Mick Mulroy (4:37)

I did work at the dod, started as a private, ended up, you know, with a policy job. So I'd start with this to say we can get into all that. I'd start with this. This idea that you can't question the policy decisions of an administration or you're somehow attacking the military and not being patriotic. It's not only completely untrue, in fact, I'd say it's the opposite. As long as your complaints are valid. The U.S. military Uniform Military doesn't make policy. So it's not their decision to go to war. It's the civilian policymakers that are either politically elected or politically appointed that are making the decisions. And then, and then the other part to that is most of the people that are now deciding that it's unpatriotic to criticize the political decisions that brought people to war, made their political mark, criticizing the political decisions that brought us to war for the last 20 years. So not only is it not true, it's completely hypocritical, which is one of the things that just, I would rather just disagree with somebody or somebody just not, you know, be good person but not be hypocritical. For some reason that just drives me great. Like, so I think we should all acknowledge that you can, you can disagree with your political leadership and still fully support the men and women in uniform, which I'm sure everybody on this podcast does. And I'm one, you know, I guess I'm on the right side of this podcast. I'm one that supported the, you know, the nuclear bombings or the bombings, the nuclear facilities back in 12 day war. I support the military objectives of this war. I just think we're making a lot of mistakes when it comes to how we're presenting it. And I bring that up mostly because I want us to be successful. I want the US to be successful at the end of this. I want history to judge that this was strategic success by the United States because I think that's, that's where I am. So the criticism, if any, if it's taken that way, is so that we don't come out as a strategic failure in this endeavor. And the first thing is to, you know, even though your mom told you this, honestly, the best policy is to be upfront with what's happening and what's not happening. It's all going to come out. It's all going to come out. We all know it. Historians are going to read the declassified a description of what we did and what we didn't do, what the enemy did and what the enemy didn't do. It's all going to come out. So you can have your five minutes of your world, which is already being eroded. And D already mentioned all of the media that's coming out and it's being eroded inside of the administration of the vice president level. So if we didn't reduce their ballistic missile and suicide drones as much as we're saying we need to fix it, we just need to say It. And if they did a lot of damage to our bases, we need to say it. It doesn't mean that we're losing necessarily. It doesn't mean we're going to lose whatever the definition of that is. But if you. Once you stop telling the truth, people are going to completely dismiss you and they're just going to assume anything you do say after that is just, you know, not accurate. So I would start with, let's just go with honesty is the best policy. I know that's not really what politicians do. I think not only is that good, just ethically, but ultimately it's going to be good politically. And to the extent that we need to review how we're doing, that's important because it's not only important to capture what happened, but we're about to go into, we think, a new round of kinetic activity. We're about to start the air war again. Right. So if you want people to listen to, okay, now we've depleted this strategic asset to that, you're going to have to be totally earnest with your numbers. And now we're also hearing, in addition to what Dee said, that the Air Force wasn't completely destroyed, which I've been saying over and over again, but apparently that's not the case because I obviously don't have access to classified information. I'm just going with media reports. So I'd start with that. I know we're going to get into, you know, what's going to happen next and all that, but I think since D, you kicked it off talking about those really important issues, I'll. I'll stop there and throw it to my. My friends here.

Dee (9:12)

Who wants it? Who wants it? Mud wrestle. You want me to get the ky? I'll get it right now.

Mick Mulroy (9:18)

You have a different definition of mud wrestle than I do.

Podcast Host Intro (9:20)

All right, let me.

Mark Polymeropoulos (9:21)

Let me just take a quick. That was gross. My stomach just flipped over.

Jonathan Hackett (9:26)

What do you call it? Non compliant boarding.

Mark Polymeropoulos (9:28)

Although I did. Jonathan is wearing kind of like this V neck. V neck shirt. So it's kind of sexy there. But, you know, Nick almost spit out his coffee. All right, I'm going to translate. So first of all, Mick, I really enjoyed what you said right there. I'm going to translate Mick talk into angry Greek talk in honor of DNI's heritage and who we are. No, on a serious. I mean, so I agree with all that. And you can then translate that into, our Secretary of defense is full of shit. His testimony in front of the Hill was obnoxious. It was irritating. I think he was lying and it was insulting because exactly what Mick said, questioning people's patriotism who are saying, hey, what's going on with the war is absolutely bullshit and that's un American. And Mick, you said it perfectly because the entire administration has been lambasting the never ending wars of Iraq and Afghanistan. And so now we're not allowed as commentators just questioning what's happening. And so that's angry Greek translation. I cannot imagine a less capable, less competent, more irritating Secretary of Defense I've ever seen in my lifetime. And I would imagine, and you guys don't have to agree or not or publicly, but I would imagine the uniform military, especially at the senior levels, feels the same way. Maybe not the more junior folks, maybe not the enlisted who likes the idea of a leader being able to bench 315, but come on now. And I do think there's a notion of this, as I was watching this, I've turned it off because I do find it insulting. And you guys are going to laugh when I say this, but know, so I'm a critic of the Trump administration, worked for the agency for 26 years and went to some really kind of funky places. Look, I'm a patriot. I fly the American flag outside my house. I drive a pickup truck and I listen to country music and I have guns. Yet somehow, like I'm the. I'm not a patriot. I mean, I find that absolutely insulting. In particular, if you have a brain on your head and you realize that, you know, hey, maybe the United States overstretched over the g wat over Iraq and Afghanistan, it's okay now to question if this is going to turn into some never ending commitment. So let me just throw that out there. Anyway, Mick, I thought what you said was great. I just wanted to give a little spice. But let me just raise a couple other points for discussion because it does have to do with the notion of can we believe what the government says? I sound like a conspiracy theorist. But when DoD is putting out things such as the price tag of this war, and that's from the congressional testimony is 25 billion, nobody believes that that was met with eye rolls. There's just no way it's that low. Again, that's not necessary to do that. Just tell the truth when you have, you know, the administration coming out. And this is something that we definitely have to talk about because both Mick and Jonathan are veritable legal wizards or legal beagles, have Talked about the 60 day time limit coming up on the War Powers Resolution. Well, it came up and we got some concern from the Republican members of Congress. I'm concerned. This is, this is. And by the way. And then we went on vacation for a week. So then they went home. They're not gonna do anything. So we blew past that. And then literally Trump said, well, if there's a ceasefire, the clock stops ticking.

Dee (12:53)

I remember saying that that's what his fucking logic was gonna be, because I'm a scumbag from New York too. That's what my logic would be like, oh, we have a ceasefire. The 60 days is paused.

Mark Polymeropoulos (13:03)

But as both Jonathan and Mick have pointed out, I didn't know this, but a blockade is an act of war according to the United nations. Plus we have 50,000 troops in the region who probably are at a trigger's edge right now. Especially as Mick said, that it looks like we might resume military activity anyway. So there's that. And then the final piece just to raise is. And this goes to a different conflict, is. But the US Congress and the administration agreed to allocate $400 million to Ukraine for assistance. And they didn't do it. They literally broke the law until the Hill called them on it and then they just released it. And so I am at a point in which. And I sound like some kind of campus protester, even though I'm not. As I said, I'm a patriot and very centrist, but I don't trust anything that comes out of this government. And it's terrible to say now, Dee, we're talking kind of in the Eyes Only team room or the Green Room. Sorry, before that. Yeah. Maybe we never should trust the government on anything. But I think this is pretty, pretty significant in that stuff that's coming out from dod. You do have to kind of meet with a raised eyebrow. And Mick noted that piece. I don't know if it's Axios or New York Times or Washington Post or the Journal saying that JD Vance is not even trusting.

Dee (14:12)

Vice versa.

Mark Polymeropoulos (14:13)

That's coming out of the DoD too. Lots to kind of ponder. But, you know, big picture, I'm a little distrustful of the administration right now. What they're saying about the war.

Jonathan Hackett (14:27)

Yeah. And also with the War Powers Resolution. Very interesting that some representatives and senators think that it's an unconstitutional act to begin with. They've been more and more vocal about that over the past few weeks. First of all, they've rejected a vote on it six times in 60 days, which is a lot. It's a 60 day resolution that has a 90 day extension. So if the administrative wanted to they could actually ask Congress for an extension of 30 days past May 1st. And instead of doing that, they use what we discussed last time, which is justification, just saying there are no hostilities anyway, so why would we even ask for an extension? And also it's actually been over for 18 days. They claim that May 1 was 18 days into the cessation of hostilities. There was actually no need to report to Congress anyway. So it's kind of this concern that maybe there will be this button that they can just continue pressing in the future because there's precedent now that they can say, well, we already stopped fighting yesterday, so that give me 24 more hours. Just kind of like what we used to do when we would have our passports and we had to go get a visa reset so we could be in and out of the country on a certain kind of visa. We'd fly to a third country, get our passport reset, get a new stamp, come back in the country. Very similar logic going on right now where it's like, okay, we just stopped the war today, we'll restart it tomorrow, clock starts back to one. And it seems that Congress, first of all, not only would they not push back on that, second of all, they'd actually pretend there was no need for reporting in the first place because of how they're beginning to justify not needing to vote on this resolution, which in the Green room we were talking about, you know, when the Founding Fathers, who were all mostly in their 20s, actually sitting around coming up with these ideas, brilliant people thinking of ways to stop something exactly like this from happening. And actually in Federalist paper number 10, it talks about the dangers of political parties and how that leads to factionalism. Exactly like we're seeing right now. So even though they were, they were super smart and came up with all these things, they knew that it wasn't perfect. And right now we're seeing kind of what happens when it's not perfect in a war type situation. So it's kind of scary to be living in that time.

