of a risk to their primary. So all of these things happening were pretty fascinating and kudos to the Secret Service and the intelligence community for finding them. But you also have to ask the question about a concept called the duty to warn the fact that when you're a primary and you see other people under threat, you're going to make sure that they're not in the area too. So if there was a threat against Air Force One and they had a credible knowledge of a team with an air defense weapon probably around the Air Force airport that could shoot at Air Force One, you know, the, the uninformed will say, hey, Air Force One is, has, has these capabilities like chaff and, and threads to throw out to protect them against incoming air defense fires and all of that is true, but at the same time there's still a danger to the aircraft. It, it, there are so many things that we could talk about we could do a whole show on this as Michael Weiss and Mark Polymeropoulos did. But there were, I watched that show and there were even some more things that I had in terms of questions about what occurred. And the fact that the President says something like, hey, the plane I was on was the one that was really a threat. Not true. He was allegedly getting to a plane that didn't have the threat and that's what the Secret Service actually put as part of their plan.

[Ben Parker]

So, yeah, yeah, that was the whole point. Also, he said something that, I don't think it's technically true. You might, you probably know more about this than I do. But he said, you know, I gotta, I gotta, you know, do whatever the military says. I don't think that's true. And also I don't think it was the military. It was the Secret Service.

[Lieutenant General Mark Hertling]

Secret Service. And that's another thing I would say that piqued my interest is if the Secret Service comes up with this very unique plan of having him walk up the stairs, go into a cargo container, go down, go to another plane, you would think he would sometime during that conversation say something like, and why are we doing this? What do you want me to do? And what's the reason? Right. This is, you know, you're not going to get a guy like Trump to get into a cargo container just because you tell him to do it. I don't know. That's just me, but that's my supposition.

[Ben Parker]

Yeah. It's also just, I mean, it's more of what we've talked about, which is this, the administration's sort of knee jerk reaction to just whenever anyone questions anything they do to say, oh, military, oh, troops. The, the Secret Service does by law have to protect the President. So they, I, my understanding is that if the President says no, I don't know what, what I don't want to do what you want me to do. The Secret Service says we are bound by law. The law says we protect the President. And there's always, for a lot of presidents, there's always a bit of attention there. The military, there is no one superior to Trump. Right. Like he gives them an order and says, I want to take this plane. I don't think that's an order. They can countermand. So he's, it's again, like, actually it's a, it's a tiny thing. He said, oh, I gotta do what the military says. But specifically, it's wrong. And it's wrong in a way that we've seen from this administration so much, which is just whenever they get criticized or you have no answer, they just throw up. Ah, the military, all the troops. I hope that ends the conversation.

[Lieutenant General Mark Hertling]

Well, I'll go one step further and I know this is getting into crazy town, but I would say a normal person might say, if the Secret Service presented this plan to him and told them, we got to get you on another plane because there's a threat against Air Force One, the normal person might say, well, what about these other people who were on here? And what about my secretary of State? The question is, did Marco Rubio know that there was a threat against the aircraft or a threat against the President's life? That's the key question. And you would think that a person with even just a smidgen of empathy would say, hey, I've got a, you know, I don't know how many people they had on Air Force One for the flight, But I've got two dozen, three dozen, 100 on this flight. What's going to happen to them? And imagine, Ben, if we want to play the what if game again, imagine if Air Force One had taken off with all those people and without the President and it had been shot down and crashed and X number of people died and the President survives. The amount of scrutiny that would be. Wait a minute, you knew this was going to happen? You took another plane and left everybody, all these other people to die. I mean, that would have been the scandal of the millennium, in my view.

[Ben Parker]

Yeah, probably would have lasted all of 15 minutes. Sorry, I'm just cycle you all you mentioned before we get to our Q and A, you mentioned you wanted to tell the story of President Bush visiting Iraq.

[Lieutenant General Mark Hertling]

