Podcast Summary: U.S. Strike on Iran IMMINENT? | EYES ON GEOPOLITICS

The Team House – Eyes on Geopolitics
Date: February 2, 2026
Host: Dimitri ‘Dee’ Kontakos
Guests: Andy Milburn, Mick Mulroy

Main Theme & Episode Overview

This episode of Eyes On Geopolitics, hosted by Dimitri Kontakos with guests Andy Milburn and Mick Mulroy, deeply explores the mounting U.S. military buildup in the Gulf and Mediterranean and the likelihood of imminent military action against Iran. The discussion ranges from on-the-ground assessments of Iranian capabilities to diplomatic maneuvering, the viability and risks of regime change, regional power dynamics, and the implications for Congress and U.S. allies. The panel weighs potential offramps, including renewed nuclear talks, Turkey’s unique diplomatic positioning, and the consequences of an attack for global stability.

Key Topics & Insights

1. U.S. Military Build-Up and Strategic Posture

[02:51 – 07:46]

• Massive Presence: Multiple aircraft carrier strike groups and destroyers in the region suggest military action may be forthcoming.
  • “Every time I turn around, there’s another destroyer. ... So we're definitely headed toward something.” – Mick Mulroy [02:55]
• Potential U.S. Objectives:
  • Further degrade Iran’s nuclear program.
  • Potential regime change (deemed very difficult, unlikely through airstrikes alone).
  • Support for internal Iranian protesters viewed as the more credible path to regime change.

2. Diplomatic Maneuvering and Negotiations

[07:46 – 14:04]

• Diplomatic efforts have increased and Turkey is emerging as a mediator, with President Trump portraying Erdogan as a potential problem-solver.

• Iran is tough on ballistic missile concessions, but may budge on proxy activity.

  • “The third point, reduction of the ballistic missile capability, I can't see them compromising at all, can you, Mick?” – Andy Milburn [14:03]

• Turkish involvement serves both regional ambitions and domestic political optics for Erdogan.

3. Iranian Internal Dynamics & Regime Stability

[08:03, 15:56 – 19:28]

• Protests in Iran are larger and more brutally suppressed than in past years, possibly exploited to rally national unity.
• Series of unexplained explosions across Iran (officially attributed to gas leaks, but panelists suspect sabotage).
  • “Just by statistics, it’s likely not all gas leaks. ... creates a situation where the regime’s scrambling.” – Mick Mulroy [15:56]
  • “The Iranian regime’s claims that these are gas leaks...it seemed pretty ridiculous.” – Andy Milburn [18:05]

4. Prospects & Risks of Regime Change

[07:46–08:03, 19:28–25:16]

• Extremely Unlikely: Iran’s geography, population, and regime power centers make regime change via foreign intervention nearly impossible.

• “There’s simply no way to get all the leaders out...designed to sustain the regime’s primary purpose.” – Mick Mulroy [05:09]

• Decapitating the regime (e.g., targeting the Supreme Leader) would have unpredictable, potentially destabilizing consequences.

  • “Going after...the head of the state is a big deal. ... you don't know what comes next.” – Andy Milburn [24:47]
  • “He’s 86 years old. Like, you may just need to just wait.” – Mick Mulroy [25:16]

5. Regional Power Play: The Role of Turkey & Saudi Arabia

[26:25 – 32:34]

• Turkey: Pursuing mediator status to boost regional and global standing.
  • “For Erdogan to be seen as a major statesman...is a huge deal.” – Andy Milburn [27:39]
  • “They like to be viewed as...leaders in the Muslim world.” – Mick Mulroy [26:59]
• Saudi Arabia: Publicly ambiguous, some internal factions reportedly suggest that credibility for U.S. demands a strike if a build-up has occurred, despite official reticence.
• U.S. is denied use of neighboring airspaces including by Saudi, Turkey, and Qatar (despite Qatar’s enhanced major non-NATO ally status).