Mick Mulroy (16:18)

So, Jonathan, since you're in law school and talking about this right now, it seems like there's two parts to this. So the administration's arguing the 60 day didn't run because of the ceasefire. At the same time, they're arguing the whole thing sounds constitutional, right? It's almost like you got two lines of effort here as far as the administration goes. And then if Congress doesn't actually enforce it, then it basically doesn't exist. They could always cut off funding, right? They could always do that. But Where? Because I don't really know. Like, how has the Supreme Court avoided answering this question definitively all the way till today? I mean, this is the most important thing the government does. Whether you're for the war against the war or for any of the wars against the war. This should be clear. Like, where does Congress's authority start and end, and where does the president as Commander Chief start and end? And how come we haven't had a definitive statement by the Supreme Court saying this is the answer to the question of whether this, you know, 1973 War Powers act is constitutional.

Jonathan Hackett (17:27)

So what we're missing is an injured party or someone with an actual complaint, a human being with a complaint that can bring this up through the appeals process to the Supreme Court. Because the Supreme Court lacks original jurisdiction over a lot of things. In fact, they have almost no original jurisdiction over anything except a very tiny amount of very specific things. And this is not one of those things. So in order for this act, this law, to actually be adjudicated under Marbury v. Madison, which is judicial review, there needs to be a person or interested party that actually contests this at a lower level.

Dee (17:58)

There needs to be a lawsuit, right?

Jonathan Hackett (18:00)

Yes. It has to survive. It has to survive because that's the other problem is maybe there's a. A good claim here, but that claim isn't something that would make it through the appeals process to get actually argued in front of the Supreme Court. And then worse, the Supreme Court actually is the only court that gets to pick what they actually deliberate on. So you could bring up 10 issues in this case, and it makes it all the way to the Supreme Court. Everything's gone through the worst challenges, and now it's there in the Supreme Court's like, you know what? We're only going to argue one of those nine issues or one of those 10 issues, and we're going to kick back the other nine to the lower courts, or we're just going to say, like, we're just going to ignore it in the opinion and not even talk about it, which is actually what they've done in a few emergency docket decisions recently where they've done some procedural stuff that was not actually the main question and then just basically gotten rid of the case. So I think thinking through the Supreme Court method is probably not the most effective way to actually get at this problem. Instead, it's through either new legislation or elections that force out the naysayers or bring in people with different ideas to create kind of a conflict of discussion there. That's that's what we actually need in Congress is not one set of yeses and one set of nays. Instead, we need actual, like, deliberation and discussion and synthesis out of these disagreements, which is something that we're, I think, missing. And that's the most effective way to actually get at the. Answer this question about the War Powers Resolution.

Dee (19:11)

So a functioning Congress is what you're telling me.

Mark Polymeropoulos (19:14)

But just to, Just to be fair, though, I mean, if you look at Kosovo in 99 with Bill Clinton and Tripoli in Libya with Obama, when was that in? What am I missing?

Jonathan Hackett (19:25)

2011.

Mark Polymeropoulos (19:25)

2011. You know, neither of those, you know, Democratic presidents have ignored this as well. I just, I just think that's the idea that. What I find. I never expected Congress to step up here, but it's actually more irritating when Republican members say, well, we're concerned. Well, what does that mean? And then they go off on break for a week, they're gonna do nothing. The idea that somehow Congress is gonna buck the administration on this, I think even from the Republican side, is fanciful, unless maybe if it really does seem to be something drawn out. But at this point, I'm not confident. But on that note, what about the notion of resumption of military activity? I mean, there was the. I thought Admiral Cooper's visit to the USS Tripoli, I think, was pretty significant. We always think about separating signal from noise. Noise is a Trump presser on the tarmac before he jumps on Air Force One and he just blurts shit out and no one has any idea. But I don't know, I thought that was pretty significant. I think also there's been some consultations with the Israelis as well that have gone on. And so what do you guys think? And just let me just kind of caveat this. For the last couple of weeks in the media, I've been saying, look, I really don't think either side wants to resume military the fight. But I'm actually changing my mind on this now. I think Trump's getting frustrated. And while you can make a case that we can outlast the Iranians for kind of on the economic pain front, this is not his shtick. He likes things to be kind of tidy and neat. And so I think there is a chance that there's going to be some kind of strike. So if you guys agree with that, what would it look like? What's the target set? And do you think, is it even going to be something like Kharg island ground forces? What are your thoughts?

Jonathan Hackett (21:16)

Well, first, I think it's Important to frame up what's going on with the politics in the region because where the alliances are today are different than where they were in February before this started. And for example, if you look at who is the foreign minister of Iran calling and then publicizing those calls, those are different targets or bodies than they were before in February. For example, Turkey, Egypt, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Azerbaijan were all called within the last 24 hours by Iran's foreign minister. Saudi Arabia would not have been on that list in February. For example, Azerbaijan 100% not because Azerbaijan is seen as a puppet of Israel by the Iranian regime. There's no way they would have been calling them and publicizing these calls. So there's certainly something going on here on the Iran side trying to probably posture or like search around for some kind of support around their borders because they sense or perhaps are planning something. Same with the United States, with the Emirates withdrawing from opec. I mean, this is a massive change and it's very important to highlight how significant that is because OPEC has since the 1970s been an unlawful monopoly over oil. If, if OPEC countries were corporations, we actually have laws that would ban them from selling oil to us because of their non competitive behavior and colluding on prices. So the fact that the Emirates jumped out of that, they just lost access to this really favorable financial system that they belong to because they're part of the Abraham Accords and they're looking west right now. They're looking at Israel, they're looking at the United States and they're understanding that their position no longer depends on other Gulf states for what's happening inside the Emirates. I think this is kind of a time where the Emirates are seeing themselves kind of growing up in the region and starting to gain a little bit more independence than they have had, especially in the 80s and 90s period when it was dominated by other Gulf states, in particular Saudi Arabia. And I think that you see that starting to rise up now too. And this is definitely.

Mark Polymeropoulos (23:05)

Do you see the Emirates wanting, pushing the Trump administration to resume military activity or no?

Jonathan Hackett (23:10)

Well, for sure. And we just authorized a bunch of foreign military sales, billions of dollars worth of equipment to the Emirates this week, which is a new development that we had not done to any other Gulf partner in the last 60 days. So the fact that the US is doing that right now, very important, significant. And at the timing of it, that funding was released days after the OPEC departure, probably not a coincidence, John, also, is it?

Dee (23:33)

Because also they're trying to angle for a little Bit of like a bridge loan bailout as well.

Spin Quest Disclaimer Voice (23:38)

Right.

Jonathan Hackett (23:38)

They're trying to do a dollar for dinar exchange basically to buoy their economy, which if you think about the sequence of these events, the dollar exchange was announced first, the OPEC departure was announced second, and then the 4 military sales was announced right after that in succession. Right. So there's clearly some economic back and forth between the United States and the Emirates and Israel. The Israel Emirates parts a little bit quieter or harder to see in the noise, but it's certainly there.

Mark Polymeropoulos (24:03)

By the way, Iron Dome and IDF soldiers on the ground in the Emirates.

Jonathan Hackett (24:07)

Yeah, that's a huge. That never has happened. Yeah.

