The Team House - Zelensky Drops a Peace Plan on Putin's Face: Will the U.S. Buy in? | EYES ON GEOPOLITICS

Episode Date: December 29, 2025

In this episode, the hosts discuss the ongoing geopolitical tensions surrounding Ukraine, focusing on Zelensky's peace plan and its implications for NATO and Russia. They explore the humanitarian crisis in Ukraine, the situation in Nigeria, and the potential for U.S. military involvement. The conversation also touches on Iran's nuclear ambitions and the humanitarian crisis in Gaza, concluding with reflections on the future of U.S. diplomacy in Africa and the chaotic state of global geopolitics.Wild Alaskan Company⬇️https://wildalaskan.com/HOUSE Get $35 off your first order!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 Start03:04 Zelensky's Peace Plan and Its Implications05:59 Security Guarantees and NATO's Role08:57 Consequences of Russia's Actions and NATO Expansion11:53 The Humanitarian Crisis in Ukraine14:53 The Situation in Nigeria and U.S. Military Involvement18:01 Iran's Nuclear Ambitions and Regional Stability21:01 Gaza's Humanitarian Crisis and International Response24:00 The Future of U.S. Diplomacy in Africa26:56 Conclusion and Reflections on Global GeopoliticsBecome 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 here with Jason Lyons and Mick Mulroy. I hope everybody had a good Christmas, a good holiday, and we won't see you until the next year. So happy New Year coming up. A lot going on as usual. Last week, I think it was the 23rd or 24th,

Vladimir Zelensky put out his 20-point plan. And now Zelensky's meeting with President Trump today in Mar-a-Lago. It might have just started while we're recording this, so there should be some updates on what goes on. I mean, we'll see what, if anything happens. A lot of happening with Ukraine. I mean, we've seen it too more and more over the last few days. A lot of drones hitting civilian targets, apartment buildings.

They hit infrastructure. 500,000 people in Ukraine and Kiev don't have power. And it's, you know, wintertime in Ukraine. It can't be that comfortable. What's going on? What are we looking at? I do have the Zelensky Peace Plan brought up here

if you guys wanted to compare it to the bullshit 28-point plan that Russia came up with. Make, where are you at with this? So, and I just got off with ABC talking about it, hence the garb. There's a potential for this to be substantial, to start

on a positive note. And I think we should go, and I have in front of me, too, the plan that's they currently exist. But if the U.S. and Ukraine and Europe can agree to this plan, and it is, it does preserve Ukrainian sovereignty, it does get them real security guarantees, and it is a concession. Like, they concede portions of the Donbos that Russia currently doesn't occupy, doesn't concede it to Russia, but essentially makes it a demilitarized zone.

So it's nobody's, right? There's nobody in it under this plan. So it is a major concession. I think that has to go to a referendum. But if the U.S. is supportive of this, and if they're not, I don't know why anybody's wasting their time anymore to be. But if they're, if they are, I would hope that the U.S. in Europe then become the major advocates for this plan with Russia. In other words, this is now our plan. You need to enter into a 60 or 90-day ceasefire to go into a next-year-old. negotiations based on this framework, which we've all agreed to. And it gives stuff to Russia, which they don't deserve, you know, the portion of Ukraine that they've taken by force unlawfully. It doesn't necessarily make it part of Russia, but they obviously occupy it. So they have, it concedes and it doesn't militarily attempt in the future to take it back. So it is a substantial concession on both sides. And it's something that Russia should accept.

because it's in their own interest. They're losing how many, they've lost over a million casualties in this conflict so far, which is unheard of. Could you, I mean, think about, you know,

50 plus thousand dead from the U.S. and Vietnam and how significant that was. And there are over a million casualties already. So, and then if they don't accept it, there has to be consequences. Compliments don't work with Putin. He'll take them all day.

They'll, they'll, they'll not change. mind at all. Criticism won't change his mind as all. It's only consequences. So that means Europe and the United States say we're going to impose secondary sanctions. We're going to unfreeze or at least use the frozen Russian assets to loan Ukraine the equivalent of what we have frozen so they can and so they can, you know, buy weapon systems and we need to sell them all the advanced weapon systems with no caveats. So you can shoot whatever you want.

other than, you know, civilian targets because although Russia does that, that's against the law of armed conflict. But everything else is fair game, right? And so if you expand the range of Ukrainian weapon system, you will really impact the logistical hubs, the air bases, and more energy infrastructure that they can hit. So I would say going into this positively, and then we could go down and talk about some of them, if we can get to an agreement that becomes the unified U.S., European, and obviously Ukraine position, then we need to take up the mantle to be the leader and basically impose it on Russia.

