Tangle - The India–Pakistan conflict escalates.

Episode Date: May 8, 2025

On Wednesday, the Indian government said it conducted several airstrikes in Pakistan-controlled territory. While India called the strikes a success, at least two of its military aircraft were reportedly lost in the operation. Pakistani military officials said at least 31 people were killed in the strikes or by artillery fire. Ad-free podcasts are here!Many listeners have been asking for an ad-free version of this podcast that they could subscribe to — and we finally launched it. You can go to ReadTangle.com to sign up!You can read today's podcast⁠ ⁠⁠here⁠⁠⁠, our “Under the Radar” story ⁠here and today’s “Have a nice day” story ⁠here⁠.Take the survey: Do you think a war between India and Pakistan is imminent? Let us know!You can subscribe to Tangle by clicking here or drop something in our tip jar by clicking here. Our Executive Editor and Founder is Isaac Saul. Our Executive Producer is Jon Lall.This podcast was written by Isaac Saul and edited and engineered by Dewey Thomas. Music for the podcast was produced by Diet 75.Our newsletter is edited by Managing Editor Ari Weitzman, Senior Editor Will Kaback, Hunter Casperson, Kendall White, Bailey Saul, and Audrey Moorehead.  Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From executive producer, Isaac Saul, this is Tangle. Good morning, good afternoon, and good evening. And welcome to the Tangle Podcast, the place you get views from across the political spectrum, some independent thinking and a little bit of my take. I'm your host, Isaac Soll, and on today's episode, we're going to be talking about the latest in the India-Pakistan conflict. If you've been paying attention to the news, you've probably seen some headlines about what's going on. I know many of our listeners are not familiar with this

issue. Personally, I have some knowledge on it, but I've also done a lot of learning over the last few years. So we're going to start by trying to just give you some historical context, break down exactly what happened, explain the news a little bit, and then we're going to share some arguments from the left and the right. And then I'm going to share my take. Before we jump in though, I do want to give you a quick heads up that tomorrow we're going to be debuting something that I'm really excited about. I don't know if we're going to make this a recurring series, but I think there's a chance we do. And it's this idea of going back to some news stories that were at some time dominant in the headlines that felt like these existential

major issues that were gonna be with the country for a long time and then just sort of disappeared, faded into the background, kind of got memory hold by people and we're gonna start tomorrow with a newsletter and a podcast on what happened to the baby formula shortage. Do you remember that? I kind of forgot about it, but for a large period of a month, I think, we were being told that there was going to be this massive baby formula shortage that we weren't really sure how to get out of it. And then the story kind of just dissipated, just floated off into the ether and everyone sort of forgot about it and moved on. And we

want to revisit stories like that. And we're thinking about making this a recurring series, but we're curious for your thoughts. So we're going to start tomorrow with a revisitation of the baby formula shortage. And if you like the podcast, feel free to let us know because it's something we're thinking about doing as a sort of thematic recurring episode. All right, with that, I'm going to pass it over to John for today's main topic, and I'll be back for my take.

["The Big Game"] Thanks, Isaac, and welcome, everybody. Here are your quick hits for today. First up, President Donald Trump announced a trade agreement with Britain that will roll back U.S. tariffs on British steel, aluminum, and automobiles in return for increased access to British markets for American imports, such as beef, ethanol, and other farm products. Trump said the 10% baseline tariff on global imports would remain in place and details of the deal would be finalized in the coming weeks.

2. The Federal Reserve held its benchmark overnight borrowing rate in a range between 4.25 and 4.5 percent, where it has been since December 2024 after its meeting on Wednesday. The Fed said it will assess the economic impact of President Trump's trade policies before changing the rate. President Trump announced Dr. Casey Means as his nominee for Surgeon General after pulling his initial nomination of Dr. Jeanette Nashwat. A federal judge instructed the Trump administration that it cannot deport immigrants to Libya,