6. Military Scenarios and Possible Outcomes

[32:34 – 38:07]

• Most Likely Path: Limited strikes to degrade Iran’s nuclear and ballistic missile capabilities (“mowing the grass”).
  • “Most practical course of action...would seem to be to go after the nuclear facilities, continue to degrade them and also to degrade Iranian inventory of ballistic missiles.” – Andy Milburn [34:07]
• Reactivity: Actions like mining the Strait of Hormuz or proxy attacks remain serious threats to regional stability.
• Blockade: Discussed, but recognized as risky and not entirely effective.

7. Congress and the U.S. War Powers Debate

[38:38 – 46:34]

• War Powers Act: Practical check on presidential military power has eroded; Congress rarely asserts itself unless political interests are at stake.
  • “The intent of the War Powers Act was to rebalance the Constitution ... but it’s become a political football.” – Andy Milburn [40:08]
• Endless expansions and lack of revision on Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) enable ongoing military engagements without new debate.
• The panel reflects on how the volunteer military reduces national focus and oversight on war.

8. Loyalty and Policy in Syria & Unexpected Outcomes

[46:34 – 51:30]

• Ongoing SDF vs. Syrian government tensions; Turkey’s role remains significant.
• Importance of standing by effective allies (e.g., SDF in anti-ISIS fight).
  • “We turned our back ... we haven’t been very good at standing by the groups who don’t represent foreign sovereign countries but have done the lion’s share of the fighting against our enemies.” – Andy Milburn [49:21]

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On U.S. Intentions & Risks:
  • “Trying to take out the regime in Iran is kind of crazy, is batshit insane to me.” – Dimitri Kontakos [22:29]
• On Military Action vs. Diplomacy:
  • “If diplomacy can't resolve this, some form of military action seems almost inevitable given the scale of preparation.” – Mick Mulroy [05:59]
• On Regional Mediation:
  • “Turkey would like to be seen as being the go-to negotiator...and Erdogan likes that, makes him feel his chops.” – Andy Milburn [28:10]
• On the Congressional Role:
  • “It looks like they’re just not going to do their constitutional role, Congress.” – Mick Mulroy [43:43]
• On Abandoning Allies:
  • “Historically, we haven’t been very good at standing by the groups who don’t represent foreign sovereign countries but have done the lion’s share of the fighting against our enemies.” – Andy Milburn [49:21]

Timestamps for Key Segments

| Timestamp | Topic | |:-------------:|:----------| | 02:36–05:09 | U.S. military build-up and strategic options for Iran | | 07:46–14:04 | Diplomatic avenues, Turkey’s mediation, and Iran’s negotiation stances | | 15:56–19:28 | Recent sabotage/explosions in Iran, internal instability | | 19:28–25:16 | Regime change feasibility, consequences of actions, succession in Iran | | 26:25–32:34 | Turkey’s incentives, Saudi and regional allies’ positioning | | 32:52–38:07 | Likely military courses of action, operational secrecy, and triggers | | 38:38–46:34 | Congressional (in)action, erosion of War Powers Act authority | | 46:34–51:30 | Syria update, partner loyalty, SDF’s role and U.S. policy failures |

Conclusion & Takeaways

The episode delivers a nuanced, insider’s view of the rapidly evolving U.S.–Iran standoff, emphasizing the limits of military power in effecting regime change, the complexity of regional diplomacy with actors like Turkey and Saudi Arabia, and long-term issues in U.S. military policy oversight. The consensus is that if negotiations fail, targeted military action is likely—but almost certainly limited to degrading Iran's military programs rather than full-scale regime change. U.S. credibility, regional stability, and the fate of internal uprisings in Iran hinge on decisions made in the coming weeks.

Further Reading and Resources:

• Andy Milburn’s War on the Rocks article (link in the episode description)
• Mick Mulroy’s new podcast “The Pub and the Porch”
• Information about the upcoming Montana Intelligence Summit

For the most up-to-date analysis and to support the show, check show notes for links and additional resources.