The Team House - Ukraine Weapons Stopped by Trump Admin | Eyes On Geopolitics

Episode Date: July 6, 2025

In this episode, the hosts discuss the current geopolitical landscape, focusing on the pause in arms shipments to Ukraine, the implications of NATO's recent summit, and the ongoing conflict in Gaza. They explore the complexities of U.S. military aid, the strategic importance of supporting allies, and the potential consequences of congressional decisions on defense spending. The conversation also touches on Iran's nuclear ambitions and the need for a robust U.S. defense budget to address emerging threats.PBS debate about Ukraine Military Aidhttps://youtu.be/LcDrzKix0I0?si=h0n5OxSqc1eLnpF4Support the show on Patreon:⬇️https://www.patreon.com/TheTeamHouseNew merch, patches, and stickers! ⬇️https://theteamhouse-shop.fourthwall.comFind 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?utm_source=share&utm_campaign=share_via&utm_content=profile&utm_medium=ios_appBluesky ⬇️https://bsky.app/profile/bgsilverback73.bsky.social00:00 Pause in Arms Shipments to Ukraine05:35 Debate on Military Support and Strategy10:13 Congressional Decisions on Military Assets14:13 Trump's Communication with Putin22:43 Sanctions and Military Support for Ukraine25:44 Ceasefire Prospects in Gaza27:20 Humanitarian Aid and the Role of Hamas31:33 Iran's Nuclear Ambitions and IAEA Relations36:58 Defense Budget and National Security PrioritiesPBS debate about Ukraine Military Aidhttps://youtu.be/LcDrzKix0I0?si=h0n5OxSqc1eLnpF4Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-team-house--5960890/support.

Hey everybody, welcome to another episode of Aizan Geopolitics. I'm here with Mick Mulroy, Jason Lyons. I'm to meet you from tacos. Guys, do us a favor. Don't forget to like and subscribe. If you were listening to us on audio, subscribe and rate five stars there. And yeah, that's the bit of housekeeping. Just go ahead and do that.

It won't hurt. And tell a friend. A lot happening, as usual. First thing to kick off is a couple days ago. We paused our weapon shipments, some of that were already in. transit heading to Ukraine. That's caused a huge stir. There was some word that the reason why we were doing that was because we were worried

about our own stockpiles. An NBC report came out yesterday that said that's not the case. And heck, that's paused it anyway. Let's start there because there's a lot more going on. Obviously, Russia's pounding Ukraine with drones and cruise missiles way more than, it seems way more than usual, to be honest. Yeah. where are you guys at with the pause and the arm shipments?

Yeah. Well, first of all, I hope you guys had a good independence day. Did a lot of motivational American stuff myself. And to start on a positive note, I would highlight, didn't get a lot of coverage, but the NATO summit that was at the Hague, which will lead into my comments on the Ukrainian pause, was very positive, right? So, and you got to give the president some credit. He's the one that's been pushing so hard to get our NATO allies, not just him, every president since going back to when Europe decided to abdicate their security concerns to the United States.

So many presidents, but give President Trump some credit. They're now now agreeing to 5%. That's a substantial increase, right? Just to give you an example, I think I was talking to somebody yesterday, Germany's buying a thousand new main battle tanks. 2,500 infantry fighting vehicles and creating six new combat brigades. New, right? That's just one example. Now, I'm sure some of our friends out there,

the audience are going, well, isn't that because Russia invaded Ukraine? Yeah, probably it has a lot to do with it as well. So it's not just the American influence, but I think that's important to point out. 5% is considerable those that aren't doing it should step up. But there was also an ironclad reaffirmation of Article 5 of NATO, which means you fight one of us, you fight all of us. That was important for our NATO allies to hear. There was another affirmation that eventually Ukraine will end up in NATO. There was, I think, creation of the NATO assistance to Ukraine entity, which is awesome.

My son's out there doing that as far as the U.S. assistance. to Ukraine with his unit. And there was, and there was a lot of, I think, significant steps toward the development of a NATO that's a functional military fighting force. Anyway, we could talk a lot more about that, but I just wanted to highlight that before we get into. I don't know what we're thinking about pausing. This is stuff that was already approved and in the pipeline, by the way. Wasn't some of the stuff in Poland and stuff like that too? It's in Poland.

