The Team House - Trump, Orbán, and the Ridiculous Venezuela Vote | EYES ON GEOPOLITICS

Episode Date: November 10, 2025

Dee, Mick Mulroy, and Andy Milburn break down the week’s biggest geopolitical flashpoints — from Trump’s meeting with Viktor Orbán and Hungary’s deepening ties to Russia, to the U.S. Senate��s shocking Venezuela war vote. The trio also examines Israel’s Gaza ceasefire dilemma, global intelligence maneuvers, and the moral cost of modern warfare. A sharp, unfiltered conversation on power, policy, and principle.Support the show on Patreon:⬇️https://www.patreon.com/TheTeamHouseSubscribe to our new newsletter!!!!https://teamhousepodcast.kit.com/joinNew merch, patches, and stickers! ⬇️https://theteamhouse-shop.fourthwall.comCheck out Mick's new podcast here:⬇️Apple Podcasts:https://podcasts.apple.com/at/podcast/pub-and-porch-applied-stoicism/id1836955475Spotify:https://open.spotify.com/show/1k3QPmkAMwnGJxMLDwUSSd?si=n6piIu8XRcag1Z0K43A3bQYoutube:https://www.youtube.com/@UCd0Hq6QFk8CoTu5j-VU0Ong Find Mick Mulroy here: 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?uBluesky ⬇️https://bsky.app/profile/bgsilverback73.bsky.social"Karl Casey @ White Bat Audio"00:00 — Start01:58 — Hungary waiver fallout05:00 — Orbán’s authoritarian drift08:49 — EU & NATO response options16:17 — Venezuela strike watch19:45 — Senate authorization fight30:48 — Gaza ceasefire & ISF plan43:00 — Dehumanization, history & U.S. identityBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-team-house--5960890/support.

Hey everybody, welcome to another episode of Aizond Geopolitics. I'm joined today with Andy Milburn, Mick Mulroy, myself, Dmitri, Cone tacos. A lot happening. I'm going to be honest, obviously a lot's happening in the world always. This week has kind of been a little bit quiet, more quiet. We had a show last week talking about what seemed to be the U.S. military spinning up to hit Venezuela. Nothing has happened since. I think we have hit a couple of narco-boats.

it's in the interim. So that's not nothing. But some people would argue it's breaking international law. But, you know, so it's not nothing for sure. What we're going to hint on today to start with is Victor Orban's meeting with Donald Trump in the White House this past week. A couple of key points from there. I mean, obviously it's a hot button issue because Orban is, Hungary is obviously an authoritarian, has become an authoritarian country. Uh, the big, I guess the big note from there was the, uh, energy stuff because, um,

Hungary does get about 86% of its oil, uh, from Russia. Uh, and the U.S. has been kind of putting the screws to Europe to stop their, uh, you know, their dependence on Russian oil. And Hungary got a one year moratorium on that, which I'm sure will cause some issues with the rest of the EU. NATO countries in terms of like they're busting our balls to get rid of the Russian oil, but we, you know, but Hungary gets the one year, you know, freeze on it essentially. Hungary also committed to buying US-licified national gas under a contract value around

$600 million. And Trump praised Orban's stance on immigration called Hungary well-led and signaled strong personal rapport. That's all the notes I have. So make you tell me what's going on with this. First of all, I have to say. a happy almost Marine Corps birthday to Brother Andy over there because, you know, there's going to be Marines around the world starting to lose it. I think today, probably. So if you don't like

that stuff, you probably shouldn't watch social media. There's a storm coming, and they're hilarious. It's at all serious. This, that's, you know, the birthday of our beloved core is tomorrow. And then Veterans Day is the day after, which I hope every, everybody takes the time to remember all those that gave this ultimate sacrifice. Orbaugh. So it is inconsistent with the strategy, the policy of trying to cut off Russians' ability to fund its war. And the comments, as you rightfully said, of the U.S. pushing Europe, many countries in Europe, which there are several. it still use Russian oil and gas to cut it, right?

And then have Orban come over, who is sympathetic to Russia, who is, as you said, sliding further and further into autocracy, less than to the belief in civil rights for its own people, and then give them a pass. They should be included in all the other countries that need to figure out new ways. And the U.S. could help them. There's all sorts of discussions on, you know, coming out of Croatia, this new pipeline. I know it's going to take a while, but coming out of Qatar that's going to go through Syria and go into Europe.

We need to be doing everything we can to get off of any dependence at all on Russian oil and gas. They are, as Senator McCain, the late Senator McCain said, a army for the gas station. So we need to make that is we need to make our allies in Europe to do the right thing and get off any dependence on them. So Orban came out of that saying he got an indefinite waiver.

