12-Day War Aftermath: Iran Strikes, Gaza Ceasefire Hopes, & Ukraine's New Front

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
This is the paid advertisement from Betterhelp. Let's pause and
take a moment to talk about something very important. Life
has its pressures for everyone, and we often carry the
immense weight of expectation to never show weakness, to hide
our true feelings, and believe that asking for support somehow
makes us less of a person. But bottling things up
isn't the answer. It can often lead to feeling down, burnout,

(00:23):
or other unhealthy habits. We want to normalize the idea
that it's okay to struggle. Real strength actually comes from
opening up about what you are carrying and doing something
about it so that you can be at your best
for yourself and everyone in your life. If you're feeling
the way of the world, or even if things just
feel a bit off. I can't stress enough the value
of talking to someone. It could be a friend, a

(00:46):
loved one, or a therapist. We here this week explained
believe that therapy can be incredibly valuable. Whether you've been
in therapy personally or not, the broader benefits are clear.
It's so helpful for learning positive coping skills, understanding how
to set healthy boundaries, and it really empowers you to
be the best version of yourself, and it's so important

(01:07):
to remember that therapy isn't just for those who've experienced
combat or major trauma. It's a tool for anyone looking
to improve their mental well being and navigate life's challenges.
That's why we're thrilled to talk about better Help. With
over five thousand therapists in the UK. Better Help is
the world's largest online therapy platform, having served over five
million people globally, and it clearly resonates with users, boasting

(01:31):
an app store rating of four point nine out of
five stars based on over one point seven million client
review it's also incredibly convenient. You can connect with a
therapist at the click of a button, helping you fit
therapy into your busy schedule, and you can even switch
therapists at any time if you feel it's not the
right fit. And here's something special for our listeners. As

(01:51):
the largest online therapy provider in the world, better Help
is offering our listeners ten percent off their first month.
What are you waiting for? Talk it out with better
help once again. Our listeners get ten percent off their
first month by going to betterhelp dot com slash this week.
That's b E T T E r H LP dot

(02:11):
com slash this week. Tired of feeling overwhelmed by the
headlines when to truly understand the why behind the global chaos,
then you're in the right place. Welcome to this week explained,
your weekly deep dive and in the most complex and
impactful story shaping our world. I'm Tiana and as always

(02:31):
joining me is Curvin. Before we jump into the crucial
developments of the week, a quick favor. If you want
to ensure you never miss an episode, make sure you're
following or subscribed on your podcast platform. It literally takes
two seconds and keeps you instantly updated. And if you
are getting value from what we do here, a simple
rating or review on Apple Podcasts or Spotify helps us

(02:52):
reach more curious minds like yours. And don't forget the
new interactive comments on Spotify. It's a fantastic way to
engage direct with the show and other listeners, extending the
conversation beyond the podcast. You can also find more fantastic
podcasts like ours by visiting leonmedianetwork dot com, part of
the awesome Leon Media network. This week, we're diving into

(03:13):
the latest from Ukraine and Gaza and a deep dive
into what we're learning about those intense twelve days war
strikes that happened recently between Israel and Iran. It's a
heavy start, but we'll also look for some genuinely good
news bubbling up from the African continent to end this podcast.
But let's kick things off with Russia. Because President Putin
at the Economic Forum this week said some things that well,

(03:37):
they certainly got everybody's attention. So he declared quite boldly,
quote the whole of Ukraine is ours end quote, and
even hinted at more beyond that, because of course he did. Kurvin,
from your vantage point, what do you make of this
ramped up rhetoric, even for Putin? It fills a bit
of a shift, doesn't it.

Speaker 2 (03:57):
Yeah, it absolutely does. Ciannon in Putin's rhetoric, especially declaring
which he said there that the whole of Ukraine is ours,
and then he also said wherever a Russian soldier steps foot,
that's ours. I don't consider that bluster. I think this
is a strategic declaration, part of his maximalist intent within Ukraine.

(04:22):
He's not just talking about the four annexed regions anymore.
He's laying claim to the entire country of Ukraine. He's
effectively denying Ukraine's right to exist as an independent nation.
This sets an incredibly high bar for any future peace negotiations.
It's a bar that Ukraine obviously can't and will not
meet during these negotiations. Now, from a geopolitical standpoint, he's

(04:45):
broadcasting to the world. Putin is more importantly to Russia,
to his domestic audience that Russia's objectives are comprehensive and
they are non negotiable.

Speaker 1 (04:57):
So much for Trump chewing Putin out on X that
didn't seem to have much facts.