And if they don't take it, here comes the consequences. My opinion. Yeah, I know we're going to go down the list, but the fifth one of the security guarantees at mere Article 5 with that states at the U.S., NATO and European countries will provide Ukraine with those security guarantees. I think that's a pretty important thing, too, because it's in your face, you know, it's telling Russia up front.

We're not screwing around this time. You know, we threatened it. We're threatening it. But now it's a guarantee that, yeah, maybe they're not going to join NATO, but we're still going to come to their aid, if necessarily. I think that's pretty important. It is. And if you have an Article 5 type,

which means we will come to the aid, including Europe and the United States, it's basically NATO, right? Yeah. I mean, if you're looking for the security benefits of joining NATO, it's that everybody fights on you. It's, you know, tack one, you tack all. So if they can come up with an arrangement that's ironclad,

not like the one they had when they gave up the nukes and the 90s, it's ironclad. That's good. And it allows them almost immediate concession into the European Union. Right. So if you have both of those, I think, I think, you know, it's most importantly important what they think. But I think they would be in a very good position. Because if you look at the way the original plan started, which seems like it was either written by Russia or written for Russia, everything was about getting Ukraine to a point would be easy to reinvade.

Yeah. Cut their military in half. They have a year. Yeah. Right. And it's one, they say, 800,000 maintaining peacetime. Yeah. And it also said that Europe couldn't deploy forces to Ukraine and it couldn't join NATO.

And it was all about because if you just keep the sentence going, it's because we want to reinvade once we've rebuilt our military force. Right. So nobody can trust their word at all. So it's not even trust the Verisify. It is make it ironclad. So, yeah, they're going to concede and they're and they're proving. is going to be they stop, you know, fighting. But Ukraine needs to maintain. And it's not all about size, right? It's not about size of the military. It's about the capability of the military,

the advancement of technology. Ukraine needs to definitely keep going on that front. And all of Europe does. If they need any other evidence, I don't know what it would be than a Russia that is invading European countries. So this, this, this, This is, I think, a very positive step. There's a lot of other stuff that I'd highlight. One is the $800 billion reconstruction humanitarian fund. I think that likely would majority come from the frozen Russian assets. And whatever's not, whatever's left over, Russia should pay.

Yeah, also, that compared to the old point, the 28-point Russia-U.S. plan or whatever, the leaked plan was $100 billion of frozen Russian assets funds invested in U.S.-led rebuild with U.S. and 50% of the profits, remainder into a U.S. Russian investment vehicle, Europe's frozen funds released. Like, no. And we're from the U.S., and that's the dumbest shit that we've ever heard. Yeah, we shouldn't be.

I mean, I am all about looking for U.S. economic interests and foreign policy. It's part of what we do. But we're trying to end a war, and it looks like we're trying to basically capitalize on it. You know what I mean? Yes, I'm sure the U.S. companies should get favored, you know, companies based on our support. So is Europe, right?

When it comes to reconstruction, we don't need to have it in agreement that we're going to get a certain. And that's like profiteering on this whole thing. So, yeah. But most importantly, is $800 billion for the reconstruction. And I'm sure, regardless of whether that parts in the agreement, plenty of U.S. companies will be involved in that, as well as European companies. also the other big difference that Zelensky's his plan is out is uh the talk about like uh NATO expansion like NATO will not expand further forced constitutional non-Natal language and the US Russia

reintegration package being a front and center so those are like I mean which makes sense like who the fuck why the fuck would this have anything to do with whether NATO expands or not NATO expanded because Russia started this war like literally two big countries that hate fucking Russia join NATO. Right. Maybe if they refuse the initial offer after this, every other country that wants to join NATO should join NATO. I mean, there's got to be consequences, right? He's already had consequences.

So, you know, I heard some, I was on with somebody who was saying this was not a strategic mistake from Russia to do this. Well, they said it was about non-expansion to NATO, and you just said it. Finland is sweet and joined NATO because he invaded Ukraine. So it's already been a strategic failure. those two countries manage not to join NATO for the entirety of the Cold War. And they're very significant militarily as far as like you wouldn't want to add them to your enemies list and then go to war with them. Right.

Very advanced weapons systems and they know how to use it and, you know, God help somebody invades Finland. Those people are preparing for that, all of them, like Granny all the way down. I mean, they've been preparing for a Russian invasion forever. It's happened before, right? Yes. So it's part of their. culture, right?