Mick Mulroy (24:12)

So going back to your question mark. So from what I've heard, President Trump was briefed on multiple options, including Karg. Now, that doesn't mean that it's likely to happen. I thought it was kind of like completely off the table, but at least from what I'm being told by journalists who are being told by officials, it is. It was briefed. So that doesn't mean it's going to happen. I think it's more likely that we're going to do resumption of airstrikes. I'm told it's going to be mostly infrastructure targets with the idea that they could cause more pain to the regime as a way to push them toward the US Perspective on the ceasefire and potentially a nuclear agreement. But there's some jostling back and forth. I don't know if that's the right word, but the military obviously has to hit valid military targets. They can't just blow up civilian infrastructure just because it's painful. In fact, it's unlawful. So they're designing the target deck. I'm told that it has direct nexuses to military operations. So it might be power plants, but it's one that has a direct connection to military operations. So it's a valid military target, including bridges as well. And then there are at least talks about trying to hit the more hardline because they're all hardliners, elements within the regime that are completely resistance to any ceasefire and new nuclear agreement. Vahidi, I think, is top of the list and I'm sure he understood. He knows that. Right. So I wouldn't be standing around Vahiti that much. But, you know, and, you know, we'll see. I mean, who would replace them? Jonathan might know, but it really hasn't helped us that much. I mean, some people would argue we just end up with more hardliners than the people we replaced, but they're Valid targets because they're part of the combative chain of command. So I'm not, I'm not against it. I just don't know if it's going to change that much. But, and then this is, at least the way they're messaging, it's going to be very limited, like a very tight duration, a lot of strikes. They've, they've transferred a lot of our precision strike munitions out there to do it. But it's not just what the US does, right, because there's going to be a response by the Iranians, and the Iranians apparently have their target decks. They've been planning this. They've been digging out the, you know, the missile cities that have, you know, at least been damaged, their entry points to be able to respond, likely against the uae. Right. That's probably going to be prime target number one. And it's right there. It's literally right there. For those.

Mark Polymeropoulos (26:59)

Here's the question, if you're sitting at dod, so the only thing that matters on this is, is it going to work? So, you know, will, is this going to be any kind of step that will move the Iranian negotiating position? And I think that's the big question. So it's great. We're going to do this again, beat the shit out of the Iranians. Everyone loves this, but is it going to work? That's the fundamental question. And if you see, if you look at a lot of the Iran experts and, you know, Jonathan, you're one of them, please jump in. You know, the question is, okay, you know, that's all we care about. And so is this just kind of, you know, not performative theater. It's real. But will it have an effect on the negotiations? I think that's the big question. I don't know the answer.

Mick Mulroy (27:39)

That's a good question. You know, if you remember from the beginning I was the advocate to say we go after our military objectives, we decide when it's done, and then we just say it's over. Right. Because the only thing Iran has to do to win is not lose, survive. So if there's still some regime there, they're going to claim they won. And you see what I mean, like, it's, it's, it's almost an impossible task. But for the US Military, they can keep degrading the, all the strategic military assets, they can keep hitting leaders, but it's, it's, I don't see it. I don't see them ever going, you know, no mas. We agree to everything you say and we quit. And we're going to all resign and go home. It's just never going to happen.

Ryan Seacrest (28:20)

So.

Mick Mulroy (28:20)

And it's nothing against, obviously, our efforts because it just doesn't have. I mean, we're not going to put boots on the ground. That's insane. I mean, it's four times the size of Iraq and it's mountainous and it's just never going to happen. And it's already like as popular as a Vietnam War.

Spin Quest Promoter (28:35)

Right.

Mick Mulroy (28:35)

So it's just not going to happen. So we're trying to do all this from the air with the idea that there's going to be some magic target that changes our perspective. I think we could still do it. Like, hey, we've. With honest numbers, we've done this, this, this. We think that was what we wanted to do. If they start racing toward a nuclear weapon, we'll target them again. But we see the cost of this going forward is not worth the squeeze. Now the issue is going to be the Straits or lose. And then, you know, how do we make them open that back up? So that's the big issue.

Dee (29:10)

Do you think a renewed air campaign is really going to help open up the Straits to regular traffic that it did on February 27th?

Mick Mulroy (29:18)

I think if we could have done that, we'd have done it already.

Dee (29:20)

Right.

Mark Polymeropoulos (29:22)

Jonathan, is this going to work? Is there any kind of military activity, is there any military option that's going to force the Iranians to capitulate?

Jonathan Hackett (29:29)

I think a military option is a necessary element of a larger strategy to be successful, but it's not going to be sufficient by itself to actually achieve the end state we're looking for. And if the US's end state is to create lost oil revenue that forces Iran to yield, that's not going to happen. Right now. Iran actually has so much oil produced that they're scrambling to find areas to store it because they're actually at overproduction levels right now. And they have these vessels that are floating out in the ocean or in the sea that they're trying to scramble together to put more oil into it because they have so much production right now. China is absolutely purchasing oil. Currently. They had purchased it in advance because that's how oil is paid for, through futures contracts that they expect at a future date the oil will cost this much and they pay for it. China gets it at a slight discount, but it's not that much. Right now, Iranian oil is something like 90 to $110 per barrel, which is a lot. I mean, that money is going directly to Fund the regime. So that goal, if that's our goal, is to make them yield to economic pressure. It's not working. At least it's neutral. Maybe it's not negative, but it's neutral. Right. So if we're looking at the blockade on its own as an act of war and a military option. We've hit 48 vessels in 20 days. And we. I have not seen us do any opposed or non compliant boardings in those 48 vessels. Those have all been compliant, or at least they have listened to what we've instructed them to do. Either turn around, been escorted, or something like this to stop going to where they're going. So we haven't actually had any combat operations on vessels yet. 48 of them in 20 days. That's around two per day, right? Well, slightly more than that, two per day. So that's not stopping anything because their oil still flowing, it's still moving. Lots of ship to ship transfers happening off in the 7th Fleet AOR, so like off the coast of Malaysia, Straits of Malacca, a lot of Iranian oil going on to other vessels that are then making their way to China and doing exactly what they were doing before the war. So that's all to say that the military instrument could work if it was layered with other instruments. And I always wave my hands about this. That grand strategy has other components besides the military. It has a diplomatic component that's typically done in secret, not advertise what's happening on that diplomatic channel. Because the success of diplomacy largely has to do with secrecy, because both sides are not embarrassed in the process of showing what they're willing to concede. Showing to their own publics what they're willing to concede. This is the problem. And it seems the US is not interested in doing that right now. It seems Iran might be, especially with all these phone calls they're making, but not saying what the phone calls are about. That's clearly them trying to use this old lever that other countries are traditionally aware of. But there's also the economic component, which we've always said sanctions aim to achieve certain behavioral changes inside of a country. They have not really done that in authoritarian systems like Iran, for example. They've had effects, but not the effects that we wished for at the very beginning. And so if you want to have that economic stick, you need also an economic carrot for other members of the economy to stop combining with the bad actors in the economy. That can look like a lot of different things. None of those things are being approached right now. So kind of a long answer to your question, I don't think the military alone is going to achieve a positive outcome for what the US is trying to do there.

Mick Mulroy (32:33)

So, Jonathan, question then. So how are they getting around the blockade? Are they just hugging their territorial waters or what is it that's preventing the US from stopping all of the ships? Is it just big ocean? You know, we can't be everywhere. I mean, we're at war with them, so why wouldn't we just stop them in their own territorial waters if we could?

Jonathan Hackett (32:53)

Right, so we have three carrier strike groups. Yeah, we've got two carrier strike groups on the eastern part of 5th Fleet, then one carrier strike group in 6th Fleet, which is the Mediterranean Sea, which so that means they can't connect their forces together easily.

CIDP Thrive Team Member (33:04)

So that means really, life with CIDP can be tough. But the Thrive Team, a specialized squad of experts, helps people living with CIDP make more room in their lives for joy.

Commercial Announcer (33:15)

Watch Rare well Done, an all new reality series. Rare well Done offers help and hope to people across the country who live with the rare disease CIDP. Watch the latest episode now exclusively on rarewelldone.com

Ryan Seacrest (33:35)

hey, it's Ryan Seacrest For Albertsons and Safeway. Spring is a time to give yourself a refresh. So spend time on self rejuvenation, Shop in store and online for great savings on all your favorite personal care Items. Now through May 26th. Earn four times points when you shop participating items like Pantene Shampoo, Crest Toothpaste, Tampax Radiant Native Shampoo and Secret Yellow Deodorant. Then redeem points for discounts on future purchases of groceries or fuel. Offer ends May 26th. Restrictions apply. Offers may vary. Visit albertsons or safeway.com for more details.

