The Team House - Is the Ukraine Mineral Deal For Real? | EYES ON GEOPOLITICS

Episode Date: May 5, 2025

today we talk about the Ukraine mineral deal and whther that will help secure Ukraine long term, Mike Waltz being fired then appointed to the UN, and the devastating humanitarian Disater in Gaza. GhostBed⬇️https://www.ghostbed.com/houseFOR 10% off! New merch, patches, and stickers! ⬇️https://theteamhouse-shop.fourthwall.comSupport the show on Patreon:⬇️https://www.patreon.com/TheTeamHouseFind Mick Mulroy here: https://endchildsoldiering.com/Fogbow ⬇️https://fogbow.com/Lobo Institute ⬇️https://www.loboinstitute.org/Twitter ⬇️https://x.com/mickmulroy?s=21&t=-Ze3F_Ix2vlJ18KFvORTCALinkedIn ⬇️https://www.linkedin.com/in/michael-patrick-mulroy-31198b52/Bluesky ⬇️https://bsky.app/profile/mickmulroy.bsky.socialMick’s publications ⬇️https://www.loboinstitute.org/publications/publications-of-michael-mick-patrick-mulroy/Find Andy Milburn here: Twitter ⬇️https://twitter.com/i/flow/login?redirect_after_login=%2Fandymilburn8LinkedIn ⬇️https://www.linkedin.com/in/andrewmilburn2023Substack ⬇️https://amilburn.substack.com/Andy’s book ⬇️https://www.amazon.com/When-Tempest-Gathers-Mogadishu-OperationsBluesky ⬇️https://bsky.app/profile/andy-milburn.bsky.socialFind Jason Lyons here: LinkedIn ⬇️https://www.linkedin.com/in/jason-lyons-666873316?utm_source=share&utm_campaign=share_via&utm_content=profile&utm_medium=ios_appBluesky ⬇️https://bsky.app/profile/bgsilverback73.bsky.sociBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-team-house--5960890/support.

Hey, everybody. Welcome to another episode of Eyes On Geopolitics. I am Demetriktas. I'm here with Mick Morroi. You guys don't make, I don't need to give him an introduction. A lot cooking. I don't know. Yeah, I don't know why I was doing that. I think it's like the default, like where to go to when you don't know what your next thought's going to be. Lock cooking as usual. Yeah. Where do you want to start off? Do you want to start of Ukraine Mineral Deal?

we're going to talk about Mike Walts being quote unquote reassigned to the UN and Rubio taking over the NSA and Secretary State at once and Israel, Gaza. Your call, dealer's choice. Well, let's start with the order you have of it, D. So the Ukraine mineral deal. I'd start off by saying it's a good deal for Ukraine, right? It's, you know, we can certainly debate how we got here with, you know, the Oval Office meeting and the rob eating and, you know, basically using Russian talking points, none of which, you know, I would agree with if anybody's asking me. However, we got to, we are where we are. And this is a good deal, I think, for the United States.

obviously these rare earth minerals are incredibly important to modern technology. You know, lithium, for example, graphite. I'm not an expert in this area. But there is believed to be billions and billions, if not trillion dollars, in Ukraine and oil and gas and other. And so this is as a partner to Ukraine, something I think that, was very much fair. The original proposal required Ukraine to pay back for aid they already received, which I don't think was fair.

This one did not. So this is all about future. This is about mutual investment. Ukraine maintains ownership of the material, but the U.S. is the preferred partner and has, you know, like front of the line privileges. Obviously, we will have to invest in getting these minerals out of the ground. cost over a billion dollars to simply do that. And most important for Ukraine is it actually one identified that Russia invaded Ukraine in the agreement and that the only way for this to work

is for Ukraine to say free, sovereign and prosperous. So now I think we have an obligation, an ethical and moral obligation as a leader of the free world. But even if you don't, we now have an economic interest. We're basically business partners now, which, you know, next to the marriage is an extra, you know, most important relationship in many ways. So their prosperity is our prosperity. And the most of the minerals, 60% of them are under the territory that Russia currently occupies. So in order for us to fully realize this, we have to help Ukraine get the territory back,

which we have been doing and we should be doing. But this now adds an additional incentive to do that for American businesses. and it ties us together at least somewhat economically. And in addition to that, we've seen, you know, these proposals, I think Lindsay Graham's, one of the supporters, I think it's a bipartisan support, about massively increasing tariffs on countries that buy fuel from Russia, like 500 percent, right? It's essentially crushing up. I totally agree with that.

And it's got like 70 senators that have already signed on. Yeah. Apparently, I mean, that's unheard of now. Right, right. And so and President Trump approved military sales to Ukraine. A huge, you know, amount, you know, considering where we have been in this relationship in the last two months. So I think we're on the right path.

I think we're doing the right thing. And I think we should applaud. I don't know if it was the Treasury Secretary, you got most of this done. But good on them. It's a good thing. Now it's time that really use all this, start putting maximum pressure on Russia, get them to the point where they want to come to the negotiation table because they're losing terrain and obviously promote the concept that Ukraine should be equipped to win, not just survive, to win.

And I think we're getting there. And we've seen a lot on the battlefield right now. There's the pretty cool stuff for those who track in these, what are they call them, Magara B5s, these remote-operated boats that can launch and just shot down to, you know, Russian fighter jets. Yeah. But the big picture is- With an air-to-air missile, which is wild. Yeah, well, they shot it down, at least of what I'm referring to, from a drone that's water base that shot it down from the water. Yeah, I think they shot an A-9, which is an air-to-air missile.