Saudi Arabia, or any other country where they are not citizens without due process. And number five, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and US Trade Representative James Sengrier will meet with China's top economic official in Switzerland later this week. The meeting is expected to kick off talks on a potential trade deal. Funerals have been held for 31 people killed by what Pakistan is calling unprovoked Indian aggression against civilians. Even as people were being buried, more attacks were reported. On Wednesday, the Indian government said it conducted several airstrikes in Pakistan-controlled territory. While India called the strikes a success, at least two of its military aircraft were

reportedly lost in the operation. Pakistani military officials said at least 31 people were killed in the strikes or by artillery fire. India said the strikes were in retaliation for an April mass shooting at Pahal Gram, an Indian-administered town in the disputed region of Jammu and Kashmir that killed 26 people, primarily Hindu tourists, and wounded 17 others, the deadliest attack against civilians in India since 2008. India has accused the Pakistani government of supporting the militants who carried out

the attack and, on Wednesday, claimed it had credible leads, technical inputs, testimony of the survivors, and other evidence pointing towards the clear involvement of Pakistani-based terrorists in this attack. Pakistan has denied any involvement. India and Pakistan have engaged in a decades-long conflict over the region of Kashmir since 1947, when the United Kingdom divided British India into two independent nations, India and Pakistan, with the latter then further divided into West Pakistan and East Pakistan,

modern-day Bangladesh. The partition set off a wave of violence and displacement, with millions of Muslims fleeing to West and East Pakistan, while millions of Hindus and Sikhs fled to India as each side fought for control over disputed territories. India and Pakistan both claim complete control over Kashmir, and each country administers a section of the territory divided by a militarized ceasefire line established in 1949, later formalized as the Line of Control in the 1972 Simla agreement. Two subsequent wars and a limited conflict were fought over Kashmir, most recently in

1999, but the sides agreed to a ceasefire without agreeing on the fate of the region in 2003. Kashmir remains a source of conflict with an ongoing armed insurgency against Indian rule, separatist violence, and regular military operations. Both governments have also engaged in tip-for-tap measures since the Pahal Gram attack. India and Pakistan are nuclear powers, and experts and political leaders have long warned that the hostilities could eventually spill over into nuclear conflict. The Washington Post published a detailed explainer on the history of the conflict.

We've included a link in today's episode description. On Wednesday, Pakistani Prime Minister Shahbaz Sharif called India's airstrikes an act of war and said a strong response is indeed being given. Additionally, Pakistani security forces claim to have shot down five Indian Air Force jets and one drone during India's attack, describing a series of missile exchanges involving a total of 125 fighter jets. However, both countries have since signaled caution, with India describing the strikes as non-escalatory and Pakistan saying it would only pursue a proportional response and would

never target civilians. President Donald Trump offered to help resolve the conflict. �We get along with both countries very well. Good relationships with both, and I want to see it stop. And if I can do anything to help, I will," Trump said. Furthermore, Secretary of State Marco Rubio has corresponded with Sharif and Indian Foreign Minister S. Jaishankar in the past week in an attempt to ease tensions between the sides.

China, which shares a border with India and Pakistan, called for de-escalation. India and Pakistan are neighbors who cannot be moved away, and both are also China's neighbors. China opposes all forms of terrorism, the Chinese Foreign Ministry said on Wednesday. Today, we'll cover the latest in the conflict with views from the left, right, and Indian and Pakistani writers. And then then Isaac's tape. We'll be right back after this quick break. Alright, first up, let's start with some agreement. Writers across the political spectrum and abroad agree that the risk of war between India and Pakistan has heightened.

Many also say that the conflict could further destabilize the global order. And now let's move to what the left is saying. The left is troubled by the latest in the conflict, with many saying the risk of war is as high as it's been in many years. Some worry that the conflict could soon spill outside Kashmir. In the New York Times, Mihir Ahmad suggested this India-Pakistan skirmish is not like the others. Longtime watchers of this contentious region of the world often call these incidents skirmishes.

Rarely do they escalate into all-out war. Rather, they end after some militaristic back-and-forth and threats lobbed by politicians and media statements and shows a force geared toward releasing the nationalistic bloodlust that often comes in the wake of a deadly terrorist attack, Ahmad wrote. The last serious skirmish in 2019 ended after India dropped bombs in the wooded hills near Madras that it claimed was harboring terrorists and Pakistan dropped some munitions on the Indian side soon after. Things remained touchy for a time. The news media cycle in both countries was sent into jingoistic overdrive, before returning

to the uneasy middle ground India and Pakistan often find themselves in. I had hoped for the same outcome for the two nations in this latest iteration of this long conflict. India and Pakistan share so much with one another, of rich culture and history, and hoped for the same outcome for the two nations in this latest iteration of this long conflict. India and Pakistan share so much with one another, of rich culture and history, and millions in each country who originally called the other side home," Akhmad said. But the attacks early Wednesday were very different. The Indian military did not drop bombs in the middle of the woods this time.