Spin Quest Promoter (34:07)

Forget everything you had planned for this weekend because you are sitting on your couch and winning from the comfort of your own home. I'm here with Spin Club where you can play hundreds of slot games, all the table games you love and you could even win real cash prizes. New users $30 coin packs are on sale for 10@spinquest.com Spin Quest is a

Spin Quest Disclaimer Voice (34:29)

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

Jonathan Hackett (34:36)

Effectively got two carrier strike groups and about 12 naval ships that can actually do interceptions with opposed or non compliant boarding problems, which is what you have to always plan for. You always plan for the worst when you approach this unknown vessel, right? So 12 ships is not a lot. Especially when you're talking about hundreds of vessels, some of which were already outside the straits before the war Started, So we actually don't know where they were. You remember the MH360 or whatever, the Malaysian Airlines crash that happened back in 2015? We never found where that aircraft went down in the Pacific Ocean, largely because the Pacific Ocean is gigantic. So they're taking advantage. Exactly. As you mentioned, it's just this huge gapped space that if you have your transponder off, if you're using a little bit of operational security, you know, no Iridium phone, no transponder, no direct to cell stuff, none of that. You're just, you have a compass, a physical compass, and you're just using that and the stars, which is what they have always been doing, to navigate east and northeast. You're going to make it to that rally point that you had planned in advance with coordinates that you had planned in advance. No electronics. You show up, basically do a brush pass with your oil, transfer it off. One vessel empties, one fills up. Nobody knows where it happened, when it happened, until that vessel shows up off the coast of Hong Kong and is ready to go on load. And this is happening every day, Many vessels. And again, they were doing this way before February. This has been something they've been doing since 2007, when we first sanctioned their oil system. So they've had a lot of time to develop with a lot of different pressures of different. Because each administration comes in with different packages of sanctions and they try different things and the regime has been able to adapt to that almost like antibodies or white blood cells. They've been able to actually survive these white blood cells coming in. So now you have this kind of mutated regime that's super effective at avoiding any of these sanction related issues that we have any of these tools we have to use, because we have a kind of limited number of tools to use. And they know what they are. They say, oh, we know that U.S. sanctions by treasury say Company X LLC at this address. Well, we'll just make Company Y LLC at a different address. And then it will take six months for the US government to catch up and make a new sanction against the exact same company that just changes name and address. You know, it's like they know these very simple tools to get around this stuff. Again, we're a democracy. They're not. It's faster for them to do this stuff than it is for us.

Mark Polymeropoulos (36:52)

Hey guys, a question. There was a press piece yesterday that got some attention and lots of debate. And this is an issue. Dee's going to love this because we started talking about Israel and Israeli influence. But there was a. Someone from. I think his name is Nick Stewart from the Freedom of Defense of Democracies is joining the peace talks as an aide, as an advisor to the US Side. I think he served in the first Trump administration. Mick, I don't know if you know Nick Stewart, but is an FDD guy. And so, you know, there's a lot of people who really think that that organization, that think tank, has a lot of undue influence. Clearly they have the ear of the administration. But have you guys followed this at all? What are your thoughts on that? Because one of the things that I thought was interesting is we've all criticized the administration for not listening to any Iran experts. Well, they're bringing in an Iran expert. We might not like the Iran expert they're bringing in, but at least they're actually bringing in someone who can help Kushner and Witkoff, who are completely the most clueless envoys in the history of US Diplomacy. So have you guys followed that at all?

Mick Mulroy (37:57)

I mean, to the extent that, I mean, traditionally you see think tanks, especially the ones in D.C. when your party has the White House, they empty out those think tanks and they go work and they become the dazz and the DASD's and all that. And then when your party's not, you go back to the think tanks. Right? So, which is not bad. I mean, because that means, like, the people that make policy kind of grow up in that system, right? They start as a junior person and they move up. And I also go to the Hill and are on the Foreign Relations Committee and stuff. So think tanks, Hill staffers. And so it does create a pool of people who are very seasoned and smart on every issue. You might disagree with their stance on it, but that's how it generally works. And we haven't seen it. Like, we've even seen the Pentagon, at least the leadership of the Pentagon, like, not even allowed fellows, you know, military fellows to go to these think tanks. And that's like, this has historically been part of our policy system for both sides. So the fact that they're using some. And of course it's going to be, you know, somebody from their political inkling that's common is a good thing. And I don't know, Nick, but it's a good thing that they are. I would hope they would use more of these folks and think tanks, potentially even ones that are.

Dee (39:19)

Yeah, but this is like fdd. I'm just reading a little bit as you guys are talking. It's like, come on, bro, come on brothers, it's like, what are we doing? I mean, they're straight up Israeli shills. Like they, they're looked at as part of the Israeli lobbying like effort into America, which they do an incredible job of, frankly. And kudos to them, I guess. Extremely hard line in terms when it comes to Iran too. It's like getting another crazy uncle from the IRGC to come and come and join us at the negotiation table. It's going to go great.

Mark Polymeropoulos (39:53)

We're really going to get d. I agree with you. And FDD is extremely pro Israel and there's, you know, and people are very exercised on social media about this development. But I think the reason why I wanted to raise it because I think, you know, someone like myself who's been really critical that these guys don't listen to anybody. Well, now they're bringing in an expert. So now we're going to be critical again. It's kind of funny. So I. Mick, I think it's good, I think it's good that I think

Dee (40:16)

they need to see the writing on the wall and see the reality of what's going on. And if you're really serious about making a deal, you're going to have to give up some concessions because we fucking broke it and we're going to have to buy it at some point. February 27, the Straight of the Hormuz was operating fine. Gas was cheap. Spirit Airlines was still in business. Your summer travel this year is not going to be as expensive, it wasn't going to be as expensive as it is going to be now. So, like there's real effects and like we're barely feeling it in America, frankly, you know, a West coast, maybe a little bit more in terms of gas prices. But, you know, we're seeing the effects on it. And yeah, like the fake stock market can keep going up. At some point that bottom is going to fall out as well if this keeps going. So I don't know if bringing in another hardliner who's not going to listen to reason is exactly a smart move. I think we need to have grownups in the room that are going to make real deal. Just look at what the writing is on the wall. Like just look at what the reality of the situation is and how we fucked it up so badly.

Mark Polymeropoulos (41:16)

But that's never going to happen. This is the Trump administration and it's

Dee (41:18)

never going to happen. Then we're still going to have this issue.

Mark Polymeropoulos (41:21)

But you can't, you're not going to get bringing anyone with anything other than the same Ideal.

Dee (41:25)

So like our, everything's going to go up. More money, inflation is going to go up and we're going to feel it at home. Our partners in the Gulf are going to feel it even more. I think Saudi Arabia's economy is going to retract by 8% as well as like UAE too. Like all the Gulf countries are getting smoked right now. So Wolf, you know, which means they're going to stop buying our weapons. Like there's going to be reverberations to this. And Iran, frankly, I remember me and Mick were talking about it before it went popped off where like Iran's was at its weakest it's ever been right now as pretty as strong as they're ever going to get because they're squeezing the straight at Hormuz and the money's stop, it's, the money has stopped flowing and that's just the reality of it.

Jonathan Hackett (42:07)

So unless you get charging up to $2 million per transit per ship through the straits up to as a ceiling. But the interesting thing on that is the way they're receiving that money is through things like default swaps in kind payments, bartering like grain for oil. They're using a lot of crypto and these like specialized payment offset structures are really fascinatingly complex and they're getting money with that. Now default doesn't matter. So that's actually what caused the 2007 crash in the United States. Yeah, they're basically paying for insured transactions of transactions, if you want to think of it that way. Right. So if they don't get their oil or they don't get their money, they actually get paid a secondary payment because of the way this thing is structured. So they're going to get their money no matter what and they're getting it in bank accounts outside of Iran. So they're getting money. So even if the US Stops Iran from exporting oil, Iran is still benefiting because like you said, the straits have been closed since February 27th, really the 28th. So our closure of the straits is actually enriching Iran, which is I think very important for people to like connect these two dots together.

Mark Polymeropoulos (43:12)

Hey, can we, can we. I'm sorry, go ahead.

Mick Mulroy (43:14)

Nick, just one quick point on your question mark. Like even if you agree with the policy objectives of the administration, it's still important to have people who have that expertise because you need somebody in the room to say, hey, you know, Vahidi is probably the most hardline person we could have had. Right. Like they might not even know that I'm not saying they're. But, but there's like detailed stuff on Iran that you need somebody in the room to actually just answer the question, you know, like, is this going to matter? Like, is the regime, Is, is financial, economic hardship for the regime going to turn them at all? Even if you want him to turn, even if you agree with the policy, you have to have somebody that actually has a knowledge base to go, no, they're still going to be drinking Johnnie Walker Black, right, while the other people are outside their palace are starving to death. I mean, that's the way regimes work, right? I'm not saying that's truth, but you need somebody to be able to know that so that if you try to go down a policy route that you have at least somebody in the room that can tell you whether it's going to work.

Mark Polymeropoulos (44:14)

Even if the first time around, this is Iranian negotiating behavior, this is the history of how they do things, et cetera, et cetera. I mean, I just think Kushner and Wyckoff are just complete, utter boobs and I can't even imagine that they're involved in this thing after they fouled up Ukraine, screwed up the whole Gaza thing as well. I mean, they got a ceasefire deal, nothing else. And so I do think I agree with you, it's probably a good thing. But let me one thing that, yeah,

Dee (44:38)

Palestinian citizens are still getting smoked, by the way, nine year old girls and the like. Just, I want that for the record.