Oh, yes, I see what you're saying. Yes. Yeah, which is weird. technology is being developed out there is unbelievable. Hopefully if we tap into that too, as something also benefiting the United States is these technological advances in the battlefield. We need to be able to incorporate them now in our own operations. So anyway, I applaud the both groups for getting that done.

And I think it's a positive. What do you think got it done? Like got it over the one-yard line? I think in part it was to take the discussion off the public sphere, turn it to the experts, and I'm sure there's a lot of experts we don't even know about, you know, certainly mineral experts and, you know, the staff that gets down into the weeds and takes out the hyperbole and all that personality and stuff. And it really, I think, came down to what's beneficial to both sides and both agreed. So I think moving forward, we're in a good place, and it's important to point out that this was a positive step.

And hopefully they pass the piece of legislation and the Senate and the House and the president sign it, that Senator Graham and I can't remember the, I think it's Blumenthal maybe, is a Democratic sponsor. But it certainly has a lot of support, and I think it shows that America's back when it comes to standing up against Romney. Right.

Yeah. So like I listen, I think the mineral deal is definitely smart. And it helps like fortify the relationship between Ukraine and the U.S. and stuff against Russia. I mean, obviously there's a different discussion. But is it like does it meet the requirement as like or the standard of like a security guarantee when they start? Yeah. So we get it's getting close, right? I mean, we have now economic interests and we're going to provide them.

military support. We're going to hopefully increase our security assistance to them. It's not an actual guarantee of security, which is something that I think the Ukrainians will want in any kind of peace agreement. Now, but a negative, one could say, not to be too rosy, is the U.S. looks like we're pulling out of being part of the mediation of this agreement and basically telling Russia Ukraine, they need to talk directly. That might actually not be a bad thing. Because Russia is going to play games until it actually

believes that there's something of, you know, it's really advantageous to Russia. Until then, they're just going to play games. And they're obviously playing games, right? They're saying they're going to have a ceasefire on Easter and then they violate it thousands of times.

They're saying they want to ceasefire for three days, which happens to coincide with all their military parades. It's actually offensive. And then they rejected the U.S. proposal to have a 30-day ceasefire, which shows that they don't have an interest. And really, there needs to be a ceasefire, and then the negotiation starts. That's the best way to go about getting a long-lasting ceasefire. But right now, I think from the U.S. and our European partners and, of course, Ukraine, the best thing to do is to put Ukraine in a better position that they can start taking terrain back.

and that is going to be done by security assistance and support. And then if there is this, they go back to what I call the Kellogg Plan, which is they stop fighting. There is a security force that comes in from the Europeans that's backed up at least by air from the United States. And there's your securities. I mean, if they attack the European partner, that's it. But I think we need to start looking at a proposal

that's more advantage to the Ukrainians as they are. or the agreed party on this. And if they don't, Russia doesn't agree, they should start cutting some of the trunch or taking tranches of the frozen assets. I was just going to say that. Yeah. Just start.

I mean, why not? Yeah. Why not just open it up and be like, listen, we're serious. Like, we're going to burn this till it's empty.

Yep. And it's going to go to your brain. Yeah. I was literally thinking of just saying that. That's hilarious. Yeah. I wonder why they haven't done that honestly, too. Because, like,

that is a big signal that you're fucking serious. right like you know burning their frozen money not burning but like they don't get to touch it and it gets it's to finance you know weapons against them i feel like that's just you know that'll they'll feel that or they'll at least take that as a signal that that europe for the most part i mean europe is serious but like ultra serious like we'll fucking burn all your money into being fought against you yes i think it's it's a way to um basically fund you ability to defend itself and makes it more taxing on Russia the longer they wait. Right.

Right. That's why I just pick, you know, 30 billion a week or what have you. But every weekday delay. I think once you break that ice that like, hey, we're willing to do this, like Russia will be like, oh, shit, okay. We want that 300 billion back eventually. Right. And, you know, the idea that Ukraine should accept, we never should accept that if a country is stronger than another country, they can simply take what they want.

That's going to throw the world order, which is advantageous to the United States, by the way. Right. The world order to complete disarray. So they can accept that they might not militarily be able to take back Crimea, but that still means, you know, in the international space that Russia is an illegal occupier of, you know, Ukraine. Of a sovereign country, right. Right. They can accept a ceasefire and that they can't take it back. But they should never, you know, it's up to Ukraine, I suppose.

But I don't think we should ever promote the idea that they should. have to give away or we would ever recognize, you know, one country that's stronger than another simply taking over. Sure. Yeah. Light force. Oh, yeah. All right.

So. But a good thing. Good thing that that's done. And I think we've kind of turned a corner on that. I did see a little. Yeah. Go ahead. I'm sorry.

No, I just said, hopefully this effort in the Senate comes through fruition and the one in the house. Yeah, me too. Maybe one time Congress does something right. I was going to say I've seen a couple reports about the Victory Day and the May 9th thing in Russia and Moscow that Putin's kicking around the idea of not even going. Right. Because it's going to be targeted. Sure. Ukrainians have proven their ability in drone warfare is pretty substantial.

Yeah. So, and you know, China is not going. India is not going. All these people aren't going. They shouldn't be going because Russia's aren't legally occupying. occupying its neighbor, but they're not going probably because they're, because Ukraine said it can't, they can't guarantee their safety. Yeah.