Speaker 2 (05:03):
It does, does it?

Speaker 1 (05:05):
I don't think. I don't think Putin is scared of
Trump at all. And it's not just words, is it.
We've seen Russia intensify its defensive particularly in the Sumai region.
What are the strategic implications of this push into a
new northern front considering the extensive ground already covered in
the east and south.

Speaker 2 (05:25):
Yeah, you're right. This is a multi prong strategy. It's
what Russia's trying to do now since the winter months. Now,
the push into Sumai isn't just about taking more land.
It's about stretching Ukraine's already strained resources as they're trying
to fight along this border. Russia's forcing Kiv to commit
troops to defend yet another border. It's pulling them away

(05:47):
from other critical errors areas along the thousand kilometer front
line that already exists. Now, this creates a dilemma for Ukraine.
Do they reinforce Sumai risk weakening other positions, or do
they prioritize the established eastern fronts and then leave the
north vulnerable. So Russia is trying to overmatch its opponent.

(06:08):
They're trying to do this through attrition and diversion, and
it opens up the possibility of bringing to my city
has a very significant population sitter within artillery range and
even drone range for the Russians. This further increases pressure
on the civilian population of Ukraine.

Speaker 1 (06:27):
Speaking of drones, the reports of intensified missile and drone
attacks across Ukraine, especially the deadly strike on Kiev, are
just heartbreaking. It feels like a constant psychological and physical assault.

Speaker 2 (06:39):
It is, and that's precisely the aim here. These widespread
and sustained missile and drone campaigns serve several strategic purposes. First,
they're going to degrade Ukraine's critical infrastructure, particularly talking about
energy infrastructure, and it aims to break civilian morale and
undermine the country's ability to sustain itself. Secondly, they tie

(07:01):
up Ukraine's air defense assets. This forces them to expend
valuable interceptors on these broad attacks rather than what Ukraine
wants to do, which is concentrate these on the front lines. Now.
Third these are a projection of power. It's a constant
reminder to Ukraine and Ukraine's Western allies that Russia can

(07:22):
and will strike anywhere anytime. So in the fact that
Russia is ramping up its domestic shahedrone production and refining
its tactics, even using them on the front lines, now,
this indicates a long term commitment to this aerial bombardment strategy.

Speaker 1 (07:37):
So it's a war of attrition on multiple levels. But
Ukraine isn't just sitting back, are they. We heard President
Zelensky talk about recapturing in Drifka in Semi and an
increase in their own domestic arms production. So what does
this tell us about ukraine strategic resilience.

Speaker 2 (07:54):
He Ukraine's resilience has been remarkable throughout this conflict, and
it's focused on domestick production like the SAPs and missile
and the Termite ground drone the sick critical strategic pivot
for Ukraine. It's them acknowledging the challenges and potential delays
in Western AID, which is a reality we've seen play
out throughout this conflict over the years. Now, by building

(08:17):
their own capabilities, Ukraine reduces its dependency on external partners
and gains greater control over its operational tempo. Recapturing a
village like Andrika, even if it's small in scale, it
also serves a vital psychological purpose demonstrates so they can
push back. They can push back against Russia, even against

(08:38):
this large, more resourced adversary, And it's all about maintaining morale.
But really it's about showing the world they are still
fighting effectively on their own.

Speaker 1 (08:51):
And this leads us to the diplomatic front, which seems
frankly stagnant. Like I said earlier, President Trump's Twitter chwo
out didn't quite have the effect that he anticipated it would.
Also President Trump's upcoming meeting with Zelenski at the G seven,
the lack of a strong joint statement on Ukraine and

(09:13):
Russia's deadfast demands. It definitely feels like we're in a
diplomatic deadlock while the fighting continues to rage on.

Speaker 2 (09:20):
Yeah, that's a perfect way to put it. That's a
diplomatic deadlock. We're just not hearing anything on peace negotiations now.
Russia's demands, which are permanent neutrality for Ukraine, recognition of
annex territories, those are non starters for Kiev. And Putin's
recent rhetoric only enforces, it only reinforces that he sees

(09:43):
a military solution as the primary way to get this done.
And he's losing this sort of pr front that's trying
to go on because just recently this week, he talked
about how he thinks he's trying to use use what
the US and Israel used against Iran for his own purposes.

(10:03):
He started saying that Ukraine's only a couple of weeks
from creating a nuclear weapon, and so he's kind of
trying to use that to signal that he needs to
attack Ukraine more and more now. So there are.

Speaker 1 (10:18):
Nazis creating nuclear weapons in Ukraine. That's what it is.