They'd be like invading Montana, right? Good luck. Bad idea, just for anybody who thinks that's a good idea to invade Montana. But the point being is there's got to be immediate consequences to Putin or he'll go to any summit and walk down our carpets and he's cool with that. It takes him out of the prior status of the world and puts them into some kind of, you know, other status where he's he's significant uh he's not that significant to be frank russia's not that significant of a country if it wasn't actually attacking other countries he would be talking about

it um i mean listen it's got the economy the size of italy right with like 80 million more people than italy or 60 million more people than italy like a significant amount more population um so let's stop acting like it's not a gas station with nukes you know because it's literally what it is interesting enough i was on another thing where we're talking about the Crimean War, the 1850s, and Russia went into Crimea to defend the Christian Orthodox, which I'm all about, and I know we're going to talk about Nigeria today, I'm all about protecting minority groups, but it's all a show. Like, they could care less about, just like they could care less about the Russian-speaking people and Crimea. It's just a hook.

It's a hook they've been using for hundreds of years to basically take territory by force. Also, make you call that, right? Like, it's been a real. strategic failure. I mean, we were, you know, we've been told that this invasion would have lasted five days a week, right? And like the Ukrainian government would have fell and they would have put in a guy who was more pro-Russia and stuff like that. It's pushing four years later.

And that has not happened. And Russia has a million casualties. They are losing strategic weapons like fighters and things like and bombers at a pretty alarming rate. They're oil infrastructure getting smoked to. they can't do much to stop it. I mean, if that's like a big, bad superpower, I don't know what it is. And the fact is we know they're not going to use nuclear weapons unless Putin himself

is if there's like an army at the gates of the Kremlin. Like maybe then he'll use nukes. It's suicidal. That's the thing, yeah. It's like having a gun to your opponent's head that no matter who pulls the trigger first, the other one's going off. Yeah. You know what I mean?

Yeah. It's going off. And it's going off for everybody. If you look at just the models for a limited exchange between nuclear, and we talked about this before, like Pakistan, India, yeah, like it affects everywhere. South America, Africa. Can you imagine an actual conflict where multiple nuclear weapons were used between Europe and Russia or the United States in that? It's catastrophic. It's like the amount of food production drop is, you know, it's almost.

It's extinction. I mean, I'm not a scientist. I'm just looking at the ones. Tens of a million people will starve. Yeah. Yeah. Tens of millions. Millions. Right. And if it was a major, you know, a major nuclear conflict, it'd be billions. Let's face it. Not just dead from the actual impact,

but dead from the consequences. And there's a lot of very esteemed think tanks in universities who have these. models out there in case anybody's you know, wanting to look at. There's also another big one that seems to be, will probably be a sticking point.

The 28 point plan for Zoparisha nuclear power plant. 28 point plan sets a 50-50, Russia, Ukraine power split. The 20-point plan that Zelensky brought up leaves the governance unresolved, but it's a 50-50 U.S. Ukraine split and U.S.

has floated a tribe party Yeah On the demilitarized part? Yeah, the Zaporizia nuclear like what goes on in Zaporizia. I mean, it's essentially a power plant to generate energy. So maybe the UN can take it over,

you know, just as long as somebody competent, right, we don't need any Chernobyl's. And it keeps the power going to the people who need it. And like you said, they need it because, I mean, there's 500,000 Ukrainians because of the recent strikes that are now out of power. and it's cool.

Right. And what's interesting is, like, going back to the point, like, Russia is just indiscriminately hitting civilian targets and infrastructure targets. Like, they, they, drones have hit the fucking, uh, that shell thing that they have for Chernobyl that they put in like, I think 10 or 15 years ago that was supposed to last for like a good, you know, a century. And they hit it with fucking drones and they put holes in it. It's like, at what, like, who?

Like who we're dealing with fucking lunatics that don't give a shit. So like even this 20 point plan like there's major concessions. Like even the cap on the military, peacetime military. Like you should have, you tell us you, you don't dictate terms in terms of our military at all. Like don't even go near that, right? Like there's. So Frank, like honestly reading through this, you know, Zelensky's being pretty fucking reasonable, right? Because, you know, his people are dying.

He wants this shit to end. And he's not scared of an election either because in here too it says election is possible. That's going to backfire big time on Russia for saying that. I mean, a guy who hasn't been elected for how many decades talking about. And then Zelensis, with the whole world watching, he's going to probably get reelected with a major win. And then all that's going to be done. Which maybe it's good. It's good.

Right. Under their constitution, they don't have to have an election. election while they won't have an election while they're under attack. But Zelensky also floated doing a referendum for that too, like where they change it. Also, there's a question to be asked and ways to figure, like logistics to figure out, the occupied territories, those are Ukrainians. Do they vote in it or do they not? Right.

Like what happens there, right? That's a big issue because even if they say they get this into place where they don't say that the Russian occupied areas Ukraine, but like you said. free economic zone or something. There's a Ukrainian's living in it. Yeah. So what happens to those people? Are they represented by the government in Kiev?