Right. If you want to go watch, you know, the invading Russian army goose step around Moscow, then, you know, you're part of the issue. Right. All right. Moving to Mike Waltz being, at first he was fired and then he was reassigned, at least the timeline of things. He was reassigned to the UN.

And Marco Rubio, Secretary of State. supposedly going to take over his duties, do double duty as National Security Advisor and Secretary of State. Mickey's worked, I guess, sub-cabinet. So you've been around there. You've been around the White House and stuff. Is this normal operating procedure? No.

And, you know, when it comes to Mike Walls, he certainly, I think, had the qualifications for this job. And early on was considered, you know, one of those kind of instill is, I suppose, traditional Republicans. Right. And having his voice there, I think, was important as somebody who, you know, kind of looks at the Reagan philosophy of national security. Obviously, he made a mistake.

I'm not going to beat it at a horse with the signal. I think we've talked about that and everybody has. So this is, they're actually reducing the position itself to a non-cabinet, which it usually isn't because it's not a secretary. Right. It's an advisor to the president. And, hey, you know, I would point out that it's at least traditionally a pretty big job and the U.S. UN ambassador, you know.

Oh, sure. Yeah, ambassador. Yeah, but maybe kick that off in the beginning, right? But they're worried about the house, losing house, another house seat with Stephanie Act. I mean, it doesn't look great. Hey, guys, our show is sponsored by GhostBed. Check them out. Please, they make awesome mattresses, awesome pillows, awesome.

betting. Ghostbred provides high quality and super comfortable award-winning mattresses crafted in the U.S. and Canada. Did you know that 60% of U.S. adults report being too hot when they're trying to sleep? That's me. I'm a sweaty little baby. That's why we designed all of our products with cooling features so you stay comfortable and asleep all night long. Pair any of our mattresses with Ghostbed's award-winning adjustable base and get the ultimate

sleep experience. Ghostbred rules the family-owned business. 60,000 plus five-star reviews. They have sleep experts on staff with 20 plus years of experience. If you have any questions, you can hit them up and ask them, you know, maybe what kind of mattresses work for you. 20 plus year warranty. That's two times the industry standard. Free shipping and returns on mattresses.

Most of the products ship out within 24 hours. They have in-house customer support and sleep experts chilling in Plantation, Florida. It rules. It's the best. They give you 101 nights risk-free to make sure that these beds are right for you. If you don't like it after 101 nights, you could send it back full refund. When you purchase a ghost bed mattress, your comfort guaranteed. I'm reading it right now, and it's capital letters guaranteed.

Okay. They do the right thing, and they're a great company. If you're not sure which ghost bed's right for you, like I said before, you could take their mattress quiz online, or you can give a call to one of their sleep experts and they'll help you. with exactly what you possibly could need, what works for you and what doesn't. And the best news about this is Team House listeners and viewers. You get an extra 10% off sitewide for a limited time.

You just go to ghostbed.com slash house and use the code house at checkout. One more time, that's ghostbed.com slash house with the code house, H-O-U-S-E at checkout for an extra 10% off site-wide. I want to thank Ghostbed for their continued support. I want to thank all the fans that listen and watch for their continued support without you guys, we are nothing. So thank you for supporting the show. And thank you for supporting the companies that help support the show.

Ghostbed.com slash house for 10% off made in the U.S., made in Canada. Shout out to our brothers in Canada. They rock. Check them out. I love Ghostbed. Thanks, guys. No. And so this has been done before.

with, what am I drawing a blank? It'll come to me from Henry Kissinger. Henry Kissinger was Nixon's Secretary of State and National Security Advisor. And if you read Secretary Kissinger's books, many of them, he references how hard it is and how it's really not the way to go. And to your point, yes, I, that was in the NSC every, you know, every other day when I was in the Pentagon, right? That's where the interagency policy discussion happens.

The National Security Advisor is the advisor to the president. He needs to be with the president. Yeah. Right. It's, it is, that's his role. He brings the interagency together, mostly through coordination with his staff, where they have these discussions, and it goes from, you know, lower levels, up to deputies, to principals.

And then if the presidents in the room, it's the full NSC, his advice, his, yes, he gives direct advice to the president, but he also does the coordination. And he can't really do that if he's traveling all over the world. So if you're Secretary of State, then you are the representation of U.S. policy around the world. Right. So the Secretary of State needs to be primarily traveling around the world. Where the National Security Advisor needs to be primarily where the president is at the White House. So it's a very geographically, logistically, difficult to do both jobs. In fact, some would say it's can't. You just can't.

Yeah, it doesn't make sense. Well, it does seem like Steve Wickoff is the pseudo-Secretary of State. I mean, he's all over the place. I know he's a special envoy to Ukraine and the Middle East. Yes. And it was funny. I heard a quote, and I'm paraphrasing the quote from Secretary Rubio, like kind of like a little frustrated about what's going on with,

before the mineral deal saying like we can't just be running around like jumping on planes visiting places all the time. It's like literally bro, that's your fucking job. You're the secretary of state. I feel like you need to be you know, should be traveling probably 30

weeks a year or whatever. You know, the majority of the job. Yeah. I mean, I don't know what's Secretary of where I was referring to whether it was like he was talking about travel just for the sake of travel. Yeah. I don't know. But, you know, obviously there should be a purpose in every, it's not just like going to visit people and, and maybe he was referring to this proliferation of special envoys. I don't know. But yes, to your point, D, the Secretary of State historically, traditionally, and obviously because of the job, is traveling around the world representing the United States in our, you know, objectives and foreign policies with international leaders. He might be referring to. you know, it isn't just about traveling.