Yeah. In Poland. Yeah. Now, there's reports. I don't know if it's true that this was unilaterally decided in the Pentagon. In my experience, having been in, you know, the Pentagon, this would never have happened in a normal situation. This is a huge decision to cut off critical defensive, offensive,

but defensive munitions to an ally who's in a war. That would at least have gone through the policy coordination, process where other people would have an opportunity to chime in on why that's a terrible idea. And this would be a decision by the president of the United States. I mean, this isn't, this isn't something that would be decided on the DAZ level, for example, what I was. I mean, this is, this is, this is getting kicked up to the, to the president. So I don't understand why it was done. I think it needs to be turned back on immediately. I'm sure there's senators and representatives on both sides of the aisle that want answers.

This is a in this was already approved. It's in the U.S. interest to continue and to increase the support we give to Ukraine. Not, not charity, but actual our national security interest. Maybe we'll talk about it today, but we just approved it $1 trillion basic defense annual budget. So we have the capacity to do this. American companies benefit from this, our allies and partners benefit from this, and cutting it off, it's just going to inspire President Putin to continue the war, believing that he has the U.S. in a place that is more beneficial to him than potentially even. So that's all.

That's what I got to say about that. I think, I think, Jay, you listen to back and forth. So maybe you have some of the opposing side. Yeah. It was a, um, an interview on PBS. I do not remember the two ladies' names, but one was, they're both think tanks,

but one was for the pause. One was against the one who was for, she made the argument that this isn't just a pause. It's not a complete halt. I guess tomato tomato. She believes that, and Dee, I don't know if we can post the interview in the link somewhere.

So people can watch it. I'm going to actually say it's, Kimberly Kagan, the Institute for the Study of War, and Jennifer Kavanaugh of defense priorities. I'll throw the link in the description. Okay. Well, Jennifer Kavanaugh, she was the one who was for the pause. She kept arguing that this was necessary because we needed to focus on war with China, a possible future war with China. and that by continuing to send these arms that we were hamstringing ourselves.

And the other lady, she said, you know, one has nothing to do with the other. And that would actually only give Russia as well as China and Iran, you know, it would give them pause to say, okay, you know, they stand by their allies and they're willing to do whatever it takes to, you know, to, support them. And so it was a, it was a really good back and forth to watch. But, you know, how I feel about it. So, yeah. Well, it's good to listen to both sides, right? Because we don't want to just be the, I would say on this idea that, you know, the eminent

war with China over Taiwan, you just said it, Jay. I mean, the more, the more you pull out of supporting your allies, the more China would be inspired because they don't think we're going to support Taiwan by looking at how we support Ukraine. And China, this is reported out there that China actually was talking to a lot of European countries saying essentially that the same thing, you know, that they, they view the U.S. as a weakness, you know, when it comes to supporting Ukraine. And it's going to inspire them and obviously Russia to just continue this.

So if we have a problem keeping up with the manufacturing of these key critical munitions, which isn't just defensive, but also offensive, we need to fix that problem. Because what if we're in a war right now? What if we were in the war right now? And we can't even support Ukraine because it's our critical stockpiles. Something's not adding up. And so they need to do a real assessment with people that are more on the military, national security side, less on the political and say, If we're this close to critical, then we have dramatically underestimated how we're going to get our munitions if we should go to them.

And maybe that's addressed in the new defense budget. It is. It is in some part. But I just don't believe that that's actually the case here. I think we can do both. I think we can prepare and send a strong message to China not to screw around with Taiwan or any other entity out there and also support our. our ally that's currently being attacked after years and years by our other adversary, Russia. Yeah, I mean, if that, like, that's an interesting argument in terms of, like, being prepared

for China. It's like, you can say make the same argument like, why is CEDCOM going fucking bananas? CENTCOMs going bananas for the last four months? I mean, we're bombing the Houthis for a 65, 55, 52 days or whatever it was, right? And nobody said anything. That was a billion dollars worth of munitions. Yeah. Yeah.

And I was for taking it to the Houthis, but you can't have it. It's just Ukraine. It's just selectively Ukraine. The same people are talking about transferring B-2s and mobs to Israel. I got triggered. I got triggered when I saw that. Or ringing their hands when it comes to basic defensive munitions to defend themselves against these barrages. When we do have Americans in places.

in Ukraine. Like it's, you got to call it for what it is. A lot of this is just political. And it needs, we need to focus more on our national security interests collectively, not politically. I mean,

since you brought it up, Mick, let's talk about those two dunce caps of, congressmen, bipartisan too, one's a Republican, one's a Democrat, who are,

I guess, proposing a bill. They've done it before to other people where we give over our B2s and mops to Israel. It's like, Bro, there's a reason why we don't have universal health care. We need to keep our own shit to ourselves, right? The things that no one has, not even trying to have strategic bombers like that, stealth ones yet.