Do they have access to the government in the services? Or are they just stuck in this perpetual, their Ukrainians under the rule of Russians? It's rough. But, I mean, this is a rough, this is a tough call. But you said, Zelensky's making concessions here. We need to recognize that. and then if he agrees to it, this needs to be a plan that the U.S.,

I think the U.S., but if not the U.S., the Europeans, takes on as their own. Yeah, we'll see what happens. We'll see what happens with this meeting with Zelensky and Trump. I don't know what time they're meeting. I really hope it's not all public

because, like, we don't need another fucking sideshow kind of circus bullshit. Like, figure it out behind closed doors if you have something that you can agree. on come out and fucking agree on it like stop wasting our times just because like you want to get some face time on tv um you know and and i don't care like if like we're not totally bending over for russia like i don't give a shit if trump comes out and like does the the victory lap and he stopped nine wars and all that bullshit like he says like i don't give a shit like as long as this

turns this ends up in a ceasefire that russia didn't eat everyone's lunch because the U.S. let Russia eat everyone's lunch. Russia has no position in this. Their army is trash. They know it. We know it. It's real simple. Like we're basically, we're helping these guys, or Europe's helping these guys more

now with two hands tied behind our backs, essentially. Like if we were allowed to open up or get our stuff in there earlier, attack them's, you know, take your pick or even F-16s from other NATO countries, it probably would have looked a lot worse for Russia.

Mm-hmm. But they still can. Right. We just unleash everything that we allow them to buy and there's no range restrictions. I mean, you think about all the wars we always talk about. There's always some like either self-imposed or imposed restriction on the good guy side. You know, look at Afghanistan. The whole time is, oh, you can't go into Pakistan.

Why not? Right. If the government in Pakistan can't do anything about it, then it's not Pakistan. That was my take the whole time, right? Either they have control of it or it's not theirs. How's that playing the meetings, Mick? Well, it went over well with my folks. Yeah, I'm sure, yeah.

Hey, what's up, guys? I want to thank our newest sponsor, Wild Alaskin company. It's the best way to get wild caught, perfectly portioned nutrient-dense seafood delivered directly to your door. Trust me, you haven't tasted fish this good. They sent us a box like two weeks ago, I want to say. They sent us a bunch of stuff.

Socki salmon, Coho salmon, the Pacific halibut, Pacific cod. I destroyed the halibut and I destroyed the cod. I made actually fish and chips with the cod and it was awesome. I gave the salmon to my dad. My dad calls me back like four days later. It was like asking for more fish. I'm like, uh, dude, you got to go to wildelaskin.com slash house and you get $35 off your first box. 100% wild caught never farmed.

This means they are no antibiotics, GMOs are added. It's just clean fish, real fish. support healthy oceans and fishing communities. Wild Alaskan fish is frozen off the boat to lock in taste, texture, and nutrients like omega-3s. While caught from Alaska, every order supports sustainable harvesting practices and your membership delivers flexible shipments, expert tips, and truly feel-good seafood. The other kicker is you could try at risk-free.

There's 100% money-back guarantee. If you're not completely satisfied with your first box, while the Alaskan company will give you a full refund, no questions asked, no risk, just high-quality seafood. Not all fish are the same. Get seafood you could trust. Go to wildelaskin.com slash house for $35 off your first box of premium wild caught seafood. That's wildelaskin.com slash house for $35 off your first order. Thanks to Wild Alaskin company for sponsoring this episode.

And thank you guys for the continued support, supporting us, supporting the companies that help support the show. We really love you. Thank you, Wildelaskin.com slash house $35 off your first order. Thanks, guys. Yeah, I mean, I would love to deep dive into the whole Pakistan, Afghanistan, Afghanistan, the war on terror. Because it really, and I'm just a layman that looked at it from the outside. I've been lucky enough to know a lot of you guys now that have told me different things. It really seemed like you guys were hamstrung so much in terms of that.

Like, Hakani and the, you know, Taliban and Al-Qaeda all had a fucking safe haven. Yeah, there was some drone strikes, but at the same time, you can't really do much. with just drone strikes to flush this out. So, like, they could just pop back over to Pakistan and everything's fine. Yeah, and my point now is there's only restrictions on Ukraine. You can't use weapons that fire beyond this range. And, of course, what does Russia put a majority of their infrastructure beyond that range? Yeah.

Right? So it's an artificial restriction that needs to be lifted immediately on everything. You can't, except, you know, you can't violate the law of armed conflict. But Russia does every day. Yeah, but it does seem like even what Ukraine does when they hit inside of Russia, whether it's oil refineries or military bases with jets, they're keeping it to, like, non-civillian. I mean, I guess an oil refinery civilian or whatever,

but it affects their war economy. But I'm not, I don't think they're looking for, like, mass casualty, civilian casualty things to happen. No, they shouldn't be. Right. But if they had the tomahawk, the most advanced tomahawk and the means to launch them, they'd be hitting a lot more of the Russian infrastructure. It's that simple.