Yeah, you don't know this story. So I was in Iraq, in Baghdad with the 1st Armored Division in 2003 and 4. And in the morning, on the morning of the 22nd of November, 2003, we were, by the way, our headquarters was at the Bay app, the Baghdad International Airport. We had taken over a terminal for our division headquarters and we had troops, 30,000 troops all over the city of Baghdad. But on the morning of the 22nd of December, we were actually in a, in a battle update briefing and we heard an explosion. After we heard an airplane take off because we were right near the Runway, we heard an airplane take off, we heard an explosion. We kind of all said, what was that? And then we started hearing airplane engines screaming back and forth. And there was this bizarre noise of an airplane obviously fighting, having been hit. And in fact, a DHL Airbus A300 cargo plane was who had been lifting off from Baghdad International on a routine flight with goods to bahrain. At about 8,000ft they were engaged with a surface to air missile, slammed into its left wing, knocked out all the hydraulic system. Three man crew in this very large airplane had no conventional means of controlling the airplane other than by measuring the two engines to get it back to the land. They brought it around and landed it at Baghdad International. And for the next couple months while we were in Baghdad, that airplane was parked on the tarmac. They closed down all flights, all non military flights into the Baghdad airport. And all three pilots survived or the crew survived, but the aircraft was damaged and it sat there for the rest of the time we were in Baghdad with a tarp over where the left wing had been damaged. Okay, that was on the 22nd of November. Fast forward to Thanksgiving Day. Five days later, the 27th of November, President Bush decides to come into Baghdad to have Thanksgiving dinner with the troops. He lands with Air Force One in Baghdad airport in the middle of the night, five days after this airplane had been shot down. Air Force One does the corkscrew drill of landing as opposed to a, you know, when a plane comes in like this, you have to kind of corkscrew into an airport. You know, he had Thanksgiving and someone asked him why did he do that? And he said, if the troops are going to, you know, have the suffering and the dangers that they have in Baghdad, I want to be with him for Thanksgiving. And there's pictures. And I was there at the mess hall when he came in and started serving soldiers food from behind the counter, something that good leaders do. So that's kind of a different approach to danger in Air Force One. Interestingly enough though, over the next couple of weeks, a C5 aircraft and a C17 aircraft coming out of Baghdad in December were also shot down from that airport. So there was a cell of people with, you know, shoulder fired missiles on the approach and on the Runway out of the airport that were shooting at aircraft. Bush knew that. The last thing I did when I, when I did my book interview with Nicole Wallace of Ms. Now the subject of the Baghdad airport came in and I said, yeah, I was there at the time. And she said President Bush would not allow me to come with him on that trip, although I was the communication advisor because he wanted to take as few people as possible because it was dangerous. And I got to tell you, we did coordination with the Secret Service, the 1st Army Division did. And I got to tell you, every single Secret Service agent we talked to Said they did not want the President making this trip, but he did it anyway. A little bit different from the current situation, don't you think?

[Ben Parker]

Yeah, a little bit different indeed. Hey everybody.

[Lady Luck (Spin Quest Advertiser)]

Lady luck here. And we're celebrating America's 250th birthday. Now all summer long I'm going to be celebrating by playing on spinquest.com which is an American owned social casino. It obviously features over a thousand slot games and live blackjack, live craps, live bubble craps. Head on over to spinquest.com get yourself a $30 coin pack for just 10 bucks.

[Narrator / Ad Voice]

Spinquest is a free to play social casino void where prohibited. Visit spinquest.com for more details.

[Lady Luck (Spin Quest Advertiser)]

This Monday.com ad was created by a team of people and AI agents. Reese, our content agent, wrote the copy based on our best practices, like mentioning Monday.com three times. That was the second. Johnny, our coordination agent, built the timeline and kept everyone aligned. Olivia, our human creative director, stayed in the loop because agents are great, but they don't always know when a joke lands. She had one note tell listeners it only takes minutes to build an agent. So minutes. Create your own AI agent. Today on Monday dot com.

[Ben Parker]

How much warning did they give you? Did they give you as the division commander that he was like, get ready, 20 minutes?

[Lieutenant General Mark Hertling]

No, I wasn't the division commander. I was the assistant division commander. General Dempsey was the division commander. And there were four of us that knew in the division that he was coming in. And we had meetings with the Secret Service a couple of times to talk about how this was going to happen. They came in in the dead of nights, no lights on the aircraft, all the windows closed. So they didn't have inside lights showing out. But it was one of those kind of things that it was very well planned by the Secret Service. He got in at Thanksgiving dinner later in the day and then got out that night.

[Ben Parker]

I've always wondered a little bit what it's like being one of the Air Force One pilots because those guys are very specially chosen. They are incredibly skilled and, and mostly what they do is like fly in and out of big international airports and like, you know, pretty, pretty quiet like Andrews Air Force Base with a nice long flat Runway. But it's times like this that I think, oh, that's why they choose the really good pilots for Air Force One, because when you need them, you really need them.