It's about, you know, what, what is our goal here? What are we trying to advance? So I don't know what the... So he was referring to like the start and stop of like Ukraine talks, like, you know, whether there's going to be a mineral deal or ceasefire and stuff like that. And they like to start and stop of it because I think they had made a few trips in the last, you know, two, three months. Well, if it's not advancing, then I could see the secretary turning it, certainly turning it over to, his people, right?

So it looks like the fourth, I think it would be the fourth engagement between the United States and Iran on the nuclear deal isn't going to happen. Oh, that also is who he was frustrated about as well. Sure. So that this, that shouldn't, I mean, he can't, he can't be so focused on one event

unless it's close to the end when it requires the big guns, if you will, at the expense of everything else around the world. So that's why, you know, you have, under secretaries and assistant secretaries and deputy assistant secretaries they need to be empowered at least to do a lot of thought of the necessary work to get it to a point where you know the president can sign it etc because if he focuses on everything he's not going to be good at anything right i do if that's what he's referring to that that certainly makes sense to me yeah um

going back to mike waltz uh his deputy as well Alex Wong got I don't know if they were if he was re-signed to the UN as well. But, man, I don't know. It just seems like we've been hearing about Mike Walts and Keith Kellogg, General Kellogg, as like the kind of sober voices in the room when it comes to like various issues across the world. And, you know, increasingly more, Keith, General Kellogg is more isolated.

And, you know, Walt's just straight up got reassigned from, yeah, you're going to go to New York. going to have a nice $15 million apartment that you're going to hang out and go to the UN and sit and glad hand and do what you got to do there. I'm not, I'm not lowering the importance of the job, obviously. The job is important. But national security advisor is like perennially, perennially known as and looked at as like a key national security advisor to the president in the United States, right? Like you, that's like since I can't remember, obviously. so yeah so like it just i don't know it seems more and more like the inmates are running the asylum

because you saw the thing with laura luma and stuff like that and she crowed after after after mike waltz got fired and reassigned and stuff like that she wrote scalps which is unbelievable and i wouldn't be bringing up an ultra or right wing cuckoo brain and let and if she wasn't having like one-on-one meetings with the president you know what i'm saying like if this was some lunatic on like some podcast I wouldn't bro it up but she's obviously has access

and some kind of sway yeah and I don't know much about her but I mean if if President Trump removed Mike Walls because of the you know the signal issue that's one thing if he removed him because

of this person well that's another thing because that I think we should all want, as you call them, sober, very experienced. Mike Wallace was, you know, a former colonel in special forces. He was a congressman. He had been around the policy decisions. And, I mean, he was, he was, you know, what I'm calling our traditional Republican on foreign policy.

So if that was why people are celebrating it, then obviously I would disagree. Yeah. Right? because if it's about the signal, I mean, Secretary HECF started a signal chat with his spouse and brother. And so,

but it's up to the president to decide who he's got confidence in. Ultimately, he's the decider. Yeah. But I do think, I do think we, I would hope that we get somebody similar to Mike Walsh in the role of national security advisor,

sooner rather than later, because Secretary Rubio has enough to do. Yeah, you got a full dance card. Yeah. Yeah, and USA director and like director of archives or something. I'm not even sure what that is,

but really? Obviously, the guys has like four hats. I mean, he's a hard working man, but, you know, that, there's no way you can even do while the job. Yeah, me, right? Yeah, no, I usually,

I could probably kill Secretary to stay down its own. No, I'm sure. So, and like you said, going back a little bit to that signal debacle, like the person that kind of put out top, like secret info is Pete Heggseth, right? And Pete Hexeth has been insulated more and more. You know, the president's doubling down on his support for Pete Hegset and stuff like that. And I mean, I'm not really speculating. I think this is the fact, this is the truth. It's because he has, he is, you know, a loyal soldier, you know, he's going along with anything and everything the president says and he wants a guy like that and that kind of spot you know as secretary of defense no matter how fuck you know how much he fucks up and again i'm not taking anything away from like what mike waltz did with setting up the whole thing and then putting in the uh atlantic reporter but one more thing with that and mike waltz and i know you're saying he's like rocks out he's more of a sober voices and stuff

like that. But interesting report that he was, again, during the cabinet meeting, there was a picture taken that he was using signal communicating with like people in the cabinet. And it also came out that it's

not, it's a Israeli version of signal. Which I know Israel's our ally, but like you, yeah, you can't be using it's like using a Huawei phone to I'm being hyperbolic

okay China and Israel are obviously not the same thing in terms of our being allies but it was I just saw that and I'm like bro what do you like how about not using signal and Mick I've heard it before and it's been reported before that like

when you're in the cabinet in a high high position with a top secret you get clear and secure comms you get secure phones secure computers you can't fucking text on that computer on that phone?

Like, I don't know how hard that is. You can. And yeah, so I don't know about the Israeli version. I'm looking at that one way or the other. I mean, to be fair to everybody, signal is used often by people in the government. Right. It is, it's not for classified information,

but, you know, instead of using the cell text, right, it was considered at least in the past to be more secure than texting. right right so i don't know if that's what he's doing uh and again i don't i think you know i don't know beat it at or anything the guy's gotten an up grief about you know and acknowledged that he was a mistake so i don't know i don't know one way or the other but there to your question uh the there is devices obviously that you can have portable that are secure and i and we obviously should be using that for any kind of classified material okay so a little bit of uh clarification

he's not using an Israeli version of signal. He's using, it's called telemessage because it archives the signal messages. And that's an Israeli app. That's crazy. Yeah. Yeah, they should be a better way for them. Yeah, man.