Yeah, so we'll keep an eye out on what happens. If there are any big updates, maybe we'll come on later this week and talk about it. Moving on, I mean, Mick mentioned, like, you know, what Russia did to try and come and help Orthodox Christians in Crimea in the 1800s. It does, I mean, we're looking at what happened in Nigeria on Christmas Day. We bombed a couple of ISIS-affiliated terror groups. And a month before that, we also were talking about how, like, we're going to start bombing things because, like, we need to protect Christians. And I'm Christian, okay, and I like protecting people,

but I don't know where our government gets off in terms of telling us who they choose to protect based on their religion. going to be honest. Well, there probably is, well, I would start with this. ISIS is a problem throughout the continent of Africa, and it's becoming more of a problem because of the significant reduction in foreign assistance by not only the United States, but Europe. So if you look at Mozambique, there's a resurgence in ISM, ISIS of Mozambique, because of a major cut in U.S. aid funding, because U.S.

aid was cut. And in Nigeria and in the Sahel, the Islamic State of the Sahel province is increasing. Our diplomatic presence is also being reduced. We talked about, at least internally, but everybody has the reduction of the African diplomatic mission to include the ambassador to Nigeria, who was already confirmed, and on or out already out there, is now being recalled. So a lot of the increase in ISIS activity is a result of our decisions on forest policy. And as you just said, Dee, when it comes to attacking our attacking Taliban in Pakistan, there's only so much you can do with air strikes. They're an effective tool, but you're very limited. And this seems to be, so this seems to be limited. It was in the So Cicoto province, which isn't the province that has the most

problems, which perplexed several CT analysts. And it does seem to be related, I would say, politically. I'm all about protecting minority groups from terrorist organizations, including Christians, of course. But it seems to be more about an advocacy from one side of the political spectrum who wanted to do something essentially to look like they're helping. But this is the despotic. terrorist organization that kills Muslims and Christians, and the best way to do it is holistically,

which means on the ground, say serious diplomatic, intelligence, and security cooperation with the government to actually defend these populations and defeat ISIS, or at least do as much as we can to limit their impact. These strikes, I'm not against them necessarily, but I think everybody views who mostly is symbolic unless it becomes a campaign that has more than just an error component. Yeah. I mean, number one, the Nigerian government has come out emphatically multiple times and said, it's not just Christians that ISIS is killing. They're killing everyone.

So I agree that it was politically motivated just to use, you know, the group Christians for this. And number two, my fear is that, I mean, The president came out earlier and said, you know, use the term troops on the ground, basically troops on the ground. He said guns ablazing kind of thing. But now in the, I'm thinking of the minds of the Nigerian people, you start to hear the word or think of the word occupied. You know, you think of Libya.

You think of Afghanistan and Iraq. And do you want to turn the very people you claim to be protecting against you because now you've plop troops on the ground with no clear. no clear end game who are going to you know might end up in an afghanistan situation um you know that's how you get a populace to turn on you so i don't know that they're thinking that far ahead with just the words that they're throwing yeah i'm not an expert but it sounds like nigeria could use a little uw and some fucking special forces in there by with and through stuff you know find right find the guys that are against ISIS and help them support them into beating them back

quick question so this night the Nigerian ambassador that was confirmed he was confirmed this term I think so and he's being recalled

yes there's 30 recalls of ambassadors or DCMs or charges so explaining to me how that fucking makes

more than 30 I think I don't know he was confirmed I mean most career ambassadors or at least a large portion of them or most ambassadors are career ambassadors So people who grew up as foreign service officers and came up through the ranks and were consular officers or political officers.

Yeah, these are real deal career diplomats. These aren't like the guys who donated to an inaugural fund or whatever who go to like Paris or go to UK or like Cush jobs basically. Right. So there's always been a combination of political and career, but I think most fulfilled by career. A area like Africa and like tough spots are going to have real deal diplomats there. Right. And that's a skill they learned over their whole career, just like one would learn in the military or something. It's very professional.

They're not there to push for any kind of political party in the United States. They're there to push for the interests of the United States, which should be universal. So I don't know anything about the person. I'm sure I'm certainly he was perfectly capable of doing this. And I don't think he was, or any of the other ambassadors for that reason, were recalled for their, something they did. They did. I think it's a political issue. So, but it's, if you're, sorry. Go ahead. No, go ahead. No, you go ahead. His name is Richard Mills, Jr. And he was, he's presented his credentials, diplomatic credentials, in July 2024. And his role will end in January 2026. So. Okay. And the other question is, is, is he, going to be replaced.