[Lieutenant General Mark Hertling]

Yeah, it's interesting because most of them grow up in the transport world. They're flying C5s or C17s, but there's a few of the crew that are always fighter pilots. From what I've been told by the Air Force and of course the crew itself, the so called flight attendants are all pretty well trained as well in terms of not just aircraft safety, but also very good cooks. Although I've never been on Air Force One other than on a tour, so it's kind of interesting.

[Ben Parker]

That is cool. All right, we should get to this Q and A. We got. I think we have time for three questions and you also did some really good ones. Please keep sending them to command [e-mail]. i also got to say I sorry I forgot to write this down, but after we had that episode about how the military was reclassifying the fatalities as not being part of Operation Epic Fury, they were trying to sort of fudge the numbers. Someone sent it. He was a former Mortuary affairs specialist who had served in Iraq. I don't know if he was technically in Iraq. He might have been in Kuwait. And he sent in a personal essay about what he had experienced

[Lieutenant General Mark Hertling]

it

[Ben Parker]

just in the course of his job. Yeah, I forgot to write down his name and I think he's since taking the essay down. But if you're listening, I just want you to know that I read was very moving and it was just about the care that people in the military go to when someone in uniform dies to make sure that their remains are respected and, you know, and sent home. And as good quality, as good a condition as possible that all their affairs are collected and given to the next kin. So if they add, you know, half a pack of cigarettes and a CD collection, they find who to send those to. Just all the respect they had and how important they took. Anyway, I just want to thank you.

[Lieutenant General Mark Hertling]

Okay, you got, you gotta let me. Time to tell another story.

[Ben Parker]

Yeah, yeah, yeah, please.

[Lieutenant General Mark Hertling]

Before I was commander of US Army Europe, my last, my second to last job was commanding all the basic training. And I used to go around not only basic training, but what the army calls advanced individual training to meet soldiers that were going through their different specialties. And I was at Fort Lee, Virginia one time and I was having lunch with a group of recruits who were now in their advanced phases of training. And I went around the table and I asked them what MOs, their occupation they were going to go into. And a couple of them were truck drivers, a couple of them were fuelers. And one woman, one young woman in the group said her mos and she gave me the code for it. And I didn't know what the code meant. And I said, what is that? She says, I'm a Mortuary affairs specialist. And she did not, and I hate to be sexist on this, but she did not look like someone who was going into Mortuary Affairs. So I asked her the question. I said, why did you choose that as your mos? Her name was Private Jennifer Prowl. I'll still remember that name. And she's out there somewhere today. But she said, well, sir, she said, I watched a movie called Taking Chance with Kevin Bacon. If anyone hasn't seen it, be careful watching it because it'll bring you to tears. And it's about bringing soldiers home from combat to their final resting place. And it's a great movie. Didn't receive a whole lot of kudos. Maybe Sonny Bunch can take a look at it and see what he says. But she says, and I thought that was the most honorable thing I could ever do. So she eventually went out in the army, became a Mortuary affairs specialist. And I got a call from her sergeant major one day because he knew I had talked to her at lunch. And he told me that as a young private, she had volunteered to go to Haiti after the earthquake and exhume bodies. And she was there leading, as a private leading a State Department team of Mortuary affairs people exhuming bodies. And she, as I understand it, exhumed over 400 bodies during that crisis. This is a young 19 year old private Jennifer Prowl. I don't know where she is now. She's out of the Army, I think. But I had some opportunities to connect with her as a young soldier. And yes, you're absolutely right. The care of these Mortuary affairs assistance in the military take of killed soldiers is just incredible.

[Ben Parker]

It is, it is. All right, so now we turn to our first question, from the sublime to the very technical. Tina asks after the last few years of watching the Russian Ukrainian war, why were slash, are we so unprepared for drone warfare? Why didn't we learn from our allies on this topic?

[Lieutenant General Mark Hertling]

Well, we are learning from our allies, first of all, and I answer this question a lot, how come we don't have more drones? Well, it, it, as the Ukrainians found out, when they didn't have the big missile systems, they developed these. But I got to tell you, the military has been looking at drone warfare for a couple of decades at least. We used small drones in Baghdad in 2004, the same story. We had something called a Raven drone, which was just a handheld thing for intelligence collection. And there was a thought that drone warfare was going to become ubiquitous and. But you know, you're measuring, you know, the development of drones, which we did in the big drones like the Reaper and some of the other ones that we used in combat, but nothing like the drone swarms with the quadcopters that we're seeing Ukraine use. It's now starting to pick up. And in fact, the military has a couple of organizations that's testing different types of drones to counter drone warfare, but also to conduct it. But truthfully, you know, Ben, the acquisition process in the army is slow and we are slow sometimes to adapt. But it's not because we don't want to. It's because there's other dynamics causing us to buy other systems and we have a certain pot of money. We got a real feel for drone warfare for the first time in the Azerbaijan, Armenia war in the late 2000 and twenties or late 2019 in 2020. And until then we didn't have a really good feel for it. Ukraine has adapted very well. We are now adapting. But Iran has been having these kind of missiles and drone warfare capabilities for a very long time. And we thought we would have the capability to knock all those down, but we're finding out very quickly we don't. And we just can't swap on a dime in terms of changing our approach to warfare totally.