The strikes hit near major population hubs, and Pakistani military officials said that more than 20 people, including a child, have died. It's hard to imagine this skirmish will end in a TV spectacle and memes. In Bloomberg, James Stavridis said India and Pakistan can't let conflict spill into the sea. Leaders of both nuclear-armed powers are fanning the flames. Most ominously, the chief of the Pakistani army, General Saeed Aseem Munir, said any attack by India will be met with a swift, resolute, and notch-up response.

Where is this spiral of threats headed, Stavridis asked. India has many options for further retaliation short of full-on combat. It could choose a cyber-attack against critical Pakistani infrastructure, launch special forces against what it regards as terrorist organizations operating in Pakistan's territory, as it did in 2016, undertake precision airstrikes, as it did in 2019, or initiate artillery barrages along the Kashmiri border. But a less obvious thing I worry about as a naval officer who sailed many long voyages on the Indian Ocean, is the possibility of the conflict spilling over into the sea.

The world's third largest ocean affords plenty of options for maritime adventurism. Leaders of both nations may see the use of naval forces as less potentially escalatory, Stavridis wrote. But, trust me, military confrontation at sea can escalate all too easily. A strategy of naval brinksmanship could bring the nations closer to broader war. India and Pakistan would be wise to avoid inflaming tensions not only in Kashmir and notion. Alright that is it for what the left is saying, which brings us to what the right is saying. The right aligns with India's view of the conflict and hopes the strikes act as an effective

deterrent to further military action. Some suggest the countries are doomed to continue this cycle of violence. In the Wall Street Journal, Sadat Andoumé said India tries to subdue the threat from Pakistan. Dealing with Pakistan, an unstable nation bristling with armed jihadists, is a serious challenge for India. New Delhi must find a way to deter Pakistan Army-backed jihadist groups that have long sheltered under Pakistan's nuclear umbrella while factoring in Islamabad's support from

China, which calls Pakistan its iron brother, Dumay wrote. The West, too, has a Pakistan problem, although it's more manageable. The Biden administration imposed sanctions on Pakistan's missile program last year over fears that the country was developing long-range ballistic missile capabilities that could threaten the U.S., and people of Pakistani origin have been implicated in terrorist attacks in the U.S. and the U.K. While sympathizing with India over terrorism, the Trump administration has made it clear it isn't interested in getting overly involved in the India-Pakistan conflict. Washington should nonetheless hope India succeeds in moderating the Pakistani army's appetite

for risk, Dumé said. Indians are right to wonder why Pakistan picks fights with a larger neighbor. It happens in large part because in the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, the army, steeped in hostility toward Hindu India, calls the shots. For India, ending the symbiosis between the Pakistani army and jihadism in the near term may not be possible, but New Delhi has no choice but to try. In Creator's Syndicate, Austin Bay wrote about terror,

nukes, and reunion. Should this war go hot, India will win, but Mumbai and Delhi will have Gaza craters. Islamabad? A radioactive memory, and the real victor is China," Bey said. India and Pakistan have a lot in common, including cricket, but they kill each other. Serbo-Croat is similar. Serbs are Orthodox Christians who write in Cyrillic.

Croats are Catholics who use Latin letters. Both are Slavs, speaking the same language, but divided by politics and religion and alphabets, and they often kill each other. Pakistan and India, however, possess nuclear weapons. Will Kashmir lead to a nuclear war in 2025? I say no, because Pakistan knows India will win, and no one sane wants radioactive craters. Is there a solution? The post-World War II partition of British India was a blood-drenched mess. Since partition, India has prospered. Pakistan has not," Bay wrote.

In retrospect, splitting British India into West Pakistan, now Pakistan, East Pakistan, now Bangladesh, and India may have been one of the 20th century's greatest geostrategic errors. If religion and politics divide them, culture, common sense, and common decency unite them. But reuniting India? Political fantasy. All right, that is it for what the left and the right are saying, which brings us to what some Indian and Pakistani writers are saying. Many Indian writers praised the government's response, saying it sent a message without

risking wider war. Conversely, Pakistani writers expressed concern that the retaliatory attacks will have repercussions in both countries. In the Indian Express, Arun Prakash called India's strikes an apt and timely response to Pahal Gram. The strikes should have served to fulfill two underlying objectives in the larger framework of the India-Pakistan power play. First, this was an overdue act of retribution to assuage justified public and political

outrage at the barbaric and faith-based gunning down of 26 tourists in Pahal Gram Kashmir," Prakash wrote. Secondly, no matter how spectacular or satisfying an act of retribution may seem to the public, it can only be classified as a tactical level response. What the Indian state actually needs to establish or re-establish vis-à-vis Pakistan is conventional deterrence as part of a well-thought-out strategy. India can thus re-establish conventional deterrence vis-à-vis Pakistan provided Indian security planners are mindful of two factors.