I saw that and I was like, dude, you're a congressman, man. Like, make that count. Make it fucking count for your constituents. You think your constituents give a flying fuck that we give B2s to Israel? Come on. Make it, you know, I can say the same. thing about Lindsey Graham too. Do you think anybody in South Carolina gives

a shit about what's going on in Iran? No. I mean, let's be real. Like, you have your first and foremost job, I feel like, is, as a Congress person, we're getting side-checked and I'm sorry to everybody, but you're going to have to get over it. Now you guys, the audience.

It's like doing what you've got to do for your district or your state. It's crazy to me. How, like, there's only how many 135 guys and girls, right? That's out of 340 million people. You're the leaders of the land. I'm a number of you.

Take your job seriously. All right. I'm off my soapbox now. You want to just say, Jay. No. I mean, there's really not much to say. I mean, yeah. Yeah, it's, I agree.

I mean, there are more pressing things to work. about as a congressperson as a representative you know whatever um too close to home to be uh you know proposing something like that you know or someone's face on mount rushmore or whatever it is um you know there are more important things now someone could come back and say well you just made our point about ukraine there's things too close to home well one directly affects things close to home or could in the future, whereas us giving Israel B-2s, it's not going to help us at all. We want to control the assets and nobody else on the world has. I mean, that's where I come down.

Of course. And I supported the strikes. So I think the U.S. should be able to take the strikes if it's needed for our own security. If it's not needed for our own security, why would we, you know, why would we then give it to somebody else who would then decide what, what, what, if it's not now not in our interest. I don't know. I mean, we can see a scenario where we don't want to see the war kick back off or, you know, I mean, there's a lot of scenarios where the U.S. would want to have the control of the very assets that nobody else has to be able to make our own decisions.

So, and that's not a slight against Israel. It's not a slide against any. It's, you know, I mean, it's the same as the British or the French or anybody. Yeah, anybody. Yeah, anyone. That's ours. You know, it's like your buddy. he's like, hey, let me borrow your car.

I know, damn that. I'll drive you. Give me gas money. I'll drive you, but you ain't taking my car. You know? Yep. That's right.

Yeah, let me get your one out of 19 car that's worth a billion dollars that nobody has to maybe bomb a country whenever we feel like it. Like, no, no, no, we dictate what happens, right? We're the United States. For God's sake. I mean, I sound like a, you know, I'm on the board of Halliburton, but, you know, but at the same point, we have these things, why give them up? Like, here you go, no problem. Lazy fare that carte blanche, enjoy yourself. Alliance's shift, man.

Think about it. Yeah, I mean, we gave Iran, you know, F-14s and their first nuclear reactor. Yep. You know, and we're not exactly writing each other Christmas cards right now. Nope. And we'll be talking about it. Just to round out, going back to Ukraine and Russia. This is more of like, I guess, like,

just an odd thing from a dummy like me that looks out of from the outside. There were reports that Zelensky and Trump were going to have a phone call, and then all of a sudden the day before Putin and Trump had a phone call. There wasn't much readout on what went down on the phone call. But it was the day before he talked to Zelensky, and this is after the pause and the weapons. I just don't get it. Like, why does Trump feel the need to have to talk to Putin every time he talks to Zelensky?

Putin's not our buddy. Definitely not a buddy. I mean, I don't know the thought process looking at it both ways. I guess President Trump could say that he's trying to get some kind of concessions from Putin before he talks to Zelensky. So, but because he came right out of it and said basically, I got nothing. Clearly not interested in ceasefire. And he's clearly not interested in his ceasefire. So it's time to pass the sanctioning Russia Act, sponsored by Senator Graham.