[Ben Parker]

This came up in the comments on one of our previous episodes. If you're not in the comments, by the way, they're great. The people who listen to the show, watch the show are so smart and I love.

[Lieutenant General Mark Hertling]

Yeah, they are.

[Ben Parker]

I love sharing, reading recommendations and talking about these things. So definitely a great place to be if you're not in the comments already. This came up in the comments. And you know, I just, I pointed out. So you're talking about how it at the time that the German army defeated France in the summer of 1940, using their Panzer divisions, which are armored divisions or tank led divisions, they had already conquered Czechoslovakia and Poland and they defeated France in six weeks, which they hadn't been able to do in four years of World War I. At that time, there was not a single armored division in the U.S. army. Your old unit, the 1st Armored Division was stood up later that fall. And so it's like, yeah, like we

[Lieutenant General Mark Hertling]

learned, like, here's, here's an anniversary mug of the 50 years for freedom, you know, and, and it shows how, you know, the first armored division started to be stood up in 20 in 1940. Yeah.

[Ben Parker]

And so it was, it was after we saw what happened that we decided to stand up at Armored Division. And then, you know, luckily over the course of World War I, we had. Sorry, World War II, we had the time to stand up a whole bunch more divisions before we got into combat. But there is. There is a repeated pattern that adaptation in peacetime is really hard. And then when war comes, all the red tape gets cut through. You just hope you have enough time,

[Lieutenant General Mark Hertling]

but it also takes a lot of scar tissue. That first Armored Division, which I'm proud to have served in combat with for three different combat tours, was also the first tank division that went into combat in North Africa. And they suffered humiliating defeats at Sidi B Zid and El Al. Let's just say they suffered some very bad defeats, as you see.

[Ben Parker]

Were they at Kasserine? Was that.

[Lieutenant General Mark Hertling]

They were at Kasserine Pass? Yeah, Kasserine Pass, Sidi Bazid. And as you see in the opening scenes of Patton, all those tanks that were destroyed were American tanks. They didn't know how to use them very well until some really smart people came and adjusted the tactics and the operations.

[Ben Parker]

Second question is from a friend of the show, Marcy. There was a discussion, and this actually gets us, something you talked about last week with Andrew Egger when I was out. There was a discussion about our munitions supply being low. Can you talk about the production process? Because my question is, why aren't we producing more or increasing the production rate? And Admiral Kirby mentioned this too, how difficult that is. So just give a broad overview. What's the problem? Why don't we make more?

[Lieutenant General Mark Hertling]

Well, we've made our process of developing these systems are such that they complement other pieces of equipment. So a TACMS missile or a Tomahawk would be part of a campaign plan. Also using naval gunfire, aircraft overhead. We wouldn't be using them singularly as missiles to attack targets. Now, you can do that for a while, but if you do it for a long time, like five months, they run out. And it's partly because of casualty rates. You can shoot a missile, a Prism missile, more than 300 miles. And when you do that, you don't have soldiers in direct contact with the enemy. So by shooting those precision weapons long distances, you save lives. That's not how we fight wars. We fight wars with a combination of ground forces, air forces, navy forces, rocket forces, etc. To get to the point, I think of the questioner, though. These missiles are extremely expensive and extremely difficult to produce because they require a long supply chain of rocket motors, gps, unique parts that are found in different countries. So I'll give you the perfect example, the Thaad missile, the air defense missile that we've been using to strike cruise missile targets coming out of Iran. $15 million per copy. $15 million per missile. The Patriot missile that everybody wants. $3 million per missile. And that doesn't include the unit that's around it, the launchers, the radar devices, the command and control headquarters. So we recently sold a Patriot battalion to Poland, and I think it was over $3 billion for that one battalion that would only consist of about 100 people, but a whole lot of potential to fire missiles if you have the $3 million missiles at your disposal. So when, when people are saying, oh, we've depleted our ammunition, we haven't depleted all our ammunitions, we've depleted some key ones. Tomahawks, Patriots, Thads, the ATACA missile, which travels about 300 km. The Prism missile, which travels more. It's the newer ATACM missile. It travels longer distance than 300 miles. All of those things are upwards of a million dollars apiece. Take a long time to build. It's sort of like building a Lamborghini. It takes a long time on a production line. And truthfully, there's only one or two organizations that are building it. When the President also says that these defense contractors are building new headquarters and building new construction, they're not. I've checked the defense industries. There's no new construction facilities going up. They're trying to increase the number of missiles by going 24 hour shifts, seven days a week. But it still takes a long time to build these missiles.