I mean, God, they have to do some kind of like, when you come in, I'm the new NSA, I'm the new sect deaf or whatever. here's a briefing or like an orientation as to like how to be operationally secure or just like keep things off the phone. Like there has to be some smart guy that walks in there is like, you can't do this, you shouldn't do this,

this and this, right? Yeah. And they don't think, at least from my experience, it isn't a suggestion. It's, this is what we're doing.

You know, maybe it's a little different to a secretary. You know, I wasn't one of those. But sure. You know, it's it's uh it's not a it's not a uh suggestion it's a you know this is the way we do business and this is how they'll communicate yeah period and even if it is a bit of like an inconvenience

it's like yeah you have a serious position i'm a dumbbell and i would be like yeah i can't i need to make sure i don't fucking say stupid shit on my regular personal cell phone right like it's just it should be obvious i feel like so that's kind of what the frustrating thing about it is for me I'm right hot about it. All right. Moving on, Israel, Palestine. What's going on there? I've heard upwards of 2 million people are starving.

And it's just an incredible amount. That's a majority of the people there. We just don't have any kind of aid whatsoever. I'm going to be honest with you, Mick. I'm not exactly. I see Israel as like really using famine as a way to like, I don't know. I don't want to say ethnically cleanse, right? Like it sounds insane to say that in 2025 with like a supposed democratic country.

But dude, I mean, all signs points to that. And I know you're like deeply connected with the humanitarian aspect of what's going on in Gaza. and you're trying every day probably to get stuff in there. Where are we with that? Like, what are your thoughts? So you're right. They've cut off humanitarian aid going into Gaza and people are at serious risk of starvation.

And of course, that affects the vulnerable populations, the quickest, which is children and the elderly and the sick. you know, three of the three parts of the society we should most want to protect, right? Right. That needs to change. I mean, nobody's asking me except for, I guess you just did. We need to, humanitarian aid needs to flow into Gaza. It shouldn't be used as any form of leverage negotiations, I would say.

I think most people would say, and it's the law, the international law. I'd also say that Hamas needs to accept the agreement they were offered many, many, weeks ago. Why are they not? Because they stockpile food, likely, in their tunnels that they spent over a billion-dollar building before they launched an attack on October 7. So they seem to be completely indifferent to the point of the Palestinian people in Gaza. And by that, I mean, they don't care. In fact, they use it to their own, you know, warped agenda. But if they would accept the agreement to have a pause. Again, I don't think it should be withheld. We would see humanitarian aid come in. We'd see hostages coming out and they'd get some of their prisoners back. The same agreement that they

had originally. Now, the issue is, Abbas wants to hold out to the IDF fully agrees to withdraw from Gaza. And the problem is they aren't going to do that unless there's some kind of security to fill the vacuum. Because right now, I mean, Hamas has been significantly degraded. Don't get me wrong. But they could reconstitute themselves if they're not under military pressure. So if they pull out, I think Israelis left, right and center would say, well, holy hell. So Hamas is going to reconstitute himself and we'll be back in the same boat.

So now, there's no great options. I think the best option would be to build some kind of acceptable Palestinian. force, that the Israelis, you know, vet and check and make sure they're not connected to Hamas or, you know, P-IJ and those groups that are independent. And it can be a security, not just to protect people in any society, like a police force, but also strong enough to make sure that Hamas doesn't reconstitute itself, start gathering weapons and all that stuff. That needs to happen. And it's not. And it's not just on Israel. It needs to be. I mean, there's a lot of talk by the international community,

but my question would be, what's the action? Yeah. I'm pretty sure in the last administration, Secretary Blinken went around asking a lot of countries if they'd be willing to contribute to a multinational force, and he got a resounding no. And I understand the issue, so don't get me wrong. I'm not saying to everybody.

But, okay, so if that's not going to happen, what's the alternative? Because people, I think, rightfully, would like to see the idea of which we draw? Well, there needs to be, a discussion on what would fill their vacuum. I think if people are generally interested, and hopefully they are,

in ending this conflict and the suffering of the people involved, there has to be an actual effort to get that to come, or it's mostly just rhetoric of people using it for their political positions. Yeah, I mean, listen, I've seen it. I've stumbled upon a couple of videos and stuff of like a 12-year-old, amaciated malnutrition girl.

And it's like, bro, it's literally like pictures from a concentration camps, right? She's, like she looks completely like she's starving. She looks like a skeleton with skin on her.