I don't know if you saw that part. The media is reporting what the White House said, which I assume is accurate, that it's a one-year waiver. But that one year can, you know, it's going to be substantial to the war in Ukraine. So I think it's too late now, I suppose, but we need not to be giving waivers to friends because other countries in Europe are not going to say, you just gave that guy a waiver.

So now we need a waiver. And it's going to be a domino effect. So I think it was a mistake to do. Unfortunately, it looked like it was just a personal friendship that led the way there. It's not only not helping Ukraine, but it's not helping. what you stated U.S. policy is on supporting Ukraine and kind of cut off Russian oil to front of war. Andy?

Yeah, of all people to give a waiver to although on is probably the last choice that I would make. You know, I mean, you know, I will say, yeah, Hungary allegedly its economy suffered probably more than most other European countries from the sanctions because I think as you mentioned D, sorry, it wasn't that I forgot your name,

it's just encroaching old age. As you mentioned, Hungary is landlocked and reliant on you know, oil, pipeline oil. But, you know, nevertheless, there's the timing of this particular announcement. First of all, I mean, as I said, the person himself, Orban, you just have to read what he's to be doing

within Hungary, you know, let alone the fact that he is open and open support for Putin, an apologist, a close friend, Tody, a sycophant of Putin. I mean, these are all their objective phrases to use.

You just have to look at what he has been saying about Putin from the outset of the war, let alone that, the fact that his the way that he has been controlling immigration in the country. Yes, you can say absolutely he has a right to control his own borders,

but he's been violating Poland's sovereignty in many ways by pushing refugees into Poland, encouraging them to get in, enabling them to get in illegally. This is all open-source stuff, and it's one of the causes among several for that being a breakdown of relations between Poland and Hungary. But it's what he's doing within his own country, undermining the judiciary, undermining the independence of his judiciary,

using strong-armed tactics against opposing political parties, hiring thugs to break up demonstrations. I mean, all of these things. But the timing is bad, too, because Hungary's on the eve of an election. I forget what date it is. In 2020- What's that? It's in 2020-6.

Yeah, I think it's early 20-26. right and opposition to him is growing he's it's going to be a challenging election and now i mean he's all over social media saying that he came to the united states and secured a deal with the united states and which directly affects the the economy of hungary and is going to stand him in good stead with the electorate so uh there's political ramifications uh plenty not just geopolitical but domestic political ramifications that are not positive. And for those who say, so what? I mean, we should definitely, I think, you know, this isn't a naive view.

Again, going back to U.S. stance in Europe since the Marshall Plan, we should back countries that represent democracies and democratic values, and we should oppose those countries that threaten those values. I mean, that to me just seems such a, yeah, it's, you know, it's a foundation of what be standful, right, since the birth of this nation. And people seem to overlook that. So overall, incomprehensible decision, you know, it's, and not a good one, frankly, you know, and as Mick pointed out, those countries against whom we are imposing sanctions and whom we are rightfully hectoring to get away from dependence on Russian oil can now point.

to this anomaly and say WTF, what's going on? Well said. And Hungary is, of course, an EU member and a NATO member. So when I had to talk about this this week, I looked it up. Apparently you can't kick a country out of either of those, but there are ways to minimize

their potential negativity inside it. So the EU, if this continues, they can assess essentially take all voting rights away from something to be considered. Hopefully they would just leave them. They, hopefully they don't leave. Hopefully they throw Orban out and turn back toward the west.

The other thing on NATO, which we've seen, they can't necessarily kick anybody out of NATO either. But there's the one argument that I saw is under the Vienna Convention, Article 60, for people of care. there is a way to essentially remove somebody from NATO based on their inconsistency with the overall purpose and values of the organization. So if you're, for example, if you're pro-Russia, you're inconsistent with the purpose of NATO, at least to defend themselves against an obviously aggressionation of Russia. So I'll know that any of that's going to happen. But I think the discussion should start in earnest

if they continue down this road and Orban stays in power. Yeah, you know, I forget the name of the previous leader in Poland, but when he started varying towards undermining the judiciary in Poland, I don't know if you remember, but there was talk of downgrading, Poland and even evicting Poland from the EU based on that. And fortunately, that didn't happen, and Poland has made a remarkable resurgence. And now Poland is the country that we should be rewarding of them all. Poland is a mainstay of NATO, has up to its GDP expenditure to above, on defense to above 4%, has undertaken a massive modernized.

of its military has been overt in its opposition to Russia and actually covert too. If that who's that reprehensible human being who runs the team house, D. Jack Murphy. If Jack and Sean Naylor's high side, that's a great, by the way, that was a great article, too, I do encourage that. Was that released on the high side in the end or a substack about? Poland's covert operations. I think initially it was released on Jack's regular website and then a high site later. In any case, you know, Poland has been doing much, both in support of Ukraine and against Russia,

and to uphold everything that we have asked member nations to do in NATO and Poland has done more than that and should be rewarded in some way by the United States rather than Hungary. Great example. Hopefully Hungary views it. an example, the people hungry, that is. Yeah. And so the Hungary, Hungarian elections are in April of 26, no exact data set yet.