Mark Polymeropoulos (44:45)

Thanks. Thanks. D. No problem.

Dee (44:46)

My pleasure.

Mark Polymeropoulos (44:47)

So if we're under the assumption, and I think we probably agree that it's a, it's a, I don't know if it's a likelihood, a strong possibility that there is going to be renewed military action. Let's talk about Iranian response, because one of the things that I think that, that we have not seen is actually the true nature of Iranian asymmetric warfare, perhaps, obviously we saw them using drones, perhaps there's been cyber activity we don't know about, but I don't think they seem to have turned out up their terrorist apparatus. Yes, globally. So what is, what are some of the things you all are looking for? If, and again, if any. Because if we do these kind of infrastructure strikes, I think that is an escalation on the US part. And so how do, how do the Iranians reciprocate? Escalate? What do they do? What are some of the things that we haven't seen yet that are kind of in your, that you're thinking about?

Jonathan Hackett (45:38)

So there's something new going on In Lebanon right now.

Mick Mulroy (45:40)

Yeah, go.

Jonathan Hackett (45:41)

Yeah. So in Lebanon, this is the place to look is kind of their, their test bed for stuff before they it large scale or at least to attribute to the regime. So right now I think it was yesterday Hezbollah first used a 15 kilometer fiber optic cable attached to a drone.

Mark Polymeropoulos (45:55)

Yes, FPG drone.

Jonathan Hackett (45:57)

Yep, exactly. So that's a new development for Hezbollah, not a new development in warfare. They've been using that in Ukraine. But the fact that it's now happening in Lebanon indicates to me that someone's testing this out to see how does this work against a similar type of adversary that would be used against the United States. Because Israel and the US share intelligence, they share air defense information and a lot of other things. So they're probably testing it on the Israelis first to see what is the reaction to this, how do they counter it, what's what to expect. Then when the US comes closer to the regime's shoreline, the regime will probably begin using this. 15km is a long way. Right.

Mark Polymeropoulos (46:29)

Helicopter that almost got hit. There was a, there was a, this is a thing as a X post of it was pretty scary. And I think some Israeli IDF soldiers have been killed recently with, from the FPV drones. That's some scary shit right there.

Jonathan Hackett (46:39)

Yeah, a 19 year old soldier was just killed with one and Hezbollah released a really sleek propaganda video of it showing how it happened. I mean that, that does put fear into the soldiers. I mean that's. Morale is a component of warfare. Information is a domain of warfare. And Hezbollah and Iran are very good at using information as a domain of warfare. And I think as you mentioned, even if we haven't seen cyber attacks happening publicly, first of all, they're already happening. Yes, they're happening without being publicized because it doesn't look good if we publicize it's happening to us. Second of all, they have certain cyber tools that are extremely advanced. They are a state actor, a state adversary with a lot of very sophisticated things that zero day technology. The moment you use it, it's no longer as effective. But if you wait to the right moment to use it, it is extremely effective. And they've already shown since 2009 that they've been able to hit targets inside the United States. They took down the entire financial system of the state of Georgia in the United States. Once they did that with two guys, they've done some other things that were very over the top. And as Mickey mentioned, I wrote a book about this. But they're very advanced in a way that we sometimes don't respect enough. You have to respect your enemy to be able to defeat them. Well, because you have to know exactly how are they willing to use this thing, how far are they willing to go? And we can't look at them and be like, oh, they're just these guys running around with sticks and shouting and like, maybe that's true. But if they're really good at using those sticks and really good at shouting, I need to respect that fact and figure out a way to stop it from harming us. Right. Because it can harm us. Especially in a democracy where people here affect what happens over there because of how they view things at home. Right. And on the military front kinetically. We haven't seen them using artillery, direct fire weapons. We haven't seen them doing any kind of squad, battalion or division level operations yet any of these things. That 40% of their military forces are designed around those capabilities. We haven't seen them yet. The last time we saw Those used was 2016 in Syria when they fought against ISIS and defeated large, large pockets of ISIS fighters in northern and northwestern Syria using battalion sized elements partnered up with Syrian partner forces. And the National Defense Forces, which was their surrogate force inside of Syria, that was a non state force. So we've seen them do that about 10 years ago. A lot of the veterans from that time are now mid level field grade officers in the IRGC ground forces who are capable and possibly ready to use these tactics against the United States, especially against our partners. If you're looking at Iraq, you know we have the Iraqi forces that we train, counterterrorism forces and regular forces that look a lot like the way that fighters fight in Syria. So there's the PMF that has over 200,000 fighters that are on Iran's side that have not really engaged very much in a meaningful way against us. They've done a couple of things, especially Katab, Hezbollah, but most of them have not really awakened yet, so to say. So there's a lot of forces at rest in the area that Iran has not pressed the go button on yet. And I'm sure the Pentagon planners are aware of this obviously, but this is just something for the public to be looking at that Iran has really actually held back a lot. They've been using mostly a standoff strategy. So is the US but once one side shifts to a different strategy, a more stand in strategy, you're going to see the other side respond to that.

Mick Mulroy (49:44)

So I mean, I know you don't know exactly, but if we're shifting from almost Completely military targets to civilian infrastructure, at least the ones that we can hit, because they have some nexus. Do you think the regime would then take those previously unused options that you just described and do them? Could we see direct kind of terrorist attacks in the United States based on the fact that we destroyed a bunch of bridges and hit? I think there's like three major power plants that would really put the country into darkness. And of course these power plants, I mean everybody understands like that's also water purification, hospital, respirators. I mean, this is, this is when you, when you take the power out of any modern country, you're killing a lot of people. Yeah, a lot of civilians. Right. So again, I don't expect you to know for sure. Do you think that would be to the level where they're going to take some extraordinary steps knowing that it's going to escalate this, but they'll view this as we escalated at first, therefore they're going down that.

Jonathan Hackett (50:56)

Yeah. And actually they've done this before. They've demonstrated that this is the way that they kind of respond to escalations. For example, 2012, when Israel started assassinating nuclear scientists inside and outside of Iran, there was a very measured escalation on the Iranian side attacking Israeli diplomats using the exact same weapon style that Israel used almost to telegraph. Without saying that this is in response to what you did rather than some new thing. They've also done it to the United States in 2020, January when we killed Soleimani. Then Iran struck Al Assad air base. And the way that they did these things was very telegraphed to kind of look tit for tat. The question is, are they going to still operate with that? Because all the people that made those decisions to behave that way are dead now. So we're left with new decision makers and new thinkers. And even the ones that have survived were not the ones that were in those positions previously. You know, Vahidi is a notorious hardliner who's very much against any kind of capitulation at all. He may see this as an opportunity to prove that they have some strength. There's actually an interesting statement by a field grade IRGC commander in the western part of the country, which is a very important Iraqi border area, mentioning that the US has not used ground forces yet and Iran invites them to use them because the Iranian forces have not shown what they're capable of yet. And I think that's true because as we were mentioning, like 40 to 60% of their forces have not even been used yet because they're ground forces. So the way they use them in 1980-88 was not in a way that we would like, and that is human waves, suicide missions, basically taking the whole building down with them if they're going down. So I'd be very concerned about how they do escalate or if cooler heads will prevail at the Supreme National Security Council, which is where some of the quote, unquote moderates are at. They're not really moderate, but relatively speaking to Vahidi, it depends on who is actually holding the levers right now in Iran. And I think the Iranian government doesn't even know who actually is making those decisions right now.

Mark Polymeropoulos (52:48)

But on this discussion now, you know, let's pretend that we were sitting around the National Security Council. I mean, I think the argument would be, well, okay, this doesn't seem like the right course of action in terms of the US Escalating for infrastructure strikes. Everything we've just talked about does not suggest it's going to be effective. It could, the response could be quite significant. Yet it seems like we're going to, I mean, so, you know, it still seems like we're going down this path. Does this say that there is no NSC process, which seems possibly to be the case, or who is, who has the, who is the influential member and the national security team who would argue for such a thing? And presumably that would be Pete Hagseth, the Secretary of Defense. But again, there is going to be a sit room meeting at the Principals Committee level with probably Ratcliffe, Kaine, Hegseth and Rubio amongst just a couple others who's arguing for doing this. Because again, this is just four of us sitting around kind of jawing about this. But we're smart enough in the national security sphere to kind of put those cautionary flags up. But I don't know if anyone's going to have this conversation with the President.