Senator Graham and Blumenthal on the Democratic side, but it's got 80 plus senators, right? So it's a veto proof. Like, I don't know what they're waiting. I really don't. There's zero interest by Putin to stop this war. He's intensified it. He's bringing in 30,000. Now it's

pretty much verified. 30,000 North Korean troops are going to be going on. So he's got allies. They're pumping out ammunition. They're pumping, they're sending their own soldiers for Christ's sake. you know and so we need to keep up the pressure with Ukraine who's never going to quit i mean if you haven't figured that out yet right if Putin hasn't figured that out yet i mean they're just not going

to quit they're going to fight all the way to the end so that means every last Ukrainian and Russia simply hasn't shown that they have the capacity uh military capability planning anything so um let's hope that but part of these this increase in NATO also translates to an increase in support for Ukraine because I think they're one of the same. Yeah, I agree with Mick on that. It seems I'm not in the administration's heads or Trump's head, but it seems like this is his way of saying, hey, look, I'm addressing both sides. I'm trying to get this thing done.

You know, it just so happens that I'm talking to Putin first. Now, from an intelligence officer point of view, Mick will know as well as I do. one of the biggest things you want to know is what is a world leader thinking what's in their head where from Putin's point of view he doesn't have to wonder he doesn't have to send his spies out to know because by Trump calling him first he's telling him what he's thinking I'm sure that they talked about I can't 100% say but I'm pretty certain they talked about hey what are you going to talk to Zelensky about and by doing that now Putin can kind of steer the situation steer the conversation, you know, that makes sense, but, you know, what about this?

What about that? Put things in Trump's head that could now steer the conversation with Zelensky in a way that it wasn't intended, you know, and that's one thing that we learn as intelligence officers is you never let an asset control the, the situation, whether that's everything from where you meet to what the conversation, how the conversation goes. you always steer that. So, I mean, I don't know who he has in his head if the DNI is talking to him or anybody like that. But to me, it's just a bad idea to talk to Putin first every time. Maybe on certain occasions, depending on what the situation is, what the conversation is going to be about. But not every time because now you're also just giving the appearances of Zelensky that you're going to defer to Putin first anyway. So, you know, why are we even talking? That's a really interesting point.

I mean, I don't know that. I obviously, I don't know. Anybody explain that to POTUS that, you know, we have the ability to psychologically profile key leaders and give you a lot of information that would make you better prepared for any of these conversations. I assume that they have, but that's a, that's readily available. And Putin is a former KGB spy, right? So he knows what he did. This is all his. This is his world.

So that's a really interesting. point. Hopefully they are taking advantage of that and the president's taking the feedback because if not, I mean, this, I'm not saying it's, you know, he's manipulating the president, but he's certainly trying. We know he's trying. So it would be interesting to see if somebody's actually trying to counter that and even give talking points to the president. I think this happened in the past that could, you know, turn the tide, so to speak. Yeah. Yeah. Because you break that pattern. Sorry, I don't mean a run. No, no, you're great. But if you. But if you, You break that pattern of going to Putin all the time and then this next time go right to Zelensky first.

Now you might force Putin or his people to reveal something, you know, questions that they might have, which is intel, you know, about it by saying, whoa, would you go to him first, you know, for, you know, did you tell him this? Did you talk to him about that? You know, so now we're getting information on what they're thinking. So hopefully somebody is in his ear about it. Yeah, Jay, that was literally what I was thinking. I was like, doesn't it, couldn't it, you, couldn't you get more yardage out of like, I'm talking as a lens game? You know what?

I'm going to miss a fucking phone call with Putin and let him sue on it a little bit. You know what I mean? Like, just to fuck with him a little. Yep. So, yeah, great, great point, Jay. I mean, also, like, outside of, like, from 99, 2000, 2001 when Putin first came to power, there were some talk about, like, he's a reformer and stuff like that. But over the last 20 plus years, he's clearly shown that he's a manipulative, lying.

I mean, you just even see Dmitri Mavidav. Like, him and Obama had a good relationship, right, when he was president, even though Putin was still pulling the strings, but he's gone totally fucking bad shit. You know, it's like these guys were just always lying, essentially, right? Always trying to manipulate. Yeah, it's wild. Like, I, you know, I mean, there's a reason why I guess Biden didn't take a ton of Putin or anything. phone calls from Poon. I'm not saying completely

iced them out and stuff like that, but you want to make a phone call mean something and get like actual stuff out of it, right? Like, strategically put it in the right place where it's like, yeah, we got X, Y, and Z out of this. And it was worth it. Because the more and more phone calls, you got to feel like it just waters down the effect.

There's a reason why. Oh, go ahead, Mick. No, go ahead. I was going to say there's a reason why again, going back to training as intelligence officers, it's always emphasized that you do not, You do give some a little bit to that, you know, to your asset or, you know, or to the person you're trying to recruit. But you don't give everything because now they control it. So we've got to get better at that, you know, by the, why we, I mean, the administration has to get better at making Putin stew. Make him sit for a little bit.