And, I mean, listen, we've had two wars, right? Iraq and Afghanistan. Do we withhold humanitarian aid? I'm not saying we were perfect at all. right we weren't but did we use that as like a fucking bargaining chip no no i mean i i i've spent a lot of time in both areas and i've never even heard that so i i do think we should uh put pressure

to make sure that aid starts flowing it needs to happen immediately uh and age is it's food of course but it's also critical medicine which once you get to a level of starvation you become way more vulnerable to disease and it's power right you can't even make clean water without uh power to run the desalinization by it. All these things should be happening and should, I don't think should be part of any negotiation. But it's two things can be right. You should be able to get humanitarian aid and you should understand the situation, the security situation and realize that no country on earth would accept a country next to them where Hamas was in power. They just wouldn't. We certainly wouldn't. United States, right? So I think there,

should be more of an effort to assist in bringing that up. God bless you. And it looks like they're calling up tens of thousands of reservists. I was talking to some of my friends that are there. And there's a very diverse opinion inside the IDF for people who don't know that on this whole thing. But they're being called back up, which is a big difficulty for them. That means these reservists have put their lives on hold for a long time. because they simply can't progress in like college or any career right so but it looks like

there's going to be another substantial push in Israel in Gaza excuse me because they're calling up you know a large amount of preservatives so that indicates to me there's going to be another effort to significantly go after a lot yeah man that to me it's it's fucking crazy it's brutal and listen I'm not saying that Israel shouldn't be a secure country um I think it should, and it relatively is. I mean, the amount of security assistance they get from the United States and the level of which, like, where their intelligence is at and military is at, like, dwarfs most other countries.

I don't want to relitigate, like, what went down on October 7th because, like, they fell asleep at the wheel. Let's be real. And I don't think their political will is there in terms of with B.B. Netanyahu, specifically, and his war cabinet. to stop this. The minute this is over,

he's going, he at least going to like, you know, the investigation for his corruption charge is going to kick off again. So he has an actual like incentive to keep this shit going. So I'm just saying like we don't

like we don't have good faith actors here. And the same thing goes with Hamas. I'm not saying Hamas is like some fucking, you know, Christian, you know, some like a charity group that's, It's like does what good.

They're fucking rats too and they need to go. But like beyond rats. I mean, they're depraved. They're completely depraved. Uh, with zero care for human life, including their own, you know,

people they claim to represent. Yeah. I mean, Mick, you're, you're a military and covert ops expert, I would say. Uh,

and I think anybody would say that. He's a full-fledged, like invasion and occupation. Like, this what is going to work or is it more like I think what the Israelis are actually good at is like their covert ops

and assassinations and stuff like that that would have made more sense in terms of like at the minimum at least decapitating Hamas because if you look at what like compared to it to Hezbollah and what's gone on there there wasn't a full fledged invasion of how Gaza was right

like they just did a decapitation strike and they hit them hard obviously and Hezbollah is reeling Hamas. Hamas is still around, Hesbill is still on, they're both reeling, but they've gone about it

in a kind of different ways. And it's just, would it have made more sense to do a covert ops style thing, rather than full-fledged 100,000 troops, level an entire fucking place,

and starve 2 million people? Well, okay, so, I mean, you can do an invasion with that level on the whole place and starve people. So I would say it's not a necessary either or between the first two.

Like you obviously Israel is exceptional at their intelligence driven clandestine covert operations. I mean, they're killing guys in Tehran. They were right. They killed the leader of Hezbole. And they killed the leader of Hamas. The, you know, with the whole pager and push to talk radio operation essentially decimated the chain of command and has. So they're blowing up power plants in Iran right now. And ports.

We don't know that, but it's starting to look a little too coincidental, right? Right. So hats off, somebody who spent a lot of time in that arena, I think anybody would say, well done. The military is also proven to be very effective, not just against Hezbollah and Hamas, but also against Iran, right? They essentially proved that Iran was a paper tire, right? They would be no match against Israel conventional, even without us, I think. But the question is, it's very difficult.

We did, I mean, we're 20 years we occupied two countries, spent, I mean, I am not one to advocate for long-term occupation. I think it's essentially a loser. It's, there's no real way to win in the sense without, you know, old school just tactics, which is not acceptable. I haven't been unacceptable since, you know, we decided we weren't going to do that anymore. to World War II. After that, when I agree that, you know, obviously the Geneva Convention, the Hague it mentions everything that goes into that, that it's really, really difficult to, you know, quote, unquote, win a long-term occupation.

Because unless you're going to eradicate everyone, which hopefully nobody would want to do, you can't win a philosophy. Yeah, right? But you can degree, what I think, the fair representation of what Israel could do, the idea, is degrade Hamas, since we're talking about Gaza, to a point where they just don't have the capacity to attack you. They're going to want to attack you. You can't, you know, reprogram their head. So, and then prevent them from being able to reconstitute themselves, which is primarily weapons and munitions coming from outside of Gaza. So it's hard. I mean, it's

easier said than done. And I think they obviously know that as well as anybody. But this might be a push to try to do that to a point where they think Hamas is degraded to a point where they are okay with it. But again, there needs to be some kind of security that comes in to ensure they don't reconstitute themselves. And it's also for the benefit of the Palestinian people, which I think you're seeing a lot of protests, the people of the Ghazans, against Hamas. Right. And they'd be a lot more if they wouldn't summarily kill them as soon as they, you know, said something about them. So that's should be, I think, an effort of the international community would be to come up with a security force that is good for the Palestinian people and the Israeli people, right? So that they don't have to worry

about, you know, attack like October 7th that were happening in and that people in Gaza, the Palestinians in Gaza can start to rebuild their society. But it's going to be, to rebuild, it's going to be $50 plus billion over a decade. So that's another area of the international community that needs to be ready to step in and do because it's it's unenhabitable right now. There's essentially people are living in Brones. Yeah. I mean, actually

fucking brutal. Question about like the other groups that are coming out and doing protests against Hamas and Gaza which you know, good on them. I mean, it's unbelievable. The kind of human spirit, like balls it takes, right, to like do that because you're putting the crosshairs

on you for sure. And you, like you said, you've seen, we've seen like Hamas guys breaking up these protests and stuff like that without getting obviously into getting kind of TTPs or anything is there like an effort I guess from like Musa or like even us or somebody to like connect with these people and see what we can do in terms of like something some other kind of entity in in Gaza that can possibly even look like not Hamas or not like just like one that hates Israel because I think it's hard to do that to be honest yeah yeah and I don't I don't know I would tell you right if it was some kind of the covert I think not just from

the intelligence perspective sometimes they can be best at identifying people but from the political and diplomacy they need to find people that have legitimacy within the Palestinian community that have the goodwill of the Palestinians themselves, right? So there's, you know, Palestinian authority doesn't have a lot of authority anymore. They're viewed largely as inept and corrupt. But obviously, Hamas is unacceptable. So there needs to be, I think, an effort by the international community to identify those that are more on the technocratic front, people that are good at governing, right?