Because the thought is that this isn't like I'm going to replace it with the people that I want. It's just, and it is in line with the national security strategy, which basically leaves, you know, the continent of Africa as almost like not even a footnote. And now we're seeing the consequences, right? And who's going to move in? China, Russia. All these other countries that we used to call our adversaries are going to take big advantages of a reduction in. a diplomatic presence

on the continent, a very important continent. I mean, Nigeria is a massive country and the way like, you know, biggest old producer in Africa. And projections are showing they're going to have

one of the biggest populations in the world in like the next, it's already massive, but in the next 50 years they're going to be a real deal player in Africa. So like, pulling out,

I don't understand what the fuck's going on. Really? Like, what is, are they thinking? What's the plan? Is there a strategy or isn't there? I was like, I will drop off, you know, a dozen Tom Hawks over there that hits nothing on Christmas Day to like make it made for fucking social media. But in terms of actual real deal like stopping ISIS or, you know,

at least stemming ISIS's growth, we're not doing shit. And the US has to lead in that effort. Generally, when we pull out, our partners pull out because of the logistical infrastructure to keep these going, I suppose another country could do it, but they don't. Very few other countries can do it. So we need to be there for it to really be a collective international effort. And I know it costs money. I get that. Do you want to be engaged around the world, which is in our own economic advantage,

right? It's in all benevolence. It's to develop new economic opportunities for the United States. It's to prevent an attack on the United States. I mean, how many times did people across the political spectrum? So we're going to fight over there so we don't have to fight here. It's a pretty simple concept. Everybody used to agree with that.

Yeah. Also, like, I'm not even, like, saying for us to send over, like, an entire fucking special forces group or some, like, some massive footprint. But just to have our P's and Q's kind of, like, on the ground, understanding what the, what the temperature is on the ground and stuff like that. like actual ground truth and like creating those relationships with whether it's a foreign internal defense or just straight up using militias like whatever we need to do to make sure that ISIS doesn't get too gully we should do but I mean this just sounds like the complete opposite I have a question about Nigeria because you know like France and UK have you know ties to Africa they've been in Africa for years does France have a big presence in Nigeria as far as you guys know or

Or does the UK? I don't think so. I don't know. Other countries in Africa. Okay. And France has pulled out a lot of their historical tied countries. You know, a lot of baggage there. But, you know, in, you know, all things considered, the irregular warfare apparatus in the United States is very cost effective compared to conventional, right?

You don't want to have to send in a division of Marines and, you know, the 82nd or 1001st. you want to have advisors, combat advisors, specially trained from Socom and special activities in the agency, that can go in there, train a force, that can be more lethal than their opponents, and have all of the advantages of intelligence collection in the United States have, operational planning, logistical support. That is a much more cost-effective way for stemming the spread of a terrorist. organization than deployment of large-scale U.S. conventional forces, who will win, no doubt, but they will take casualties, and they're not going to stay, right? They're not going to stay.

I don't know how many times I've gone to places where somewhere in the conversation with the locals as a reason not to fully cooperate with us is them looking at me going, look at you. You're not going to stay here. Yeah. I think you're referring to what way to look. Right? And you know, it's like, Probably right, right? You know, the Jolly Green Giants are probably going to go home. And that's it, but if we have a long-term enduring plan that's cost-effective enough to be in our interest, we can help local governance both form a government we want to work with, develop their own security to beat back these groups, which are takeover, and become an economic partner with the United States in the long run. so that would be better than sending over a new like squadron of battleships yeah yeah golden yeah

golden fleet i have that there too which is absolute bullshit i wish andy milburn was on here because he would rail against his because he's right they would be just huge targets huge 21 billion dollar targets waiting to get sunk um all right right now what i got left is uh there was a report that the The Supreme Leader of Iran gave the okay to start developing or seeking out a nuclear weapon. We talked about this in our group chat. I didn't really react great to it. I'm like, obviously, they've said that they would do this if they got bombed, which they got bombed. You know, and there was a time when there was an agreement in place where no uranium was being enriched past a certain number.

That's when actual diplomacy was working. I guess that didn't make sense for some folks in the U.S. government and everybody in the Israeli government. So what are we looking at now in terms of that, Mick? So, I mean, to start with, I had a few people tell me that they don't believe them. Okay. We'll see. I don't know how that would come out so significantly without. But anyway, it's point out 60%.

You don't need that fulfilling you. So they're already way above it, which indicates they're trying to get to a nuclear weapon. So let's be fair with that. I mean, it needs to be like in the lower single digits to do a lot of the medical stuff. Yeah. So if they do, if they do try to go to 90%, that's the first, uh-oh. Second O'O is having a capacity to weaponize it, you know, the triggering mechanism, all that. don't think they have it.