Speaker 2 (10:23):
Yes, these that's that's got it. The Nazi has been
his playbook. And you remember they took nuclear weapons away
from and the ability to create nuclear energy away from
Ukraine year decades ago. That was all part of Russia's
ploy to then incrementally attack Ukraine and invade Ukraine without

(10:45):
that fear that a nuclear weapon would be used.

Speaker 1 (10:48):
Right.

Speaker 2 (10:49):
So, here we are Russia trying to use this US
Israel playbook on Ukraine itself, and from the US perspective,
there's this get balance at play. We've got Trump's past
statements and then the reported push to soften language in
the G seven joint statement. He doesn't want to be

(11:12):
so aggressive towards Russia, which he said multiple times since
he's been in office again since January, and this suggests
a desire to keep some channels open with Russia, potentially
hoping that they get this bargain in place and they
can sign a peace deal that we all know will
be much much better for Russia than it would be Ukraine.

(11:35):
But this risks being perceived as weakening support for Ukraine,
which Western Europe would not like, and that only emboldens Moscow.
It's a very high stakes game of diplomatic jests.

Speaker 1 (11:47):
We also saw Russia's economy minister hinting at a potential recession.
Is there a strategic play here for the West to
leverage economic pressure or has Russia simply become too resilient
to sanctions?

Speaker 2 (12:00):
Sanctions? Right, our favorite word on this podcast those.

Speaker 1 (12:05):
Things that always work forever and ever. They have never
done nothing.

Speaker 2 (12:12):
They've never done nothing. I think we're going to talk
about sanctions later on in the podcast as well and
how much we love those. But sticking with Russia. Look,
the economic situation in Russia is definitely something we need
to watch. So I keep saying this. Their country is
in a wartime economy and they're showing a lot of

(12:34):
resilience because of this. This resilience is fueled by massive
state spending on defense. I will say, even with all
of this massive spending and all this defense production, the
warnings of recession from within the Kremlin, that is a
significant statement that that's getting publicized. Russia see high interest rates,

(12:57):
declining profitability in civilian sectors, and a strong ruble impacting exporters.
These are all indicators of underlying stress on the economy. Now,
the strategic leverage for the West lies in maintaining and
tightening sanctions. And what I say there is and why
we don't like sanctions when we talk about it on

(13:17):
the podcast is that they typically don't do much because
they're not really enforced. The tight standards of a sanction
is not enforced. So if the West can do that,
tighten those sanctions target the specific sectors that feed Russia's
war machine. Perhaps more importantly, continuing to push for diversified
energy supplies within Europe. Stop buying Russian oil through different

(13:43):
sources that could really help. That could really hurt the
Russian economy even more. Now it's a slow burn, but
economic pressure can over time limit Russia's ability to sustain
this conflict. It needs sustained, coordinated efforts from the West,
and that can be challenging because of how much the

(14:08):
Western Europe relies on Russian energy.

Speaker 1 (14:12):
So looking ahead in Curvin, what's the strategic takeaway from
this past week? Is there any light at the end
of this incredibly long tunnel? Are we settling in for
an even longer, more brutal conflict.

Speaker 2 (14:25):
I mean, just based on the strategic posturing we've seen
this week, it's particularly true from Moscow. I'm not overly
optimistic about a swift resolution. This public rhetoric of all
of Ukraine is ours from Russia at least a very
little room for a negotiated peace that respects Ukraine's sovereignty. Now,

(14:47):
the intensification of Russian offensives on new fronts like SAMAI
and their continued mass missile strikes, this signals a commitment
from Russia to a protracted war, one that they can
win because it is a war of attrition.

Speaker 1 (15:03):
I think we have found the phrase of the podcast
because we have said war of attrition three times so far.

Speaker 2 (15:11):
It's been creeping in over the last few months too, right,
we continue to discuss how it's a war of attrition.

Speaker 1 (15:19):
I remember, you know, earlier in the conflict you stated
you thought that's what they were gunning for was a
war of attrition, and then you had to explain it
to me, and some of our listeners may not understand
what or no what a war of attrition is, which
we appreciate that here much. But anyways, thank you for
that critical look at the situation in Ukraine. But for

(15:40):
now our focus shifts to another region grappling with immense
conflict and profound human cost Gaza. The daily reports can
feel overwhelming, but beneath the constant barrage of headlines, crucial
events unfolded this week, both militarily and diplomatically. All right,
let's start with the latest from the Israeli Defense Forces.
They've announced a signal targeted attack, haven't they.