Just FYI for everybody. Yeah, I think we're going to see a repetition of what happened in Georgia, right? Where, you know, the Russians are definitely backing all around and you're going to see a massive disinformation campaign. You really have strong armed tactics

by Urban and, you know, his supportive thuggery. There's, you know, echoes of Georgia and indeed of Ukraine back in 2014 in this upcoming election. Yeah, I saw the Georgian elections. I mean, I read that Russia spent about $100 million on, like, advertising. Just not forget, like, that's over. Like, forget the covert stuff. Like, they're just taking out ads and their own, like, Georgian super PACs. basically to try and sway that election.

Yeah, same thing in Moldova. This is, and we've talked here on this show about Russia, what Russia is doing. The active measures that are being conducted by G.I.U. throughout Europe are increasingly active, and we in the United States appear to be ignoring the Mick knows more than I do, about the focus of the intelligence community having been forcibly taken a focus away from Russia in the last year or two, which I think is a great mistake.

It is. They're clearly the most dangerous adversary we have. They've proven it, right? Not only in their capacity to wage war nuclear specifically, but their willingness to. How many other countries have just invaded their neighbor in last year? right and if they're successful there does anybody really think they'll stop won't they try to gobble up every country that's not in nato i mean why wouldn't you believe that you know when it comes to intent and i'm not saying we should take our eyes off china uh but but russia is arguably a more immediate threat to u.s national interests because of it's intended because it's you know Putin is a wild card

and you're right we shouldn't take our eye off there's a new book out I just bought it The American Edge talks about and one this kind of argument in Washington it always happens like it's either or

no man it's I mean the defense budget's $1.1 trillion we can do both Russia and China right so just knock off the you know the policy won't stay Venezuela. Right.

Venezuela, right? I think that's the next perfect segue there. Canada doesn't even count. So it's why Canada earned that to you. Yeah. But we can do both. But American Edge is about how we are

or not even doing that. I mean, a lot of people, China Hawks came in, including people in this administration talking about how we need to focus almost solely on China. Well, now we got 10% of reports in the Caribbean, right?

part of the interview, I think Seth Jones is one of the authors said he was just out there and everybody told him, it's like, everywhere you see is China military presence everywhere. It's substantially changed

in the last few years and we're sending our assets elsewhere. Not the topic for discussion this episode, but I haven't read it, so can't endorse it, but Certainly the people that wrote it know what they're talking about, and it sounds very impressive.

Yeah, so, yeah, talking about shuffling our assets around Venezuela. I mean, we were all pretty sure that it was going to happen this week on an attack, us attacking inside of Venezuela, maybe going for Maduro himself. I thought it was going to happen later in the week, like after election day, but we still haven't seen anything. There have been, like I mentioned before, there have been some. kinetic strikes on narco you know traffickers and stuff like there

are like the smugglers and we're just waiting and seeing I haven't really seen any more buildup in terms of like you know assets into the Caribbean I know the general of Ford is like steaming in now and it should be there probably within like a month

where are you guys at with this what are you hearing what's the deal arm wrestle I think it was reasonable for not just us, but just about everybody, to think that something was going to happen. They were issuing notice to airmen blocking off air spaces doing B-1 flybys. Either that they were heading toward doing something and the president decided not to, which could happen. Or they were wanting to look like they were heading towards something, hoping that Maduro would flee the country. I don't know which is true

but I don't think you can say like oh there's nothing to see here and we didn't I mean it was just way more action that it was necessary there obviously there's going to be more forces in this area than any time that I can remember I think this

the stat is about 10% of the naval force will be there once Gerald Ford is there with its accompanying ships it's it's clearly about and you know this has been repeated so many times it'll say it another time it's clearly beyond just drug interdiction you don't need this for drug interdiction the drug interdiction is i think important most people are going to stick up for

you know drug smugglers so there's not a lot being talked about there but important to note that the senate voted not to require the trump administration get authority to do so something against Venezuela, which is odd. It's kind of like, it's not usually done that way. So, and I think it was 51.49, correct my, if I'm wrong. But so that, the way I see it, is basically authorizing the president to do something if you're not going to require him to get authorization, right? So I think you might as just view that as the president just authorized action against Venezuela, which is beyond interdicting, uh, ethically. drug boats. So that would be land-based attacks, which is a sovereign country.