Make him wonder what the hell we were just talking about, you know, have the conversation and then announce it on TV. let him see it on CNN or Fox News and then that might force him and his people to give up something that, you know, that we want to know. I mean, yeah, like what else can Putin do, right, outside of a nuclear weapon? Like, what else can you do to Ukraine? Yeah, he's just targeting civilians. That's his actual point. And that's the way, I mean, we've got to think about that for future warfare.

What did Iran do when they were trying to fight Israel? They just launched ballistic missiles into, into like Tel Aviv, right? I mean, it wasn't even a fate of like, well, I'm going after military targets. It was a military target, you know, three miles outside of Tel Aviv. So there you go, right?

They're not even trying. That's what Putin's been doing the whole time. They just strike civilians. It goes directly after and strike civilians. Terror. They're terror, 100%. So that's the adversary we're going to face. Those are two of our adversaries if we, you know,

if God forbid there is a larger conflict that involves the U.S. you can't get 80 senators to agree on fucking anything. Right. I mean, it could seem like, hey, we're fucking serious outside of just military support, right?

Like sanction them even more. Give away their $325 billion to like whatever, whether it's European defense companies or American that are making shells or patriots or whatever. Because like what else can he fucking do? Putin outside of a nuclear weapon. He's not going to do that. No, because if he does a nuclear weapon, it might trigger Article 5 because the radiation fallouts likely to hit Poland and other NATO countries that surround Ukraine. It's not like you could contain it.

At the end of the day, he wants to be, he wants to be, you know, regime security is paramount for him. Yeah. Yeah. You could unfreeze. And they have been unfreezing like Canada has. I think Japan is unfrozen some, but the big bulks haven't been unfrozen. And I don't really know why. If they did that, I mean, then you're paying the U.S.

industrial base to, which will improve our ability to do this, right? Yeah. It'll increase capacity. We'll increase all sorts of things in innovation when it comes to development of these systems. So if you did both of the things you just said, if you did release the funds to support Ukraine, periodically, right, tranches, 30 billion, I don't know, whatever, just to put more pressure on Putin.

And you did this sanctioning Russia Act, that's going to send a serious message. to Russia, it's going to be beneficial to the United States and our NATO partners. And obviously, Ukraine. I got to, like, outside of maybe people in the comments would know, like, are Europe still getting a lot of their gas and oil from Russia? I believe they are. Are they worried that if they did start, like, giving out challenges of that $325 billion, that they would get cut off and stuff?

I mean, I think there's an initiative to go to nuclear. I don't know if that could make up, I defer to the energy experts. But yeah, to my understanding, I think they've tried to wane themselves off. I think there's other, I heard through discussions with Middle East friends that there's going to be some kind of pipeline that might come through Syria that's going to get to Europe. Correct me if I'm wrong, people who know. But that's years away. Yeah, if it were to happen.

But it would benefit obviously Syria, Syria, which needs it. but anyway the point being it was helped there's there's initiatives that long term could get Europe which should have been trying to get off Russian energy the whole time the idea they got more relying on it was just a huge strategic mistake yeah so we'll see what goes down hopefully they unfreeze the the weapons package you know weapons that are stuck in Poland just sitting there it's not even like it wasn't like they're all they're sitting in an American fucking warehouse they're in Poland like ready to be transferred so hopefully that has happens soon.

Moving on to, it looks likely that there's going to be a ceasefire in Gaza, fingers crossed. Hamas answered and said that it looks like they're down for it, or at least down to continue to discuss it. I mean, thank God. I hope it's fucking done.

Frankly, because that situation is an absolute nightmare. And we also have Netanyahu coming to visit the States, which is exciting. Mick, what are your thoughts? I think you're right. I've been talking a lot of my friends from the Middle East, and it does look like this wouldn't have been Netanyahu coming

if there wasn't going to be an announcement. I think the IDF has told him that they've essentially gotten a lot of the objectives they wanted to accomplish. It is a natural point to, have at least the start of a ceasefire and the U.S. proposal is 60 days. It's adjusted somewhat, but I do believe now it's 10 living and 18 deceased hostages will come out within that 60 days. And of course, the corresponding Palestinian prisoners like 3 to 1 ratio. But most importantly, the massive, this is what I was told, a massive increase in humanitarian aid, which needs to happen.