[Ben Parker]

We ran an article by Brent Hannah Hill after Trump suggested, which he then later walked back, that he might allow the Ukrainians to build their own Patriot missiles. And just for that one weapon, the Patriot missile interceptor, Bren gave some, some details. The components for that missile come from over 400 different companies around the world. Yeah, so even if you say I want to build more missiles, like they have to build more inputs. And some of those inputs are very, are materials that are very hard to get. There's also the issue of labor. Like, I know this is a big deal in the shipbuilding world, like for people who, you know, the Navy's trying to make more submarines. But it's really hard right now to find welders who are skilled enough to make, for example, the parts that need to go into a nuclear reactor on a submarine. That has to be a really, really perfect weld every time. And there's aren't enough welders in America, especially, you know, if you have a company that can Only hire American citizens, et cetera, et cetera. So, you know, it's not like in World War II, where we can say, you know, here's how to operate a rivet gun and you're going to build a ship. These are. These are high SK jobs now that we need people to do. Even if we had the money, even if we had the materials, even if we had the supply chains, it's sort of. It's a very complicated problem.

[Lieutenant General Mark Hertling]

Yeah, the supply chains and the technology involved is incredible. And you're right, it's not like the production lines you see the movies of during World War II, where all these pieces of ammunitions are flowing out. Those are dumb bombs. They're relatively easy to make, but these missiles are very different.

[Ben Parker]

Our last question is from Andrew. Let's say we actually get a chance to pick up the pieces and start repairing our institutions. After this administration, is there anything we will be able to do for the countless senior officers, bearded soldiers, trans troops, etc. Who have been cast aside under this version of the Department of Defense?

[Lieutenant General Mark Hertling]

Yeah, I would suggest there may be some that you could say, hey, would you like to come back? And there will be some that will say, yeah, but truthfully, Ben, I think most of them have probably gone off to do other jobs, found other employment. The ones that love it, that are young enough to come back might. But you're talking about policies that could be in place for up to two more years. Two plus more years. I believe firmly that those are all going to be overturned when potentially a new administration comes in, because it just doesn't comport with who we are as a military or as a government. The respect and dignity applied toward all just isn't in some of these things. So it could all change with new policies. But the question then becomes, how do you seek a new generation or even some of the ones that left to join this operation? Now Secretary Hegseth continues to proclaim recruitment is off the chart and they're getting all kinds of people. I'm skeptical about his numbers and the way that they're recruiting soldiers, because from what I'm hearing from a lot of sources is morale is not as good as it was just a few years ago in the military.

[Ben Parker]

I am shocked that you would suggest that any member of this administration would be misleading with numbers or any other kinds of facts. But I think on that bombshell, it's time to end. Thank you, General. I can't wait to do this again next week.

[Lieutenant General Mark Hertling]

But hope springs eternal, Ben. Hope is a method in some of these things and we will rebuild.

[Ben Parker]

Hope is not a strategy but it's a good place to start.

[Lieutenant General Mark Hertling]

I know exactly. Thanks Ben. It's great being with you.

[Ben Parker]

Thanks General.

[Lady Luck (Spin Quest Advertiser)]

Hey everybody, lady luck here and we're celebrating America's 250th birthday birthday. Now all summer long I'm going to be celebrating by playing on spinquest.com which is an American owned social casino. It obviously features over a thousand slot games and live blackjack, live craps, live bubble craps. Head on over to spinquest.com get yourself a 30 coin pack for just 10 bucks.

[Narrator / Ad Voice]

Spin Quest is a free to play social casino Boyd where prohibited. Visit spinquest.com for more details.

[VRBO Advertiser]

Looking for the perfect rental? Discover top rated stays loved by guests Rated highest by real guests through authentic reviews these traveler loved stays are recognized by the details that matter most and validated by real experiences. Choose confidently from rentals you can trust. VRBO Book now a vacation rental loved by guests.