Well, we don't like, or at least the government, but it's still a sovereign country. So the way I view it is they essentially authorize it. So perhaps now they're just waiting for the USS Journal of the org to get there because that's the big club in this, in this array of capacity that the US has. It will just have to see what happens when it gets there. Yeah, so a little info, Andy, before you go on that vote in the Senate, the Senate voted on November 6th, 51 to 49 to reject a resolution that we have to require the Donald Trump administration to obtain congressional authorization before launching military strikes against Venezuela or in Venezuelan territory.

I mean, that's the same. Isn't that authorization that? Yeah. It's the most extraordinary vote. and I just cannot see how that is a good thing. You know, I mean, the strength of the process for checks and balances, I say the strength, but it's been diminished over the years. But the whole point of the system of checks and balances that we have

is that Congress is supposed to provide oversight over the executive's ability to execute foreign policy. specifically to commit military force overseas, right? And so it's okay if there is a vote, you know, for, you know, in support of military action, you know, that's in line with the Constitution. But for the Senate to vote, hey, we don't even want to look at this one. We don't. We just want to, we just want to sidelines.

Yeah. That's abdicating their responsibility. under the Constitution. And we've seen frighteningly a lot of that. I mean, all through Afghanistan and Iraq where there was, I mean, look, you know, I mean, I'm a former member of the military. I'm not from, you know, the traditional left of the, you know, the source of alternate views. You never had blue hair, Andy. But my point is this, that it's healthy for Congress.

to provide oversight and the check on the executive's power to deploy military force overseas. And we saw Congress essentially abdicate that under a continuing AUMF in the aftermath of 9-11. You know, it was kind of an AUMF that was never challenged and on and on and on for what, I think it's still in effect, right? And so, you know, we get, get it removed in the next NDA. You'd have to look that out. But I mean, so we just went on for it. We flailed around in Afghanistan forever.

Even, even when, as everyone knows, the reality on the ground didn't match our lofty objectives. And no one really questioned that, right? And it just went on and on because it was unpatriotic, right, to challenge the use of American force. in the aftermath of 9-11, even two decades after 9-11, even though we were wasting blood and treasure in a war that we could not win, and the many on the ground knew that we could not win it. So just a few years later for us to say, or send it to say, hey, we don't want to look at this.

It doesn't matter what you think about whether or not we should go to war with Venezuela. you should probably want the U.S. political system of checks and balances to work in the way that the founding fathers intended it for it to work, right? And someone's going to have to, you go to war. I mean, you know, think about the aftermath of Iraq and how that became such afterwards became from a good idea to, in most people's perspective, not. such a good idea, right? But in any case, had traumatic consequences, not just for Iraq, but the U.S. foreign policy in the region. And the only country that really ended up profiting from that was

arguably, arguably was Iran. You know, I know. And Iraq, and Iraq actually is not our, probably not our worst mistake. I think our worst mistake was to continue in Afghanistan as we did. Iraq may in the long term turn out to be okay. But anyway, my point is simply this, that to step back and say, hey, we're not even going to look at this. So I guess you can do what you want is just, it's abdicating your responsibility. It is abdicated, but I think you could also say they just authorize it. Right?

And you just say, well, whether you want to own it or not, when you say that he does, that the president doesn't have to come to Congress, you get authorization, you're saying as authorization. Authorized it without any rigorous debate. At all. That's what we should be saying is, what are the, why is your intelligence? What are the wise? How does this undermine U.S. national interest if we don't, you know, if we don't do this?

Why is this a compulsion to do this now? Because, you know, I don't want to wax too lyrical about this, but people are going to die. And the people who, you know, you may not care, there may be any. elements of the U.S. population and don't care about foreigners dying, but it won't all be foreigners, I guarantee that. Yeah, I mean, it's kind of incredible to me, like, witnessing, like,

media and even podcasts like this are doing more of a more rigorous debate than the people who are supposed to make the decision. There's only 100 of them in the Senate, right? That's out of 340 million people.