Mick Mulroy (54:04)

Good question. I mean, this is, I mean, what we're doing right now is very similar to what I experienced when I was over at the nsc. It's just conversations. We're all going toward a specific end. We want US Policy to succeed, but we go down several routes and oftentimes it's the intelligence community to that everybody turns to and says, well, is that going to work? Yeah, they're not supposed to be policy, but they're also supposed to go, nah, it's not going to work. Why? And then they tell you, you know, and then you go, okay, let's go, let's go. This path instead of that path. Because. And then by the time it gets to the principals level, a lot of these issues have already been worked out. Because if, if everything starts at the top, they don't want to hear no. So they say, this is what I think is going to work, do it. And so then they go down that road a long way before even the principal realizes, oh crap, that didn't work. Right. If it's staffed the right way, as soon as that's brought up, especially with a, you know, a president that's okay with being told, you know, not the greatest idea, it's art. They've already come up with the paths that are most likely to work and the paths that are most likely not going to work. And it's done, it's done at a senior level. But, you know, compared to the president, junior level.

Dee (55:14)

Right.

Mick Mulroy (55:14)

And that this is how the discussion

Mark Polymeropoulos (55:15)

generally goes, driving exactly how this is kind of vast backwards, that this is a top down.

Dee (55:19)

That's how it normally works. Right. Like normally, yeah, right.

Mark Polymeropoulos (55:23)

Lower levels, it comes up, got into

Dee (55:25)

the Iran thing, not in a normal way because the NSC has been gutted and it was six guys in a room talking about like, yeah, let's do it. Why not?

Mark Polymeropoulos (55:32)

All of Trump's decision making seems to be along these lines.

Dee (55:36)

Israel said it's okay to do it, let's do it. You know, they're going to do it anyway and we're just protecting ourselves, I guess. Let's, let's fucking start this war. Yeah. Ruin the fucking world. Why not?

Mick Mulroy (55:45)

You know, I mean, the best leadership that I've seen, and obviously I did work for Secretary Mattis, who's one of the, I think, greatest leaders of our generation, is the leader doesn't say anything usually other than good morning.

Dee (55:59)

Right.

Mick Mulroy (55:59)

And then they listen to everybody. Right. Because if the leader starts off going, this is what I think. Well, even in the most functional administrations, they go, well, shit, I guess he already made his mind up. Right. So you don't want to. Or her. You don't want the leader to lead with. This is what I think we're going to do. Because then everybody goes, okay, well, I guess that's what we're going to do. I'm not, I don't know, I'm not obviously in the room for what's going on now. But the most functional at every level I've seen a leader be is the one that, you know, you got two ears and one mouth. Right. So that's a stoic thing. By the way, it Goes way back to Zeno. Just for those of you that are stoics out there, you got to listen. And then people are more prone to give you the straight scoop. And then based on what you hear, then you make the decision or what have you. But I don't know what's going on now, but they need that staffing. They need those professional diplomats, uniform, military officers, not just the chairman, and of course, intelligence officers. They should all be at the nsc. They should be pushing, obviously, for the president's policies, but it has to be done in a educated, informed way.

Mark Polymeropoulos (57:08)

I don't think any of that's happening.

Mick Mulroy (57:10)

Yeah, that's not good. We do need to talk before. I know we're getting close to the time, but the withdrawal of US Forces from Germany is, I think, you know, there's so much to talk about. But that's important.

Dee (57:22)

Yeah, let's do it. I mean, it's crazy, obviously, and I'm a dirty, you know, hippie, commie scumbag, and I think it's crazy. You know what I mean? The fact that I think how we let, like, Eastern Europe and like, just Ukraine, like, flopping the wind the way we do is unacceptable and, like, insane to me. I don't understand this, how this government, this administration operates. And when it comes to Russia and Ukraine, what the is 5,000 troops out of, you know, Ramstein or wherever gonna do? I don't know. I don't know what the strategic play is, like, why it makes sense or it just makes for a good headline. I don't know.

Jonathan Hackett (58:00)

That's really do it. Last time, last administration, they were getting ready to do it, and then it extended across presidencies, which was then stopped. But 5000 troops is about one brigade combat team. Yeah, it may. It may be a brigade combat team or it may be other forces that are. That equal that number. We don't know. But there's 36,000 US troops in Germany and 100k in Europe. So 5,000 is definitely like a political statement more than a military strategic statement. You know, at least that's how I view it.

Dee (58:30)

But what is that.

Mick Mulroy (58:30)

But it could be an indicator of what's going to happen.

Dee (58:32)

Yeah. What does it signal to, like, our allies and, you know.

Mark Polymeropoulos (58:35)

Well, Trump then said there's going to be more. And the reason why this gets so stupid is. And everyone on this program knows this, you know, Germany as a logistics hub is massively important. It doesn't matter what the German Chancellor says. It is irrelevant. Every. So many things flow through several Locations in Germany quietly. That anyone who then argues because you now. And so people are making the argument we don't need them. That's insane for CENTCOM and Africom. It's, I mean it's preposterous. If you have half a fucking brain. Everything goes through these places, including weird shit like fucking relays and satellites and all sorts of ISR stuff. Like it's crazy. So you can beat up the Germans all you want, but the idea of potentially pulling out and closing some of these locations makes no sense. That that means that we can't. That's committing superpower suicide. Now if you want to make a stupid political statement, 5,000, if that's it, whatever. But the idea that. Because this is based on the notion that we don't need Germany. And that's nuts.

Mick Mulroy (59:37)

It is nuts. Again, every uniform military person, whether it's

Mark Polymeropoulos (59:40)

Ramstein, there's Landstall, I mean there's, there's critical locations there that really matter. I mean everybody medevaced goes to a certain location to get immediate trauma care. So. I don't know.

Mick Mulroy (59:51)

I think you just said it exactly right, Mark. I mean this is. We're not there one. There's nothing wrong since we're our NATO members, to be there to support NATO. That is our thing. But even if you don't agree with that, we're there because it's in our own interest. It's for us.

Mark Polymeropoulos (60:05)

Yeah. Yeah. Period. Big time. Selfish interests.

Mick Mulroy (60:09)

Yes. And when, and, and then if they, if they do. If this is an indicator and you're right, maybe this is because Mertz said that he was getting embarrassed by Iran or what have you. If this is just an indicator that we're going to eventually withdraw from Europe. And if you look at the national defense strategy, it kind of indicates we are right. So I don't think it's just a one off. The next president, Republican or Democrat, is going to spend their entire time trying to get back.

Mark Polymeropoulos (60:33)

Right.

Mick Mulroy (60:35)

They just are. It's in our own interest. It is not about, you know, we're just defending. It costs us money. It costs us money because it's in our. It's how we project force. Because we do have the luxury of being, you know, protected by oceans. But that also is a burden when it comes to projecting force because you have to go over the oceans. Right. So we're going to. There is a provision in the NDAA that requires like a certification. I was told it's not just the Secretary of Defense that has to. Although I heard Two different things. But it's going to have to be the commanding general from.

Mark Polymeropoulos (61:11)

That's correct. Yeah, I've read that. Yeah.

Mick Mulroy (61:13)

Yeah. So he is going to have to say that it won't impact readiness, which we all know is not true. I mean, it has to. If we start withdrawing a lot of forces, he's going to have to, he's going to literally say it's not going to have any impact on NATO. There's all these things that, and this is put in by Congress because they knew this was likely to happen. I think to Jonathan's point, it started in the first administration, then it went away because of Biden. So they knew this was going to happen. And this was put in there by Republicans too. Right. So do you think that, do you

Dee (61:47)

think this administration's worried about being in contempt of Congress?

Mark Polymeropoulos (61:50)

Well, that's the thing, you know, so we keep coming back to rhetorical question.

Dee (61:54)

That's a no.

Mark Polymeropoulos (61:56)

I mean, you know, Congress was also a check on this $400 million that were supposed to be spent in Ukraine and they didn't do it.

Dee (62:01)

And the Epstein files and they haven't done it. There's like, you want to go down the list?

Mark Polymeropoulos (62:05)

We can, but I think, I mean, just again, it's, I mean, how many friends of ours have been treated medical care in Germany on the way back from getting or every support flight we've ever known about goes through Ramstein? I mean, come on. It doesn't make any sense, but, you know, hopefully you'll see pushback from Congress in this case. I would say there's probably going to be more pushback on this as opposed to the War Powers Resolution. This is a bigger deal just because the kind of the national security normies in the Republican Party and there are still those out there on the Hill are, you know, certainly don't support this.

Dee (62:46)

Where are they?

Mick Mulroy (62:46)

Even Rubio?

Mark Polymeropoulos (62:50)

Yeah, I mean the amazing part about, well, that's, that's Rubio. I mean, he also went, yeah, so Rubio is just this weird enigma. I mean, I, I, you know, he's clearly so much of the things that he does now and says there's not part of his, his career enigma.