I mean, I mean, I hope, I wish Hamas was eradicated to the last. person, but withholding humanitarian assistance from civilians isn't the way to do it ever. So that needs to change, but apparently it is. So we might see, which is great. And we should all hope that Hamas is the right thing for the Palestinian people, which they haven't done yet, but maybe they'll view it in their own interest because I think there is an offer. I think there's an offer to allow the leadership of Hamas to depart and go somewhere else.

you know, maybe you're on as an old Intel dude, I would say, let them go. We'll find them later, man. We got a forever memory. So, but anything to stop the war and the issues that are, the humanitarian crisis that's in Gaza right now, let's hope that Hamas can see the pathboard. The issue, of course, is Hamas doesn't want to sign something that the,

that doesn't permanently end the war and have the IDF, draw. And that's the big issue. And the IDF doesn't want or Israel doesn't want to sign on to something because they don't know what a Moss is going to do. Right. Right now there's no suitable or even option to unless maybe private security. And I just don't see that being enough to fill the vacuum of the IDF. Right. So there needs to be some plan, maybe some way to build and train Palestinians that are vetted and trusted that can provide security for, other Palestinians both ways. And, you know, but that's something that needs to be started.

Hopefully it can be started in conjunction with the ceasefire that we can, like you said, all hope starts next week. Yeah. I think I read somewhere that IDF is controlling about 75% of Gaza now. Yes. Yeah, I don't know. I hope this fucking stops, man, because it's, uh, it's, it seems like it's a fucking nightmare. At least it looks like it's a nightmare. And also, do we really want contractors there

doing complete security for the entire place? I mean, it's not really working out great. As of, you know, the other day, AP reported that American contractors were shooting at Palestinians and stuff like that. Today, just now the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation posted a statement saying that there was an attack on a distribution site. I think a couple of contractors were injured. on top of the IDF, you know, from Heretz, IDF was saying they have a green light on fucking shooting essentially people at the aid sites where there are only what, four, which like you've mentioned before, Mick, there should be 400. So yeah, I hope this ceasefire happens, man. I hope it ends and, you know, we could just fucking chill out for a little bit. Yeah, go smoke Kamas guys in Iran, Iran or Qatar.

Have at it. Go nuts, Musa. do what you know you're actually good at. And hopefully with this, I mean, we spoke to former very senior UN humanitarian folks last week. There needs to be like 400 aid stations, right? So this is,

hopefully not enough. Yeah, hopefully it comes with that. And we'll see. And we'll see what Hamas actually does. They've indicated this positive response. So if they come back and then don't agree to it, I go from here.

be a unilateral declaration by Israel. And also part of the 60 day is a withdrawal of IDF from certain areas of Gaza. So there is, there is, both sides are submitting, submitting here. Yeah. I do worry that it's going to be like the first ceasefire where like after the first, like the phase two where it was like, who's going to do the security? and that's how it basically at least my understanding is that's how it had collapsed. I hope that's not the case again.

I don't know who the fuck's going to step up because it doesn't seem like anybody else will. So at least let's stop the fucking bombing and let's get people some fucking food and medicine. Yeah, start reconstruction. Yeah. Last bit, Iran ending cooperation with the IAEA, which is what they said they would do,

obviously if they got hit and they would redouble. They also said they would redouble their efforts in getting a nuclear weapon. A couple things there, too. The Pentagon came out and said that we brought them back a year or two. Frankly, at this point, I don't really trust what the Pentagon says. Got to be honest with you. It could be true. I mean, they were a year away anyway.

Even Netanyahu said that. So anyway, Iran, it seems like it's kind of a, a cooling period now. They have a ceasefire and stuff, but it does seem like Iran's like they were photos, satellite photos of them excavate in the Ford outside. We'll see where it goes from there.

Maker, what do you read it on that? Well, I mean, first thing, trust your enemy when they're telling you what they're doing, right? So, I mean, they were already at 60% in rich uranium and there's around 400 kilograms of the stuff, we think. That's way over what you need for civilian energy. So that tells me right there.

they want a nuclear weapon. It told me before the the A Strikes actually that they were trying to send a message to the world that that's the way they were heading. So maybe they were using it as negotiation tactics, but there you go. You got the response.

So now when they, the IAEA, they had cameras at these facilities. They had access to these facilities by taking them out. They're saying that they're going to do things that they would not have wanted to see the IAEA C, right?