First, the initial wave of kinetic strikes may need to be followed up with more, and the public should be prepared for attrition, loss of life, and the distinct possibility of escalation. At the same time, while public opinion may demand for a jaw for a tooth, our military leadership should remain wary of the escalation ladder. Easy to step on, but difficult to jump off," Prakash wrote. Given the nuclear shadow that hangs over the subcontinent, Indian planners have taken care to send clear signals of India's non-escalatory intent by using only aircraft-launched weapons

and not ballistic missiles, and also by avoiding Pakistani military units slash establishments and targeting only terrorist hubs. In Dawn, Arifa Noor wrote about after the standoff. On the Pakistani side, government officials are no longer publicly providing a countdown of when an attack is suspected, while the info minister is also boasting a victory of the Bayaniyah, Nour wrote. On the Indian side too, some events suggest a de-escalation or is being interpreted as such.

The Cabinet Security Committee meeting ended with the Prime Minister authorizing freedom to the military to decide on the response. This was followed by another meeting which announced a caste survey, something the BJP had been resisting and the opposition party, the Congress, had been asking for. In this war of retaliation and more, neither side wants an escalation, which is not just possible but also capable of causing great destruction. Still, the one-upsmanship the two sides have prepared their domestic audiences for has

bound them in varying degrees, and this aspect, the domestic fallout, will prove important in the near future as the crisis plays out. After all, one can safely say that compared to 2019, both Islamabad and New Delhi have weaker governments. And in case of a fallout, there will be a price to pay domestically. Alright, let's head over to Isaac for his take. All right, that is it for what the left and the right and some writers from India and Pakistan are saying, which brings us to my take. So when I think about the India-Pakistan conflict, I see some very strong parallels to the discord in other parts of the world today. Israel and Palestine, Russia and Ukraine,

North Korea and South Korea, Armenia and Azerbaijan, China and Taiwan. What always strikes me about these conflicts is just how much shared culture, language, history, and identity these groups tend to have. These are all, to a large degree, the same peoples who have fractured and divided over decades or centuries and come to view each other as so different, so malignant, that they view war and conflict as the only way out.

It is one of the great and depressing ironies of our present day that the groups an outsider would have the hardest time telling apart are often the ones spending the most time shedding each other's blood. To state the obvious, the situation in India and Pakistan, it is not good. These are two nuclear armed powers with a deep and passionate distrust of each other, which is almost worse than a dislike,

though that's also present here. While the tit for tat of strikes continued overnight, both sides seem to be looking for an off-ramp, which is encouraging. India is emphasizing that its strikes were contained near the line of control and it never entered Pakistani airspace, and Pakistan has repeatedly said it will avoid escalating beyond responding to India's strikes. The problem, of course, is that these kinds of conflicts can spin out of control quickly. One side accidentally strikes a religious site or kills civilians in what was supposed to be

a military airstrike, and then things spin out of control. In this case, several lingering questions illustrate the distress and anger. Most relevant is the question of who actually committed the April 22nd terrorist attack. India has not exactly been forthcoming with evidence that Pakistan supported the attackers, and the Pakistani-based Jihadi group that claimed responsibility for the attack then bizarrely retracted its claim, saying it was hacked.

Such retractions are not uncommon and often reflect internal or external pressures, though it does add to the current fog of war. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi revoked visas for all Pakistani nationals in India separating families at the border, and then Pakistan responded in kind. Modi, apparently thirsting to punish as many people as possible for what happened, is now promising to stop the flow of water into Pakistan, abandoning a 65 year old water treaty that has no legal mechanism to be abandoned in this manner. It's not just an illegal move,

but one that could upend farming and food supply for millions of people across the region. What's happening on the ground in India is equally terrifying. Abuse of Muslims already commonplace has ramped up alongside language from India's leaders that mirrors what we heard from Israeli leaders in the wake of October 7th, all signaling a lust to draw blood for blood.