Frankly, to me, if you ask me, it's like an impeachable offense. for senators to not take the subject and the issue and to even debate I want to be honest like it's a fucking joke and honestly we would be better off or certainly Venezuela would

if Daryl did say he's a autocrat he's tyrannical he's taken a country that should be one of the wealthiest countries in the Western Hemisphere not not I mean southern western hemisphere and turn it into a basket case

for 7 million people had to leave because they couldn't find food, right? $14 trillion in proven oil reserves. But the question is, do we need to do it by force? I think that definitely needs to be debated, to Andy's point. Even if it's almost a flawless execution, we're going to see a lot of American die. This is the administration that wants to get out of the war wars. That's why I really hope, I don't know what they're doing, but President Trump was announced it. I hope the agency can figure out a way to do this.

this that avoids the need for military action, whether it's convincing his pilot to go to Miami or El Paso, which would be awesome, or, you know, take them out, man. I mean, we should not, we should all hope, even if you're for a regime change scenario, we should all hope that it doesn't end up with the U.S. military having to be directly involved, because that's, we're going to lose. and we're on the precipice in veterans there. And to both of your points, this is, if Congress isn't going to do its job,

however they come out, then I think the American people are going to start wondering. Yeah, you expect the Senate to be kind of the adults in the House, right? I mean, that's always been the way. And to be more bipartisan, to be a little more mature in their decision-making, and to understand the constitutional foundations of their responsibilities. That's why this is concerning.

And by the way, I announcing that you're authorizing COVID actions, and you want. Take out an ad and like. I'm sure there's a lot of covert, clandestine employees that are making more difficult. But we'll still figure it out. We'll still figure it out. I'm sure. I'm sure. I don't know what they're doing, but I'm sure they'll figure it out.

I hope they do. I do. But to the other point on the Senate, I mean, if you're supportive of the military takeover of Venezuela, just say you are in the Senate, then get on the floor and make you the argument. Get on the floor and make the argument. Yeah, make an argument. And if you're not, same thing. But just to go, we're not even going to happen. So we have a potential based on the size of the force, right?

This could be an actual invasion of Venezuela. I don't know if it is. I don't know if it's a bluff. But the size of the force is getting close. Now, I think there are a lot more ground forces if they're going to do that, but maybe it's a Norega type apprehension. So we're seeing that happen. And then the Senate says, you don't have to come to us for authorization.

Yeah, what's their job? What do they do, the Senate? So it says clearly in Article 1, they get to declare war. And they are in charge of raising the armies in the Navy, which of course the Air Force and regulations. So if the, I think the administration can say, okay, then that's authorization. So they could launch this as soon as the board gets there,

or whenever they think they're ready. And we don't know how it'll go, right? Even with the most elite units, which I think exists in the US, still could go bad. Still could go bad. We could see a lot of Americans get killed. We could see helicopters shut down. And then where are these?

Yeah. Yeah. So we should at least be having a debate, an open debate, not on podcast, but in the Senate. Right. Where it really matters, you know, actually matters, where decisions can be actually made. It's like a fucking joke. In the House. Yeah.

Yeah. In Congress. Yeah. I mean, it's just, like, they're just not working. It's like, it's nuts to me. Even with the shutdown going on. It's like, can we do, can you guys do your jobs? Like, you're the leaders of the land.

Like, take it fucking seriously. That's just me. An angry New York. I'm going there tomorrow. They might not let them know that. They're idiots. Um, yeah. Anything else while we wrap out, uh, Venezuela?

They'll be continued. Okay. This is, this is, looks like it's going so much. Well, obviously keep an eye on it. See what I did there? His eyes on. Anyway, last bit was, it seems like Hamas is being allowed to leave Gaza through the Rafa crossing. Which, you know, what's going on there, Mick, you know, enlighten us, please.

So the issue really is, from the U.S. perspective, there's a bunch of, uh, Hamas folks that are still in tunnels in the Rafa area, right? They can't get out. So I'm sure they want to get out. But the U.S. is looking at it as a test case for the disarming of Hamas. So I don't think they know actually where they'd go. It's either inside Rafa, I mean inside Gaza or potentially to another country. But Israel is pushing back, not wanting him to be given amnesty, because it's basically amnesty.

They come out of tunnels and put down their weapons. get moved to another place and then they're they're like out of bounds right so i understand how that would have issues for israel but if you believe in the ceasefire process and the 20-point plan this is going to have to happen if it can't happen with these 300 it's not going to happen with you know the thousands that still remain so uh the u.s is dispatched uh mr Kushner and mr whitkoff over there to really put pressure on israel so i think the u.s is right in this um that like, look, if this can't happen, then we're not going forward to the stabilization force coming in. They're not going to be doing reconstruction of Gaza.

All the things that's really beneficial for the people of Gaza and Israel, in my opinion. So I think the U.S. is right in pushing this to happen. Again, I understand why they'd have issues with it, but unless they just want to leave the current state as is in perpetuity, which is not acceptable. Yes. Yeah, I think the Israelis need to look at recent history. And, you know, no matter how violent the conflict and bitter the conflict, the ones that have evolved into successful peace plans have all been based on a DDR process. And that involves understanding that your enemy is no longer your enemy

and integrating him into the new security force apparatus. That may be enabmed of the Israelis, but it's a reality. It's a fact on the ground. You can't have a totally independent security force, unfortunately, and then have all these guys who have been brought up in a culture of violence and anger and resentment, just hanging around without a job that's not going to work.