Dee (63:03)

Do you mean like just like fucking pussy that flip flops because of what Trump says? Because that is that what enigma means? I'm just trying to clarify his trip. That's what it seems like his trip

Mark Polymeropoulos (63:15)

to Hungary was, was very disturbing for a lot of us who have testified in front of him, who's seen him, know what he believes in. That's not who he is. But he wants to be president and he wants Cuba to go down.

Dee (63:24)

So he's not going to be president.

Mark Polymeropoulos (63:26)

Sold his soul.

Dee (63:27)

Gonna have to realize that sooner before later. I don't know.

Mark Polymeropoulos (63:30)

I mean, I, I wouldn't, I wouldn't go that far. I think he's, he's, he's got a very good shot.

Dee (63:34)

You want to make a bet right now,

Mark Polymeropoulos (63:38)

1000 US if Cuba goes down, if actually he, if they pull off this Cuba soft coup thing, you know, there's gonna be a lot of people in Florida who are pushing for him.

Dee (63:49)

Yeah, cool. Florida, that's a red state. I mean, if we're talking politically like it, nobody gives a shit about Cuba, except if you're a Cuban in Florida. Frank. That's an, that's an on. In America. In the broad world, in the broad country, he's not, he's gonna get 6% and he's gonna bow out and jump behind whoever gets the most, just like he did every other single time. And he's gonna keep flip flopping because that's all he is. He's a, he's a politician who's full of shit.

Mick Mulroy (64:17)

But to Mark's point, there is still a Reagan side of the Republican Party. And the Reagan side of the Republican Party views NATO as a key alliance that benefits the United States. Every president, including President Obama, was angry with NATO partners who weren't paying their fair share. And they were right. They were all right, including President Trump. But now, kind of ironically, maybe mostly because of Russian invasion of Ukraine, they're all standing up, like I just read something that Germany's going to add 466,000 soldiers. Does anybody think that Germany can't raise an army? We should all know through history they can. So we're going to. The reason why I'm saying this is because we're going to end up with great allies like, who are really strong. Look at Poland right now. I think Poland could take on Russia and beat them personally, especially if they were with Ukraine. So what I'm saying is we might end up in a situation where the US Is trying to pull out of an alliance that's now the most capable it's ever been in its history, which is not good for us. That's why we have to spend $1.5 trillion on our defense.

Dee (65:21)

We don't have to.

Mick Mulroy (65:23)

We don't have to. Especially our allies.

Dee (65:26)

I'm getting crazy on Sunday. Sorry.

Mick Mulroy (65:27)

It isn't just Germany. It isn't just. I mean, The European allies are stepping up and making.

Mark Polymeropoulos (65:34)

Okay, how about that? Greek spending on gdp. Let's go.

Dee (65:36)

Oh, yeah.

Mick Mulroy (65:37)

What's up? Tell me. I don't know.

Dee (65:39)

We don't. One of the top ones in NATO in terms of percentage.

Mark Polymeropoulos (65:43)

Yeah, good.

Dee (65:45)

We're doing it for Turkey. We don't give a shit about NATO. We want Turkey to go down.

Mark Polymeropoulos (65:54)

Yeah, no, the Greeks have been very good. I mean, in fact, I mean, even Breitbart is now celebrating the Greek national security strategy, which is causing me some angst.

Mick Mulroy (66:02)

But we used to go to smokers in Greece because my son, you know, was a boxer. Every once in a while they have like, smokers are amateur boxing matches. They'd have, like, these Turks and the Greeks. Did you go to the. And the Turks? They must have found, like, the worst boxers.

Dee (66:22)

Yeah.

Mick Mulroy (66:22)

Just get smoked.

Dee (66:24)

You got to stack the deck right there.

Mick Mulroy (66:25)

You got, like, watching the Harlem Globe Crowders play the Washington Generals.

Dee (66:29)

Yeah, right.

Mick Mulroy (66:29)

And we'd be like, is this real or is this some kind of ufc? Not ufc, but wrestling.

Dee (66:36)

Yeah. Wwe.

Mick Mulroy (66:36)

Yeah. Because it was real. They just went and found really bad Turkish box.

Dee (66:42)

They just grabbed homeless guys on the street and they're like, come on, let's go. Let's beat the. Out of you for entertainment. I mean, that's the most Greeks could probably do to Turkey, if we're being honest. But yeah, a lot happening. We're obviously. Keep an eye on it. You guys want to. Any final thoughts?

Mick Mulroy (67:01)

Well, this week could be significant. Right. So the. The president has been briefed. They're probably going to choose one of the options unless there's a diplomatic breakthrough. So we should. We could have a lot to talk about next week.

Mark Polymeropoulos (67:15)

Agree.

Dee (67:16)

Guys, do us a favor, like, and subscribe. If you're listening to us on Audio Radio five stars. Subscribe there as well. Go and grab John and Finn Hackett's books. They're very good. I started reading the first one. Not the first one. The Iran shadow weapons ones.

Jonathan Hackett (67:30)

Oh, nice.

Dee (67:31)

Yeah, it's incredible. Mick Mulroy and the White Fish. Yeah, that's why I like it. I need pictures like our president Mick Mulroy, of course. Or white. The White Fish Security Summit I'm happening at the end of February. That link is in the description. Mark Polymeropoulos. His links are in the description. He's got a book called Clarity in Crisis. And what else? Oh, help Support the show. Patreon.com the team house. You get ad free episodes both for the team house and eyes on. And thanks, guys. As usual, a pleasure.

Podcast Host Intro (68:08)

Hey guys, I want to take a moment to tell you about the Team House Podcast newsletter. If you go and subscribe, it's totally free and what it will do is aggregate all of our data, all of our content that we put out, the things that are on the Team House on our Geopolitics podcast, Eyes on things that I write journalistically with Sean Naylor. On the high side, anything else that we have going on books, we recommend upcoming guests that we have coming on the show and also, you know, filtering in some fun stuff in there as well. If you'll go and check it out. We send it out just once a week. We don't want to spam you guys. It's just a kind of roll up of all of our content on a weekly basis. You can find our newsletter@teamhousepodcastkit.com join again. The website for that is teamhousepodcast kit.com join so we hope to see you there. The link will be down in the

Dee (69:08)

description

Alicia (69:11)

Having MG can make cooking difficult, but over the years I've found some really helpful tools and tips that I'm excited to share. Hi, I'm Alicia. I think cooking should always be fun, creative and of course, delicious. These Black Bean Burgers are hearty, full of flavor and MG friendly. You're gonna love them.

Ryan Seacrest (69:29)

Check out Alicia's Black Bean Burger cooking

Mark Polymeropoulos (69:31)

video and other recipes. Full of tips and tricks for managing common MG symptoms while cooking only at mg-united.com Ready?

Ryan Seacrest (69:40)

Let's cook. Hey, it's Ryan Seacrest for Albertsons and Safeway this spring. Sweeten your day one sweet treat at a time. Now through May 26th. Whether you're shopping for gifts for friends and family or just want to pick me up for yourself, get great deals on your favorite sweet treats. Shop in store or online and save on items like Reese's Peanut Butter Cups, Trident Sugar Free Gum, Albanese, Gummy Bears, Kinder Wafer Eggs or Snickers Bars. Get these deals before they're gone. Offer ends May 26th. Restrictions apply. Offers may vary. Visit albertsons or safeway.com for more details.

Spin Quest Promoter (70:12)

Forget whatever plans you have this weekend because you're staying at home and playing on Spin Quests, 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. That's at spinquest.com S P I N Q U-E-T.com Spin Quest is a free

Spin Quest Disclaimer Voice (70:35)

to Play Social Casino Void where prohibited. Visit spinquest.com for more details.

CIDP Thrive Team Member (70:50)

Life with CIDP can be tough, but the Thrive Team, a specialized squad of experts, helps people living with CIDP make more room in their lives. For joy.

Commercial Announcer (71:00)

Watch Rare well Done, an all new reality series. Rare well Done offers help and hope to people across the country who live live with the rare disease CIDP. Watch the latest episode, now exclusively on rarewelldone.com

Ryan Seacrest (71:19)

hey, it's Ryan Seacrest for Albertsons and Safeway this spring. Sweeten your day one sweet treat at a time, now through May 26th. Whether you're shopping for gifts for friends and family or just want to pick me up for yourself, get great deals on your favorite sweet treats. Shop in store or online and save on items. Items like Reese's Peanut Butter Cups, Trident Sugar Free Gum, Albanese, Gummy Bears, Kinder Wafer Eggs or Snickers Bars. Get these deals before they're gone off rents May 26. Restrictions apply. Offers may vary. Visit albertsons or safeway.com for more details.