Naturally, Kashmir and its people are caught in the middle of this conflict. Its neighbor, Pakistan, has a history of harboring jihadist groups, and Pakistan's refusal to take full accountability for that reality has added to India's distrust. Pakistan's civilian leadership often lacks full control of the country. The military is considered the de facto leadership, leading to a general air of disorder. And Kashmiris live among armies of soldiers, literally millions, functioning as a partly occupied territory that is run by both India and Pakistan and even a little bit of China, though a growing number simply just want independence. It's all a very familiar and dark story

in today's tense state of affairs. If I were in Modi's shoes, the choice for a path forward could not be more plain. In fact, you could look back to India's history for examples of the path to pursue. In the 2008 Mumbai attacks, known as 26-11, 10 militants from a Pakistani link group arrived in Mumbai and carried out coordinated attacks across four days.

They killed 174 people and wounded over 300. India had to decide what to do. And in a great act of diplomatic wisdom, it decided not to condemn tens of millions of people to war and potentially nuclear war, and instead refused to carry out a military response. Rather than begin the exchange of bombs, then Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh

won the diplomatic war. His reward was international praise, unity against extremism in Pakistan, and pressure on Pakistan to do more to root out its extremist elements. While India was initially criticized as being soft on terrorism, its decision actually resulted in major gains in its diplomatic credibility, years of relative peace and stability, and eventually a more sophisticated intelligence and military ability to avoid similar attacks. So that is one path.

The other path is what we saw in the wake of October 7th. Israel, tens of thousands of dead Palestinians and hundreds of dead Israeli soldiers later, is still fighting its October 7th war a year and a half in. The entire region is now destabilized, with Hezbollah, the Houthis, and Iran all activated in various kinds of kinetic warfare. Israeli citizens have been torn at the seams, with domestic turmoil about the current government and the path forward, while still facing imminent threats. Just days ago, the Ben Gurion airport had to be shut down after a strike from the Houthis. Gazans are living in an absolute hellscape, stuck in the constant torment of relocation while Israeli

bombs rain from the sky and Hamas brutalizes anyone who objects to its disastrous rule. Now, Israel's plan for the future looks increasingly like an unambiguous occupation and ethnic cleansing of the Gaza Strip. Or in perhaps a closer analogy, India could look to Russia and Ukraine, two countries like India and Pakistan with more advanced militaries and eerily similar historical ties. Hundreds of thousands of soldiers and civilians have died, millions have fled their homes, and daily horrors have now become the norm. Each country's economy has been disrupted, and the violence and military threats are abending normal life, even for Russia, the aggressor. From where I'm sitting, it could not be more glaringly obvious what path forward is better for India, Pakistan,

and the civilians of each country. What we need at this moment is leaders who can see with that kind of clarity, but my fear increasingly is that we don't have them. We'll be right back after this quick break. All right, that is it for my take, which brings us to your questions answered. This one's from Keith in Barnwell, South Carolina. Keith said, is it time to scrap the reader survey or at least publishing the results? You have acknowledged the obvious

that Tangle's audience has shifted to the political left. I know you personally attempt to consider all viewpoints, but that doesn't seem to apply to your readership. Every day as I read your survey, I know the results in advance. If there is an anti-Trump or left-leaning option, it will win the day. Often now I don't even bother

to add my center right perspective or do more than glance at or skip entirely the previous results. Perhaps it is helpful for you as it helps monitor the inclinations of your readers. For those readers, however, this is now a reliably foregone conclusion. So funny enough, this is actually another potential change we've been recently discussing. We talked about it a lot at a team retreat we had just this weekend. And since we got such a productive response from our readers and listeners about experimenting with how we present summaries of our arguments across the political spectrum, we thought maybe we could discuss this question today too.

So first of all, you're right. Our readership has shifted to the left after our feature on This American Life, at least based on the surveys we conduct. And that's the main data point we have for where the biases of our readers and listeners are. Maybe part of that is due to an increase in vocal criticism of a new administration that's aggressively pursued its agenda.

Maybe it's been supercharged by a negative feedback effect where you don't want to offer your opinion if you know it's not going to be the winner. That is a real thing that happens on surveys, by the way, and is kind of demonstrated by this question. Regardless of the reason, it's clear that we aren't getting the range of results we used to get from our daily poll. That's not necessarily a bad thing.