That's, I mean, that's how you have to view it, my opinion. So they are going for a nuclear weapon, and we need to focus on dismantling that. And that, to me, is everything's on the table. I'd like to see it in a diplomatic new nuclear agreement, but that's up to Iran. It's clear the U.S. wants to do that, too. Maybe not Israel. But if they don't, then we need to focus our intelligence efforts. And I'd like to keep it on the covert side.

You know, it's better than the overt side. But, you know, and every step they make makes it more likely that this is going to become a conflict again. I mean, they have one of their Aitolus calling for the assassination of Prime Minister Netanyahu and President Trump. Oh, really? Okay. The two commanders in chief of the most significant military forces against you. And you've just called for their assassination. So, I mean, you're responsible for your work.

A big guy, the old guy? No, not the Supreme later. It's a Katami, Katami, I believe. Okay. But I mean, I don't think he's going to come out. You know, one Ayatollah is going to come out

saying this stuff unless the Ayatollah supports it. Yeah. Again, I'd like to see it in a diplomatic action, but this is not the way Iran's headed. So we need to be ready to strike again. I think we can use our own B2s if we have to. Hopefully this stays on the black side and doesn't become,

you know, war again, but, you know, the enemy gets a vote. The enemy in this case is Iran. Yeah. And it looks like to me, I'm not, again, I'm not downplaying or saying that the strikes were wrong. I don't think they were. But it gives Iran the perfect cover to to bar the IAEA because they're saying it's for safety

reasons. You know, we can't guarantee their safety down there, you know, until we know it's safe. We're not going to let them in. Well, they could be screaming that for the next two years while they. rebuild. So it's like the perfect cover. So like you said, our intel has got to be on point so that we can say beyond the shadow of a doubt, hey, we know what you're doing down there. We're coming. You know, so yeah, they're just going to use this excuse. It's for the safety of, you know, until they That's why you get to let in exactly totally agree, Jay. That's why you got to let Intel speak for itself,

right? So you can't because the problem when you get into is, you know, and I do think it was severely damaged, but when you say it's like completely erased, and then four months from now, you're like, oh, we've got to strike it again because they've rebuilt it. You're like, wait a minute. How was it, you know, I mean, just let the, let the intel speak for itself and adjust based on that. That's what I'm saying. You're on caution. And then you can say later on, see, it was obliterated. But when you start out saying 100% it's gone, you know, now the burden of proof is on you to make sure that it's actually like that. Because like you just said, if four months,

months from now, we're launching new strikes. You know for a fact, people on the other side are going to come back and be like, well, I thought you said now. Yeah. And it all comes out later, right? I mean, Freedom Information Act and all that's going to come out later. I mean, I guess people don't care. But, you know, eventually years from now, they're going to know exactly what the intelligence

community, I think. Thanks. But anyway, let's see where it goes. There doesn't look like any plan to get back into the negotiation, you know, in Oman. So I don't think it's over. Put it that way. I think we're not on. Yeah.

Not great, guys. That's my assessment on this. It's not great. Mick, you wanted to talk a little bit more about the defense budget? Like, was that part of the big beautiful bill thing? So there was a supplement. 25 billion, I think, was part of the big beautiful bill. But that brings our total to $1.1 trillion.

if you take the FY26 base budget plus that, obviously a lot, and I'm sure there could be a lot of discussions on where we're putting our money, but I'm a national security guy. So I'm focusing on that. I think a lot of it was directed correctly on the enhancement of our space operations, our artificial intelligence, drone operations. Our Navy is getting a huge bump. If you add the three ships from the base budget,

16 more from the supplemental on the big beautiful bill. It's 19, you know, by my marine man. That's a lot of ships, right? So, and hopefully these aren't ships like just historic ships that are giant targets. These are ships that can use drones and are hard to see and can be littoral and, you know, all that stuff. We need to be able to project power from the sea, but we do it need to do it in a modern way. There is this golden dome, if done correctly, I can see the value of $25 billion for that.

We want to be able to defend ourselves as nuclear weapons spread and the ability to deliver them spread, i.e. North Korea. So if there's a lot in here, and hopefully it does more than just appease, you know, different districts, but it really focuses on our national security. The U.S. has always had an offset plan where we try to jump ahead in technology of our adversaries. You know, it's a big buzz talk always in the Pentagon. And it's exponentially going from, you know, where it was to quantum computers, artificially intelligence-based robotics, drones, where they're air, maritime, ground. we're entering it to a, you know, a dangerous new world, put it that way. And we have to be way up front on this and then figure out how to deal with what could be an explosion of very lethal, inexpensive options for our adversaries that are coming out of these wars, especially in Ukraine. So, I mean, I think it's got the right priorities.