to have a skill at governing. And I think there's plenty of Palestinians who have that skill. And maybe it's an interim that just focuses on rebuilding society. That's very basics to get to a point where it could have a legitimate election and pick somebody who is going to advance the social, economic, and diplomatic well-being of the Palestinian people. Back to a point we're actually talking about a two-state solution. with any authenticity because we're just not even there now to the point where it's not.

People say that, of course, it's policy in the United States, but we're just so far away from now. We need to get back to a point where that is acceptable to both the Palestinian people and the Israeli people. What's funny is- That's going to take a change of who's running. Right. And Israel, to be honest. Let's be real there. I'm going to be real.

I'm not sugar-coding anything for Netanyahu. I think he's an absolute fucking nightmare. Bangavir, too, the whole war cabinet, I think they're war criminals, to be frank. Because of humanitarian stuff, like, kids starving and shit like that. Like, I just, I'm not, you want to fight, like, for real, I get it.

But the minute you start using kids and old people as, like, a chip is when I check out, and I can't give you the benefit of the doubt. I was looking at some polling, right? And the highest ever, it was in 2010, when Israel, people of Israel, like the citizens of Israel, it was at 70% that they supported a two-state solution. That was 2010.

Now it's at like 19%, obviously. I mean, like, I'm an American. I'm like five miles away from the World Trade Center. I remember 9-11. I remember how angry every person. everybody was and stuff like that. So I understand that. But it's just like we never learn.

Like I feel like, anyway, let's just keep talking about the percentage, right? Like the, of the Israeli population that's gone from 70% and over the last 15 years is, you know, completely cratered now to under 20% that are supporting a supportive of a two-state solution. Yeah, it depends on how you ask the question, right? So if right now the governing body in Gaza is Hamas. Right.

So if that's what you're looking at, I'm surprised you even get to 20%. Yeah. Right. Like would you give a country to a terrorist organization like Hamas? I think the answer is no. Yeah. So it's like once again, it's what's the alternative for security? What's the alternative to the governing body?

Because if it's Hamas and Hamas, then the discussion of a two-state solution, I think, is, I want to say irrelevant, but you've got to talk about a different governing body in Gaza for this to have any real substance. And we're so far away from. No, that two-state solution thing. Yeah. That's just like at this point, yeah, at this point, it's, you know, if we're lucky a couple decades away, if we're lucky, I want to be honest.

I mean, I'm speculating, but I can't see it happening next year. Yeah, and I think on top of it. all this, we're looking at, although it sounds like Oman said it was a logistic issue, but we canceled the, would have been the fourth round of the negotiations with Iran on the nuclear agreement. So the question then becomes if Iran, and I don't know what was the holdup, I think we're seeing in reporting that Iran wants to be able to keep enriching uranium. They agreed to go back to the 3.67% in the original JCPOA, but the United States made it clear that any new agreement, they would not be able to enrich any uranium.

They would have to be enriched outside the country than import it in. I don't know if that's where this has come to a standstill, but if it has, if that's where it is, then we're going to start talking more about military options to ensure Iran doesn't acquire a nuclear weapon, which could be either United States, which would make it more likely to be effective. Yeah. Or Israel, who at least has made it clear over and over again.

If the U.S. doesn't move, they will unilaterally. So we're getting, that's, you know, a broader, which could, you know, launch the region into an even broader conflict. Yikes.

Oh, man. I hope they come back to the negotiating table. And frankly, I mean, as long as we can monitor it, I'm kind of cool with, you know, them being able to enrich the arrow on your uranium, especially if we could monitor it. I think if we can get the same exact deal as 2015 or whatever Obama did it, the Jigpola, plus the proxies, if you get the proxies added to it,

at some way, shape, or form, because they're going to fucking do it covertly anyway, like, who we're kidding? I think that's a win, and it looks like a win, especially, like, to the public optics-wise. And also, they don't fucking make a bomb, right? I think that's a win. I think the, obviously this administration would like to get a better deal in 2050 because they pulled out of that deal in 2018. Right.