You have to understand that they're probably going to have to be integrated into whatever it is. Whatever comes after the ISF, the International Security Force, or whatever the International Security Force mentors into existence is going to involve former Hamas guys.

Look what happened in, as Rhodesia became Zimbabwe. You think that war wasn't a violent, bitter war? You know, you think that terrorist acts didn't occur, that white settlers weren't murdered in their farmhouses, along with their kids and everything,

but it evolved into, you know, I'm not praising McGarby or what happened afterwards, but it, but it was successful DDR process. Same thing in South Africa, right? You know, where there was even a Truth in Reconciliation Commission. But the ANC, even though they were the victors, went through a DDR process and were integrated into the security forces along with former members of the South African security forces who happened to be white, and it worked. You know, so again, the Israelis need to look at that and shelve,

I mean, I'm going to get attacked for this, but shelve a lot of this animosity and bitterness and understand that the long-term demands that they make concessions like this. Andy, what's DDR just for everybody? Oh, it's disarmament. What's the second D and reintegration, right? Disengagement. look at um

using so much you start forgetting where yeah uh disarmem demobilization demobilization yeah but i mean

you know so on the on the international security force which by the way is still kind of a vague entity right it looks i mean turkey's offering forces the Israelis have mixed that

uh because of uh... uh... so it looks as those security forces are going to be provided by Azerbaijan, I believe, in Indonesia, neither of which countries has any real background or cultural understanding of the Middle East. And Indonesians may be Muslim, but that's as far as it goes. You know, the Egyptians are going to play, they're going to have to play a prominent role in training,

but I'm not sure if they're going to provide forces themselves to the ISF. But my point is that, again, this gets back to the fact that you can't have, especially outsiders, outsiders from the Middle East coming in and thinking that they're going to enforce peace unless you have some process for taking the sting out of the militants, the guys who have been fighting there in a, in a, in a, you know, Dresden-like environment for the last two years. They're not just going to go away quietly and become shopkeepers. I mean, we learned that in Iraq, right? And so the U.S. is pushing for the mandate for this ISF.

They were last week, so maybe this week it will get proved, which is necessary, so it's a good thing. But then everything Andy said is going to be, now you've got to put it together, right? So Egypt is acceptable, I believe, to Israel, obviously not. They might be the core of it. And the U.S. has its coordination center out there to help organize it, not to go in.

But I don't think any country, Egypt or Indonesia, is willing to go in and fight Hamas. They're not willing to replace the IDF and then fight their war. So it's really going to come down to Hamas willingness to disarm and demobilize. or unfortunately we could see this kick off again in earnest because Israel is simply not going to leave them in the sizable position that they are. That's the only incentive you can offer the rank and file. The only incentive is to give them jobs.

I mean, think about the sons of Iraq, right? Who do you think they were? They were the guys who've been fighting us, right? And we paid them 150 bucks a month, not to do that and guard checkpoints instead and it was a great program and it worked you just got to get over yeah you have to be like wouldn't that be like a bit like counterinsurgency strategy and like you've mentioned before any that the idf doesn't doesn't fuck with that yeah they don't they don't have a counter insurgency doctrine basically i mean they not not a not a doctrine they've

had various papers written about counter insurgency, but they don't follow counter insurgency doctrine. Yikes. Anyway, you think Israel would really be okay with, like Egypt taking a bigger role in the ISF, like the international force, like peacekeeping force, whatever? Well, they're not 100% trustworthy. They don't 100% trust Egypt.

Of course not. They're worried about the growth of the Muslim Brotherhood back in the military, even though CC is, vehemently opposed to the Muslim Brotherhood, the Israelis will tell you that nevertheless, the Muslim Brotherhood has a firm hold within the Egyptian military. But nevertheless,

they don't have a lot of choice. Right. Which is what Rick was trying to say when I stepped over in that. I wonder, I don't, I guess if both sides agree, it's not an issue, but there's a treaty of, if they would allow Egypt to move in, I don't know, if there's

some legal, international legal scholar can answer you that. And I guess if they're both for it, then there won't be an issue, right? Who's going to be contesting it? But some force does, and to Andy's other point, is a lot of these other countries, great for them for stepping up, but they don't have a cultural awareness of Gaza,

whereas Egypt obviously would be much more culturally aware. Yeah, Egypt to own Gaza until 1967. That's right. Yeah, that's what I'm saying, like, well, Israel and like the hard right of the, the Lakud, or, you know, of Bettenhanahu's government be down for that, you know. They want the war to continue, you know, when the, uh, when, when, when this incident occurred last week with, um, uh, Israeli, two Israeli soldiers being killed in Smoldrich is yelling,

this is war. You know, I mean, he was, he was absolutely euphoric, ecstatic at the prospect of, of having a reason to go back to war. But any of those guys served, by the way? It was just like a classic chicken hawk scenario where the most people haven't for war have never actually been in one? I guess I should love that off. Yeah, I don't know.