We'll see how it's actually implemented. but yeah, it's a big. Now we're on over a trillion dollars in our beds budget, which, you know, I stay out of politics from the national security side. That just means we have to really figure out how we're going to deal with this national debt. Right. I mean, nobody's deal with it, period, either side. And I don't know how you can do both, but, you know, I'll leave that for the political allies.

Jay, you got anything to add? I know you got to run soon, so. No, no, I mean, agree with, with Mick, it's like when you're just talking that last part, I was thinking about giving one of my daughters my credit card for the weekend. You know, they're going away. And it's like, here, take my credit card. And then Monday comes, I'm like, how am I going to pay for this? You know, so it's great. It's great that we're, you know, up in the budget. You know, the toys are nice because they're necessary, but somebody's going to have to pay for this, you know, down the road. So hopefully

we're thinking that. But that's it. And let's not to play the game. Jay, you got to go? Yeah, I got to, I got to bounce. I love you. Take care. See you later. Guys, follow Jay.

I'll wrap up with Mick right now. I don't want to get into the politics of it. I'm going to get worked up again, and I can't go on another rant. Let's not do the politics of it. No, I'm just pointing out that, I mean, you're right. You're 100% right. Yeah. We just put it on the tab.

And I have a feel, I have a sneaking suspicion that the reason why they made it as supplemental to the big, beautiful. bill is because if you're a Republican or a Democrat and you vote against it, you can get tagged with being anti-defense, right? Oh, yeah. I mean, it's the, it's just normal, like, logic, you know, uh, I'm not against, you know, spending money to beat China and be better than China in terms of that and like, at least showing them like, hey, don't fuck around because like, we still, you know, are willing

to spend as much money as possible. Um, my beef is with, like, getting. rid of like you're making ice the biggest federal agency uh and other things people on medicaid losing their medical coverage and things to that nature is i feel like kind of but that's part of the other side of the bill where like i don't really feel bad if like a millionaire's got to spend 30 grand more a year in taxes i really don't because like that guy doesn't give a shit about me and i'm sorry mick i know you're a millionaire so i apologize for that Not a hard to be a millionaire

on your government service, you're all career. There you go in a humanitarian work in here. Yeah. But no, I just stay out of the poll. I mean, the Irish, you know,

they talk about two things you're not supposed to. Religion and politics all the time. I just don't talk about it. Yeah, yeah. I'm just national security analyst, man. All right, guys. Focus on easy things like war and peace.

Yeah, just the easy stuff. Guys, do us a favor. Like and subscribe, of course. If you're listening to us the audio side, subscribe and rate it right there too. Mick Mulroy, of course, Fogbo, Lobo, all his stuff. The links are in the description. Andy Milburn, Jason Lyons, everything is down in the description.

The best way to support the show is Patreon.com slash the team house. You get both a team house and IZon completely add free and early. Yeah, that's it. Mick, as always, a pleasure. All right, Dee. Have a great rest of your weekend. See you. Everybody out there.

Hey guys, it's Jack. I just want to talk to you for a moment about how you can support the show if you've been watching it, enjoying it, but you'd like to get a little bit more involved and help us continue to do this. You can check out our Patreon. It is patreon.com slash the team house.

And for $5 a month, you can get access to all of these episodes of the Team House ad free. The same goes with our affiliated podcast, Eyes On, with Andy Milburn, Jason Lyons, McMulroy, that one, you will also get all of those episodes ad-free. And you support the channel and the show, and we really appreciate it. The Patreon members are literally what has helped this company, this small business, survive,

especially during our early years. And you are what continues to help this thing going, even as we navigate the turbulent world of YouTube advertising. So we really appreciate all of you guys. there's going to be a link down in the description to that Patreon page and there is also going to be a link to our new merch shop. So if you guys want to go and get some Team House merchandise, we got stickers and we also have patches. And I should mention if you sign up for Patreon at $10 a month,

we will mail you this patch as well. So we really appreciate that. But they're also for sale on the merch shop. And additionally, they got T-shirts up there, water bottles, tote bag, coffee mugs, all that good stuff. So please go and check them out and support the show. We really appreciate it, guys. Thank you.