Spin Quest Promoter (71:50)

Whether it's slots or live dealers, Spinquest.com has the fun and action you're looking for with Spin Quest exclusives Blackjack, Roulette, Baccarat and even live dice with craps and bubble craps. The games never stop so you don't have to, and right now, new users get $30 coin packs for just 10 bucks. Play now@Spinquest.com SpinQuest is a free to

Spin Quest Disclaimer Voice (72:15)

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

CIDP Thrive Team Member (72:27)

Life with CIDP can be tough, but the Thrive Team, a specialized squad of experts, helps people living with CIDP make more room in their lives. For joy, watch Rare well Done, an

Commercial Announcer (72:40)

all new reality series. Rare well Done offers help and hope to people across the country who live with the rare disease CIDP. Watch the latest episode, now exclusively on rarewelldone.com

Ryan Seacrest (72:56)

hey, it's Ryan Seacrest for Albertsons and Safeway this spring. Sweeten your day one sweet treat at a time, now through May 26th. Whether you're shopping for gifts for friends and family or just want to pick me up for yourself, get great deals on your favorite sweet treats. Shop in store or online and save on items like Reese's Peanut Butter Cups, Trident Sugar Free Gum, Albanese, Gummy Bears, Kinder Wafer Eggs or Snickers bars. Get these deals before they're gone off REN's May 26. Restrictions applied. Offers may vary. Visit albertsons or safeway.com for more details.

Bretzky (73:27)

What's up baby? It's Bretzky and I'm here to tell you that spinquest.com is giving out free Sweeps Coins. All you got to do is purchase a ten dollar coin pack and guess what? They're going to give you the coins from a $30 coin pack that lets you play all your favorite games like Blackjack, Wanted, Dead or Wild. And we're talking real cash prizes, baby. Spin Quest.com Spin Quest is a free

Spin Quest Disclaimer Voice (73:52)

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

Alicia (74:02)

Having MG can make cooking difficult, but over the years I found some really helpful tools and tips that I'm excited to share. Hi, I'm Alicia. I think cooking should always be fun, creative and of course delicious. These Black Bean Burgers are hearty, full of flavor and MG friendly. You're gonna love them.

Ryan Seacrest (74:20)

Check out Alicia's Black Bean Burger cooking

Mark Polymeropoulos (74:22)

video and other recipes. Full of tips and tricks for managing common MG symptoms while cooking only at mg-united.com Ready?

Ryan Seacrest (74:31)

Let's cook. Hey, it's Ryan Seacrest for Albertsons and Safeway this spring. Sweeten your day one sweet treat at a time. Now through May 26th. Whether you're shopping for gifts for friends and family or just want to pick me up for yourself, get great deals on your favorite sweet treats. Shop in store or online and save on items like Reese's Peanut Butter Cups, Trident Sugar Free Gum, Albanese, Gummy Bears, Kinder Wafer Eggs or Snickers Bars. Get these deals before they're gone. Offer ends May 26. Restrictions applied. Offers may vary. Visit albertsons or safeway.com for more details.

Spin Quest Promoter (75:03)

You know what? It sucks to be bored. But when I get on my phone and play real casino games on spinquest.com the time flies by. That two hour wait at the DMV seems like 10 minutes. Play your favorite slots, live blackjack, live craps with a live dealer. New players $30 coin packs are on sale for 10 bucks. Play spinquest.com and you'll never be bored again.

Spin Quest Disclaimer Voice (75:26)

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

CIDP Thrive Team Member (75:38)

Life with CIDP can be tough, but the Thrive Team, a specialized squad of experts, helps people living with CIDP make more room in their lives for joy.

Commercial Announcer (75:48)

Watch Rare well Done, an all new reality series. Rare well Done offers help and hope to people across the country who live with the rare disease CIDP. Watch the link latest episode now exclusively on rarewelldone.com

Ryan Seacrest (76:08)

hey, it's Ryan Seacrest for Albertsons and Safeway this spring. Sweeten your day one sweet treat at a time. Now through May 26th. Whether you're shopping for gifts for friends and family or just want to pick me up for yourself, get great deals on your favorite sweet treats. Shop in store or online and save on items like Reese's Peanut Butter Cups, Trident Sugar Free Gum, Albanese, Gummy Bears, Kinder Wafer Eggs or Snickers bars. Get these deals before they're gone off Ren's MA26. Restrictions apply. Offers may vary. Visit albertsons or safeway.com for more details.

Spin Quest Promoter (76:39)

Whether it's slots or live dealers, Spinquest.com has the fun and action you're looking for with Spinquest exclusives blackjack, roulette, Baccarat and even live dice with craps and bubble craps. The games never stop so you don't have to, and right now new users get $30 coin packs for just 10 bucks. Play now@Spinquest.com SpinQuest is a free to

Spin Quest Disclaimer Voice (77:03)

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

CIDP Thrive Team Member (77:15)

Life with CIDP can be tough, but the Thrive Team, a specialized squad of experts, helps people living with CIDP make more room in their lives for joy.

Commercial Announcer (77:26)

Watch Rare well Done, an all new reality series. Rare well Done offers help and hope to people across the country who live with the rare disease CIDP. Watch the latest episode, now exclusively on rarewelldone.com

Ryan Seacrest (77:45)

hey, it's Ryan Seacrest for Albertsons and Safeway this spring. Sweeten your day one sweet treat at a time. Now through May 26th. Whether you're shopping a for gifts for friends and family or just want to pick me up for yourself, get great deals on your favorite sweet treats. Shop in store or online and save on items like Reese's Peanut Butter Cups, Trident Sugar Free Gum, Albanese, Gummy Bears, Kinder Wafer Eggs or Snickers Bars. Get these deals before they're gone. Offer ends May 26. Restrictions apply. Offers may vary. Visit albertsons or safeway.com for more details.

Spin Quest Promoter (78:16)

Whether it's slots or live dealers, spinquest.com has the fun and action you're looking for with Spin Quest exclusives Blackjack, Roulette, Baccarat and even live dice with Craps and Bubble craps. The games never stop so you don't have to. And right now, new users get $30 coin packs for just 10 bucks. Play now@Spinquest.com SpinQuest is a free to

Spin Quest Disclaimer Voice (78:41)

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

CIDP Thrive Team Member (78:55)

Life with CIDP can be tough, but the Thrive Team, a specialized squad of experts, helps people living with CIDP make more room in their lives for joy.

Commercial Announcer (79:05)

Watch Rare well Done, an all new reality series. Rare well Done offers help and hope to people of across the country who live with the rare disease CIDP. Watch the latest episode, now exclusively on rarewelldone.com

Ryan Seacrest (79:25)

hey, it's Ryan Seacrest for Albertsons and Safeway this spring. Sweeten your day one sweet treat at a time. Now through May 26th. Whether you're shopping for gifts for friends and family or just want to pick me up for yourself, get great deals on your favorite sweet treats. Shop in store or online and save on items like Reese's Peanut Butter Cups, Trident Sugar Free Gum, Albanese, Gummy Bears, Kinder Wafer Eggs or Snickers bars. Get these deals before they're gone off rents May 26. Restrictions apply. Offers may vary. Visit albertsons or safeway.com for more details.

Spin Quest Promoter (79:55)

You know what? It sucks to be bored. But when I get on my phone and play real casino games on spinquest.com the time flies by. That two hour wait at the DMV seems like 10 minutes. Play your favorite slots, live blackjack, live craps with a live dealer. New players $30 coin packs are on sale for 10 bucks. Play spinquest.com and you'll never be bored again.

Spin Quest Disclaimer Voice (80:19)

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

Ryan Seacrest (80:25)

Hey, it's Ryan Seacrest for Albertsons and Safeway. Spring is a time to give yourself a refresh, so spend time on self rejuvenation. Shop in store and online for great savings on all your favorite personal care Item. Now through May 26. Earn four times points when you shop participating items like Pantene Shampoo, Crest Toothpaste, Tampax Radiant Native Shampoo and Secret Jello Deodorant. Then redeem points for discounts on future purchases of groceries or fuel. Offer ends May 26. Restrictions apply. Offers may vary. Visit albertsons or safeway.com for more details.

Spin Quest Promoter (80:56)

Whether it's slots or live dealers, spinquest.com has the fun and action you're looking for with Spin Quest exclusives Blackjack, Roulette, Baccarat and even live dice with craps and bubble craps. The games never stop so you don't have to, and right now, new users get $30 coin packs for just 10 bucks. Play now@Spinquest.com SpinQuest is a free to

Spin Quest Disclaimer Voice (81:21)

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

Mick Mulroy (81:26)

I like things my way, my coffee, my schedule and my treatment. So I talked to my doctor about self injecting with the Vivgard Hydraulic Trullo pre filled syringe which contains fgartigamide alpha and hyaluronidase qvfc. It's injected under your skin subcutaneously. It means I can inject in my space on my time. It's my treatment, my way. Visit vivgardmyway.com that's V Y V G-artmyway.com and talk to your doctor about Vivgard Hytrulo Brought to you by Argenics.