They could buy it, right? Eventually buy it for something like North Korea. I don't think Russia or China would sell it to it. North Korea might. And then, of course, it's delivering it. And if you want to deliver on a ballistic missile, it needs to be compacted or miniaturized. So they have one missile that can go 2,000 kilometers and carry two tons.

So as long as you can get it to that, there you go. Then Israel, for sure, has a serious problem or anybody within that range. me ask you this, if the reporting is bullshit, is this Israel trying to c-seed, you know, some siops, for lack of a better term, into, like, our media? I don't know. I don't know. But the issue is this could come together. So you have this report out that if true, I mean, I was a supporter of our strikes against

the nuclear facilities. The U.S. and Israel might have to readdress whether we're going to start the, uh, conflict again, at least as far as depleting their nuclear capabilities. But Daniaz is going to be talking to President Trump tomorrow. President Trump's going to be talking about entering the second phase of Gaza's ceasefire. There's a big issue on Hamas disarmament. These issues might do this, right? So they say, okay, well, we're really not keen on, you know, withdrawing any further until Hamas is disarmed.

But if we were to do that, we'd really like your support and mitigating the Iran nuclear threat. So these, I'm not saying this is going to happen, but it's quite plausible because they're talking about all these issues, of course. And it might be that they're using, you know, continue on with a Gaza peace plan as a way to get pressure on the United States

to do something again. Which you've already proved we'll do. We've already done it, right? So if it's real, and I'm not saying it's real, just because one person told me it wasn't, and this person's super smart and I think had reason to say that. But I'm sure other people tell me, no, they are. I mean, why wouldn't they go for a nuclear weapon? Why, why do it halfway?

Sure, sure. It's like antagonistic, but you don't actually have the ability to use it. Right, yeah, yeah. It doesn't make any sense. So I'm open to saying it's both true or not true or maybe it's going to be true. But I think this, tomorrow and Mar-a-Lago, these things are going to be discussed in earnest. Yeah, and just to hit on what's going on in Gaza, aid is still being restricted. I think they did bomb a Christian church, too. Palestinian Christians got hit, which let's protect some Christians there, maybe. I don't know.

If that's such a big, big deal for our government and our defense department. What's happening? And, you know, Israel's violated the ceasefire over 400 times. So, like, maybe that should be a bullet point they talk about in the discussions tomorrow, at least brought up maybe. That's my two cents on that. I mean, frankly, I'd like to see,

And the winter right now in Gaza is hitting some refugee camps pretty hard. There's videos out there of like flooding happening. There was a lot of rain and flooding happening like wiping away an entire, you know, refugee camp. Let's just get people the basics, you know, some shelters, some medicine, some food and water. And let kids stop dying or being completely malnourished and also creating more and more extremists against Israel. Because I know if I was living in Gaza right now, I would not be a big fan. of this Israeli government whatsoever. It is bad.

I mean, if people haven't been to that part of the Middle East in the winter, you think, oh, it's the Middle East. It ain't cold. It's cold. And then it rains a lot. And that's like the worst for folks spent a lot of time outside. Like, it's almost better just to be colder and just to be snow. Yeah.

It is better than to be that almost frozen rain. Yeah. Right? Where you just get saturated and you're wet and that that is what it's like in Gaza right now. now and they are still in the they've taken away the the famine designation UN which is good it's good because there has been aid coming in but it's not enough and quite frankly I hope to your point the is not only talking about going to the second phase we're catching up to everything we're supposed to happen in the first phase right which is 600 trucks a day that go in to feed people and when this international stabilization force is deployed one of the things they're supposed to do is protect the distribution, which hopefully means Hamas isn't getting it, which has been the complaint about providing humanitarian assistance because they claim Hamas has taken a lot of it.

I don't know if that's true. Does that why the 600 trucks aren't hitting there? Is that why? Because they're getting stolen or because they're not getting let in? I think it's because they're not getting let in. Okay. So who's got that, who makes that decision, right? It's real simple.

Yeah. Now we have that coordination center now, but I'm sure the Americans are restricting it. That would make no sense. I mean, it was our agreement that said 600 trucks a day. So it needs to be worked out. Do you know where I stand on restricting food to civilians as a means of warfare? Happens everywhere. But it shouldn't.

Yeah. And, man, man, oh man. I don't know if we see that eventual two-state solution with this current government, going to be completely honest, this current Israeli government, because just the other day to the defense minister said they're de facto in and sitting the West Bank. It's like you're just trying to let everybody and let everybody who lives there fucking hate you. And, you know, there has been a myriad of Israeli NGOs and organizations that have continued to call what's going on in God. a genocide even as recently as last week so if anyone wants to pull the anti-Semitic card

there's an israel there are Israeli organizations are they anti-Semitic or are they just telling the truth I understand trying to clip guys uh clip Hamas by any means necessary but maybe pull back a couple of those means uh because killing civilians over and over again and violating a ceasefire 400 times since it's been uh enacted to me show somebody who's not our side that's not willing to actually see this through. That's just my opinion. There's going to be a lot of pressure put on Prime Minister Netanyahu tomorrow to see it through and to keep going. And the best chance for Palestinian, any semblance of a Palestinian state is this plan right now.