I don't know. I think probably the, I don't know if either of them had religious exemption, but their ages are such that they wouldn't have been involved in, you know, the invasion of Lebanon, and I don't know if they're involved in the 2006 war, but actually it was on it, but no, I suspect that they have not. I mean, that's even crazier.

Well, yeah, I mean, you've got, you know, I mean, the only Benny Gantz, who is a career soldier and has served in multiple conflicts is a moderate, and the voice of really. reason in that Ganeset and has been throughout this. So, I mean, I say, you're not really standards. Right. So, Gavir, he was exempted from service due to his extreme right political background. Wow. Wow.

So it literally created the chicken hog. So you can, you can have religious exemption, you can have physical exemption, or you can just be such a political, not a, They're like, we don't want. Unbelievable. So you can make decisions to send the military to war, but you can't be too crazy to serve in it. That's, wow. Wow, I'm going to use that.

I thought it would be just because he's such an overweight fat pig. So, yeah, Smoltritch served in the IDF in a non-combat role. He served as a secretary in the operations division for the general staff. Yeah. Oh, yeah. That's the general team. Yeah, that's the privilege to get to be what the staff of the general. That's the classic.

Yeah. Yeah. It's like, you know, a senator now who was a JAG in the Air Force publicly saying this week, hey, we're killing all the right people, you know. It's like the guys who've actually had to do that are less enthusiastic. You'd also think a JAG would it be a little bit more reasonable and logical in your thought process too. Yeah.

Yeah. Not this particular one. Right. Speaking of that, not to digress, but I don't know, I mentioned this yesterday, if you're looking for a good movie,

Nuremberg. Speaking of Jags, that is, freaking exceptional. Yeah. I haven't been to the movie theaters in a long time, and I really was lamenting the fact

that we haven't been making any good movies or, And I went to see that, and it should win them. It should definitely win the Oscar. Russell Crowe and Romney Malik, two already won the Academy, should win it again. And it's very, it's very, it's not just something in history that everybody should remember. It's really relevant because it's based on a book by the psychiatrists that interviewed them. And he's played by Robbie Malik and there's Dr. Kelly.

And his whole point of his book was, this isn't just a unique time and space. This could happen again. It could happen again. If you don't look for it, if you don't fight against it, this kind of depravity, charity is not unique to Germany's term in 1930s. And that's, I couldn't agree more, Mick. And that's why it's so concerning when you hear political leaders start to say, hey, rules of engagement are bullshit.

And we don't want to tie the hands of our words. war fighters by, you know, getting them not to, you know, trying to persuade them not to kill civilians, et cetera, et cetera. I'd say that that's exactly right. It's ignoring history. Right. And I mean, we could have just drug them out and shot them, right? But we actually had a trial, exposed what they did and had a process.

And that really set the standard, I think, going ahead. So there's a lot of reasons to watch that in addition to just being just exceptionally well done. Yeah. Check it out. You went to the theater there in D.C.? Yeah, the Draft House. Yeah, it's great. Alamo draft house.

Yeah, that's awesome spot. Yeah. It's a plus and a minus. It's a plus because, you know, I like drinking beer when I watch movies. It's a minus, but, you know, it's a long movie. You know, guys are rich. We're going to have to get up and miss a little part,

so I'll have to watch it again. Yeah. It's a little bit. It was good. It was really. really good though. I got to check it out, too. What's it called?

I was going to say so I totally forgot. Oh, to talk about what you were saying, Andy, like where, you know, we're like dehumanizing the enemy or the other, you know, whoever it is, we're dehumanizing so much. It's like when I was growing up and learning history and stuff, we were, and it's obviously biased towards us. We were always the good guys, right? Like World War II and stuff like that. And it's like more and more we seem to not, we're trying not to be the good guys.

Like it doesn't matter what happens. We can wipe out, you know, it doesn't, it's like, I don't know. America used to mean something, I think. Yeah. It's fading slightly. Let me tell you something I always think about in the height of the Second World War, right? And that was an existential fight for European countries. There's no doubt about that.

So we're talking before Barbarossa even began. No, actually it was right as Barbarossa began. So no one knew how that would turn out. But it really, you know, this whole thing about Britain standing alone. Britain was standing alone, at least, you know, within Western Europe, the only country. And its cities were getting pummel, you know, from 1940 onwards. You know, the mass raids on London, Coventry, Midlands cities, 30,000. civilian dead, I believe in that one year alone, right, which is a huge amount.