As we've said before, our poll isn't scientific by any stretch of the imagination. It is telling us something about our audience, but we isn't scientific by any stretch of the imagination. It is telling us something about our audience, but we aren't sure what. That being said, we are worried that it could be skewing our understanding of our readers and maybe even skewing our topic selection, which is a problem. Of course, it would also be a problem if we just stopped surveying altogether. Nonpartisan news outlet that emphasizes transparency stops publishing results because they aren't getting what they want is a pretty bad headline. So we had a couple ideas

about what to do going forward. Maybe we don't offer the survey every day. Maybe we keep the survey narrow and just ask about whether you agree with the take. Maybe we use the survey to solicit ideas on stories to cover, ask people their feelings about breaking news events. Maybe we just ask more casual questions related to other topics in the news and culture. Alternatively, we could go the other way. We could work with a seasoned pollster and data scientists and make our surveys less frequent and super scientific and begin weighing the results to seek a meaningful understanding of the country more broadly. You may have noticed the answer uses the word maybe a lot. We aren't sure what to do right now

and we definitely don't know what the Tangle community thinks. Let's start there. What do you want to see from our reader and listener surveys? And for that matter, what do you think about yesterday's reader question about changing how we group our summaries? You could take two minutes to answer a survey

that we have in today's episode description and let us know. All right. That is it for your questions answered. I'm going to send it back to John for the rest of the podcast and I'll see you guys tomorrow. Have a good one. Peace.

Thanks, Isaac. Here's your under the radar story for today, folks. Diabetes deaths in the United States have fallen to their lowest level in years, according to preliminary data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. In Q3 2024, the rate of deaths linked to diabetes was 26.4 per 100,000, continuing a downward trend from 2021, when the rate peaked at 31.1 deaths per 100,000. Diabetes was the eighth leading cause of death that year. Scientists and experts suggest that the diabetes death rate and COVID-19 pandemic were closely linked,

and the falling rate signals a return to pre-pandemic levels. CBS News has this story, and there's a link in today's episode description. All right, next up is our numbers section. There's a link in today's episode description. Alright next up is our numbers section. The approximate population of India as of 2025 is 1.45 billion. India's approximate gross domestic product in US dollars per capita in 2024 was $2,710. The approximate population of Pakistan as of 2025 is 240.5 million.

Pakistan's approximate GDP per capita in 2024 was $1,580. The approximate population of Indian-administered Jammu and Kashmir and Pakistani-administered Kashmir respectively as of 2023 was 10 million and 4.5 million. The approximate percentage of land in Kashmir controlled by India is 55 percent. The approximate percentage of land in Kashmir controlled by Pakistan is 30 percent. The approximate percentage of land in Kashmir controlled by China is 15 percent. The length in miles of the de facto line of control separating India and Pakistan administered Kashmir is 460. And the approximate number of people detained

by Indian authorities in India administered Kashmir following the Pahal Gram attack on April 22nd is 1,500. And last but not least, our Have a Nice Day story. Four months ago, US swimmer Gary Hall Jr. lost his Olympic medals in the Los Angeles Wildfires. In an unconventional ceremony at the International Olympic Committee headquarters on Monday, Hall was presented with 10 replica medals, 5 golds, 3 silvers, and 2 bronzes to replace the originals from the three summer games.

Having friends and family, I'm a very lucky man," Hall said. The support that I was offered from the athletic community has buoyed me through the darkest of nights. The Associated Press has this story and there's a link in today's episode description. Alright everybody, that is it for today's episode. As always, if you'd like to support our work, please go to RETANGLE.COM where you can sign up for a newsletter membership, podcast membership, or a bundled membership that gets you a discount on both.

As Isaac mentioned at the top, in tomorrow's special Friday edition, we're going to be revisiting an old story and trying to find out what happened to the baby formula shortage. This is a test for a series we're considering for Tangle. Not sure what it's going to be just yet and would really like your feedback on it. So if you haven't yet, please sign up for a membership so you can get this special content and give us your feedback on whether we should turn this into a regular series and what platform we should put this on. Isaac and Ari will be here for the Sunday podcast and I will return on Monday. For the rest of the crew, this is John Law signing off. Have an absolutely wonderful weekend, y'all.

Peace. Our executive editor and founder is me, Isaac Saul, and our executive producer is John Law. Today's episode was edited and engineered by Dewey Thomas. Our editorial staff is led by managing editor, Ari Weitzman, with senior editor, Will K. Back, and associate editors, Hunter Tasperson, Audrey Moorhead, Bailey Saul, Lindsay Knuth, and Kendall White. Music for the podcast was produced by Dyett75. To learn more about Tangle and to sign up for a membership, please

visit our website at retangle.com.