So if Hamas, they don't care about it. So I don't even know what I'm saying. Sure. If they pretended to care about the Palestinian people, they would realize that them putting down their arms is way better off the Palestinian people, way better off. Right. So, I mean, let's be clear. If Israel really gives a shit about, like, what happens in Gaza in terms of it being a Palestinian-led area, wouldn't they be trying to do the buy with him through shit? Like, find the non-Hamas people and how much.

help them, arm them, support them to overthrow or take out Hamas? Like, you can't just bomb. It's already rubble. Like, what else are you going to do? What else are you going to do? This is clearly not worked. It's worked to the, I mean, militarily to the point of Hamas has been degraded substantially. Sure.

Okay. Yeah. They have to. I mean, look at, and Hezbo has been, too. Yeah. I mean, they keep clipping. They keep shooting stuff over there. Syria.

It's another issue they're going to discuss tomorrow. It's going to be very interesting because we seem to be at odds when it comes through our policies in Syria, the U.S. and Israel, that is. Israel views them as a jihadist, doesn't trust them at all. There might be an open conflict with Israel and Turkey and Syria, which would be horrible. Well, I mean, over the last few months since Al-Shaara took power, Israel has been decimating whatever is left in terms of infrastructure of the Syrian army. military, right?

So they've been doing that. Yeah. And yet, Turkey and Israel are not exactly sending each other Christmas cards. Not that they would, I guess, Muslim and Jewish. Israel is just aligned with Cyprus and Greece. Yeah. Don't look at me. There's a lot of PM.

You're the Greek representative of this trio. Yeah, so I could see. And there's a lot going on in Somaliland right now with Israel. They just recognized them, isn't it? They did. They did. And there's been a big pushback against that in the region, except for by you A. Yeah.

You're seeing all these alliances form. The world gets more chaotic. Yeah, it's very confusing to be on, you know. All right, so we'll keep an eye on it. You guys have anything left? You want to hit on? You don't want to talk about the new fleet of battleships, Mick? You know, it would be great to get like a full-on surface warfare officer, Navy.

I can get somebody. Like, obviously, I totally understand the issues when it comes to these very large ships that are very vulnerable to modern advanced weapons systems. And we can't build them fast enough. And the Navy was going like in a disbursement model. Right. Right. And then all of a sudden, now we're talking about the opposite. So, you know, there's people that I've talked to.

that are really naval experts, and they're like, this is never going to happen. They're just going to talk about it. They're going to wait it out, and they're just never going to do it. And we can't produce them fast enough. We don't have barely any shipbuilding, like, especially the ban of China. Right. Yeah. But even beyond whether it's a good idea, but to talk, somebody to talk about, well, what should we be doing?

Right. You know, that would be really interested. Well, at least I'd. Yeah, I could get somebody. We had a Samariner on who was a captain of a boat of a submarine who's really Focusing now on like China and their capability and stuff like that so I'm sure he'd have a good amount to say I'm gonna get him on All right cool guys happy new year to everybody I want you guys to do us a favor Go check out mixed podcasts Pubbing the porch applied stoices and those links are in the description great pod

Jason's links are in the description as well and he's links and Everywhere if you want to find out more about the show and the people that do it, those links are in the description. And if you want to support the show, you can go to patreon.com slash the team house. You get both eyes on geopolitics and the team house at free and early. And you help support the show. So, guys, as always, a pleasure. Happy New Year. Happy New Year.

Have a great new year. Hey, guys. I want to tell all of you today about a new newsletter that we're launching that encompasses both the Teamhouse podcast, the Eyes on podcast. the Eyes On podcast and the high side news outlet, which I run with Sean Naylor. The newsletter is going to be once a week. It's going to come into your inbox and you're going to get the most current podcasts on Aizon and the Team House and whatever's topical or current on the high side. So it's another way for us to get the information out to you as social media algorithms are pretty iffy and you never really know what you're going to get. So this is a once a week

email, it'll slide into your inbox, and it will have, you know, the greatest hits of that week. It's really good, man. Checking it out. The website for it is teamhousepodcast.com slash join. Teamhousepodcast.com slash join. You go there and you enter into your email list or you enter your email into the little thing on the website, and you're good to go, and that'll be it. So we really appreciate your support.

and hope you'll consider signing up. Where is the link? The link will also be down in the description if you're looking for it there. And that's teamhousepodcast. Dot, kit, kiloindiatango.com backslash join.