There's going to be a lot of pressure. It is a lot of pressure on what's going to be in this. Ballistic missiles are the big issue. Obviously, that's the primary means of delivery of a nuclear weapon. And there's going to be discussions about making sure they don't have a missile that's capable of carrying a nuclear warrant. You said the proxies, that's a big issue. You know, these are terrorist organizations from my perspective,

Iran views them as allies. So they won't even, apparently, according to your reporting, even added to the discussion that they're going to support their allies. So this is hard stuff. There's no doubt about it. It's going to take a lot of experts and technical expertise to get this across the line, but it would be good if we can get to an agreement. If not, then they'll likely, if Iran,

does an intel it does right now they're certainly making it look like they're trying to get to a nuclear weapon like what's the point of uh addressing to 60 percent and you know it's it's clear that they are to me they're looking to acquire a nuclear weapon that they view that as uh the only regime security they have since the veil was pulled down when uh Israel basically just had adam during the back and forth so this this is something that's very real and you know we should all hope, I think, that we see these negotiations move forward. Because if they don't, I think the preparations for a military strike,

which should be an option, in my opinion, are going to become more likely to happen. Yeah, hopefully they hammer something out and at least keep talking. And hopefully we can put a lid on Israel as much. I mean, I'm sorry. I don't want to sound anti-Israel, bro, but

it's really fucking hard to like defend them. Gotta be honest. Because, like, we could be setting up a great deal, right? Where they talk about proxies and they even choose to not enrich in country, all that stuff. And will we, will Israel be like, oh, that's fine, that's cool? Or will they actually fucking start like a fight again or bomb them or whatever?

And, you know, what would, it's just, I don't know, we're fucked. Sorry. It's just tough to like make a deal and work so hard on a negotiation. and then have Israel just throw a wrench in it. That's what they're trying to do now with the unconfirmed, you know, bombings. Yeah, I don't know if that was them or not. Obviously, they're very good and it seems to be coordinated, but I don't know. I think, you know, they probably would say they're putting more pressure on Iran to come to the negotiation table.

The bottom line, and I am an Israeli supporter, I support Israel, the state, is the biggest problem in the Middle East is Iran. Yeah. Iran causes all the instability. I mean, take away Hezbollah, Hamas, the Houthis, the militias that Iran runs running around in Iraq, which aren't under the insurrection of Iraq. We'd just take them out of this. We'd have stability in the Middle East, right? The Abraham Accords were going pretty well.

You know, you had UAE and several other countries signed on. We'd probably have Saudi Arabia. already if it wasn't for the actions of Iran. So ultimately, the instability in the Middle East comes down to the regime in Iran. And I think if that could change, we would all be better off for it. Obviously, the people in the Middle East would too. And in Iran, of course, all those proxies I just mentioned, they attack Saudi Arabia and UAE and everybody else in the region too.

Right. So there was a pretty big conflict between Saudi Arabia and, and UAE against the Houthis in Yemen for quite some time. So let's not forget about that. Iran attacks essentially everybody and is the biggest cause of instability in the region and did everything they could to kill American servicemen and women in Iraq during the height of the conflict there. Yeah, and listen, I'm not saying I don't think the state of Israel should exist. I think it should.

I think it should be secure and stuff like that. I think they just need to not be as belligerent as they are. It's going to be, at least from my, I know, and I know Iran's, they fucking suck, too. I mean, I mean, I wouldn't even like, I would, I mean, I don't know if I would compare the apples to apples to both of them. I mean, they're both. Iran is not obviously in their regime because the Iranian people are probably great, like the Israeli people are. And I'm not saying, like, do not keep the pressure on. Iran, especially covertly.

Like, don't stop. Because, you know, that's, like, kind of what we're good at for the most part. But, like, regime change. Who's going to change that regime? Not us. There's no political will in the United States for that. Right. I mean, the United States isn't going to take on the role of invading another country. Certainly, a country the size of Iran. And by the way, just for, if you look at the terrain in Iran, militarily, it's damn near impossible.

It is massive mountain. ranges from just about every avenue of an approach that is almost impenetrable on anything on the ground. So, I mean, it would be a bad idea anyway. Sure. I didn't say what I said. But it's just not a, it's not a thing. So we're going to have to do most of our efforts clandestinely and covertly. And but I think ultimately that instability in the Middle East is at the doorstep of the regime in Tehran.

Yeah. Wow. All right. Anything else? What do you got? You tell me. I think we cover it a lot there, Dee. Yeah. Guys, check out Mick. His links are in the description. You can find out everything he's up to. Fogbo, Lobo Institute. We just had a great podcast. Check that out with Eric Ulrich and Mark Sullivan, who wrote the book, All the Glimbering stars about child soldiering and Anthony and Florence Apocca, who I guess. incredible incredible story the book is available check out the book um yeah that story is just unbelievable um gives you kind of hope for humanity i think as a whole um so check out that book especially please mix sorry yeah no thanks steve for having them on um eric and i did the documentary

and mark sullivan was the author that we took out there and wrote a fantastic book about the whole story. So all the glimmering stars is the book. I'm actually talking and it funds our NGO and child soldier and they're youngest two. So it's the two child soldiers that are married. The youngest two of their sons are my godsons and talking to them today. Oh, nice. They practice their English on me. They're two twins. Oh, that's awesome, dude. Yeah. Yeah, you can go to nchild soldiering.com. The link will, I'll put a link in the description as well. Yeah, incredible.

It should be made of a movie. I'm going to keep saying. Check out the podcast if you want to learn more. You can go to Lobo Institute as well and see what they do. And of course, Mick, LinkedIn, you know, we want to find Mick. The links are in the description. Any of the other guys, Jason, Andy, all the links are in the description as well. Best way to support.

And if you want, add free audio and video is patreon.com slash the teamhouse. You get both eyes on geopolitics and the team house. ad free and early access to you. You get it about a day or two later. So a day two before. So yeah, Mick, this was great. I love it. I want me and you to talk for like two hours about Israel and Iran.

Get it. I want to get into it with you. They might be getting into it. Thanks, guys. Thanks guys for checking out. Have a good rest of you. You too, bro.