And so the British started to bomb at first very ineffective raids into German cities, you know, beginning with Berlin and then focusing, of course, on the Ruhr and Hamburg and a lot of, you know, and then became a bombing campaign, which, by the way, the British bomber Command suffered the highest casualties of the war. Fifty-five thousand killed, and only a hundred thousands ever served in Bomber Command, right? And I'm talking 55,000 killed. So over 50% of those who served in bomber command were killed, dead. But anyway, so while all, so existential war, the Germans, you know, Britain's, the Britain was still in fear of invasion. And it became a controversy, the fact that the British were bombing German cities.

And it was contested in Parliament. It was contested by the Labor Party, a prominent MP, who was a First World War hero, by the way. I can remember his name. But he's like one distinguished DSC in the First World War. But the point was, hey, this is against our values. We've become like our enemies. And we're killing civilians for the sake of killing civilians.

And that was an actual parliamentary debate. you know during during the height of war two the height of the war existential war France is gone and so I always think about that when I hear about people going you know we shouldn't have their hands tied behind our back we should be able to do this class it's like you don't get it do you you don't get why we're fighting in the first place

and we sacrifice and we lose that we lose that then we've lost everything I do think it's the core of America to not only be the leader of the free world but to fight for freedom I don't mean just to be standing on pedestal as an American. But from our inception, right, we fought to free ourselves in monarchy and tyranny. We fought a war to free all of our citizens, not just part of them, beat Nazi, Nazism, fascism in Europe. We beat Imperial Japan, which was dominating Asia in a brutal way that doesn't get near as much attention as it probably.

We should have. We won the Cold War. by leading, and we've been a force for good for a vast majority of our history. I think you could prove that empirically, not just as American talking. I think Americans should be that proudly and should do everything they can to continue that. If we're not, I don't know who would replace us. If we're not the, you know, this leader, I don't see another country replacing us, and I can't understand why any American would want to be replaced in this regard.

even if there was one. Tomorrow's a Marine Corps birthday, and it's a better day. It's a Veterans Day, so I'm waxing philosophical. Amen. Happy birthday of the Marine Corps, you know, and happy veterans aid everybody. I want you guys to do me a favor. Not you guys here, but the people listening and watching. I want you to go and check out Mick's new podcast called the Pupp and the Porch, Applied Stoicism.

out now on Apple, Spotify, YouTube, everywhere you can consume podcasts. The links will be in the description. Andy Milburn, incredible writer, incredible memoir, When the Tempest Gathers. That link is in the description. It's one of the three books I've ever read.

And it's at least top three of those. It's really good. That link is in the description as well. Check out Andy's substack. He's got a ton of links if you want to find Andy. And the best place you can go to help support the show is Patreon. dot com slash the team house you get both eyes on geopolitics and the team house episodes ad free and early and if you guys want you can ask us questions for the guys to answer uh you know both mic

mic andy and jason uh i have no answers to any questions so check it out guys a pleasure as always any final thoughts before i don't want to cut you guys off i haven't been reading the comments on our uh youtube recently are we still getting the usual there's always a small group of hate mail. Of course. It's the same. You're going to have some cons and stuff. Yeah.

This show is terrible. I hate you guys. I keep watching. Yeah. I just came back because I want to confirm how much I hate you. We'll occasionally get like, oh, this is like a CIA. This is a CIA sci up and stuff like that. I'm like, I wish it was because that means they're paying us.

What we would have done. that we're actually in the CIA. Bingo, yeah. That's step one. Is that what they teach you first day at the farm? You don't start by announcing. Lesson one at the farm, day one.

Guys, don't tell anybody you're in the CIA. First and foremost, first rule. It is. All right, guys, a pleasure, as always. Thank you. All right. Tell us. Thanks, yes.

See next way. Hey, guys, how's it going? It's Dee. I want to thank you for watching the show. I really appreciate it. I love for you guys to check out our Patreon. It's at patreon.com slash the Teamhouse. The link is in the description.

Super easy to find. If you're listening, it's in the show notes as well. You can find it right there. What do you get? You get ad-free audio, ad-free video for both eyes on geo-politics and the Teamhouse podcast. So two podcasts, add-free for the price of one. You also get the shows a couple days early on both video and audio. and you have the opportunity to shoot us a message, ask questions,

whether it's Team House or Aizond. We could cover topics and stuff like that. It really, really helps support the show. We really appreciate the patrons that are there now. We couldn't do it without you guys. So consider supporting the show. It's at patreon.com slash the Teamhouse. The link is in the description and in the show notes.

If you're listening to us on audio, really appreciate it, guys. Thank you.