Speaker 2 (16:03):
They did Tiennaso. On Friday of this past week, the
IDEF confirmed that they killed Hachem Mohammed Issa Alisa. This
happened in a strike within Gaza City. And if you
don't know who Alisa is, he was one of the
co founders of hamasa's military wing, and according to the IDEA,

(16:25):
he is one of the last remaining senior Hamas terrorists
in Gaza who was part of the planning and execution
and he held high ranking positions before October seventh, planned
the October seventh attack.

Speaker 1 (16:42):
So they're linking him directly to the October seventh attacks,
Is that what you're saying? Okay, so that's the justification here.

Speaker 2 (16:49):
Yeah, that's right. So targeted strike against an individual that
was directly involved in those October seventh attacks, and in
the Idea of stated he played a significant role in
the planning and execution of that massacre, which as we know,
resulted in twelve hundred Israelis killed. More than two hundred
and fifty were taken hostage. Nadief also claims he was

(17:12):
actively working to rebuild Hamas's organizational systems that were damaged
during this longgoing another protracted war, and they also said
that he was advancing attacks against Israeli citizens and IDF troops.

Speaker 1 (17:27):
So a key figure has been removed. But even with
these targeted operations, the humanitarian situation in Gaza remains a nightmare,
and we're seeing persistent reports of civilian casualties, especially around
aid distribution. They're getting desperate, they're trying to go for
the aid and.

Speaker 2 (17:46):
They get shot for it, right right, So, the Hamast
run Palestinian Ministry of Health was reported over five hundred
Palestinians have been killed near aid sites since May twenty seventh.
Then we've heard of eyewitness accounts in alluding from those
who have been wounded that described Israeli troops were firing
at the crowds trying to get aid. There even reports

(18:09):
that weapons experts listened to the gunfire and found that
gunfire rate was consistent with Israeli military machine guns.

Speaker 1 (18:20):
But the idef of denying these specific allegations, aren't they
They're saying their directives prohibit deliberate attacks on civilians.

Speaker 2 (18:28):
Yep, they are. Indeed, you would you would expect nothing
less from any military really, right, I mean, no one's
going to admit that a week or ganes on purpose
right now. No, the IDEF has strongly rejected these reports.
They are unequivocally stating that their directives prohibit deliberate attacks

(18:50):
on unarmed civilians, and both Prime Minister Netanyahu and Defense
Minister Cats have gone as far as calling these claims,
and I'll quote them here vicious lies. That's what they
say it is.

Speaker 1 (19:03):
Now.

Speaker 2 (19:03):
The IDEA has acknowledged firing warning shots in the past,
and they are reportedly investigating suspected war crimes near these
AID sites. Like this isn't a phenomenon unique to the
conflict in Gaza. We have an area with where vital
supplies are very scarce, and whether it's a war zone

(19:27):
or a natural disaster, desperation can unfortunately lead to tragic outcomes.
This does not mean that what is happening is right.
It means that there needs to be a solution to this.
We have two million people who need vital aid and
they're not getting it. There needs to be a solution

(19:48):
to this, and I often bring up Hurricane Katrina. It's
not to equate these two historical events, but I want
to illustrate how this response to extreme scarcity is a
deeply human reaction. It's not something that's confined to the
Middle East or even in wartime people are suffering.

Speaker 1 (20:06):
Thank you for you know, reporting on both sides of
that whole situation. How you know, the Gaza or the
Palestinian Ministry of Health saying they're spiring on all of
our civilians, and then you know, reporting on the IDFs
rebuttal to that, So thank you.

Speaker 2 (20:26):
Both need to be accountable for sure.

Speaker 1 (20:28):
Yeah, well we'll get there one day hopefully. What are
we gonna say? I hope? Okay, Well, complicating this further
is the role of the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation or the GHF.
This organization has been a focal point for a distribution,

(20:49):
but it's now facing some pretty alarming threats.

Speaker 2 (20:53):
Yeah, and this is a tough one to break through
the nuance, But in leap trying to do the pre
production for this, there was just tons of information out
there that were completely at odds with what I would
consider is people on the ground saying what is happening,

(21:15):
and THEGJF is getting a ton of bad press recently.
For one, because there's a ton of deaths occurring at
their aid sites, which we just talked about. That's very concerning.
But another factor is that this foundation is backed by
both Israel and the United States, and so the pro
Palestinian side absolutely hates this. They think that they're not

(21:39):
giving any aid because it's Israel and Israel. Israel does
not want Palestinians in this area. So it's a Getting
accurate reporting from either side of this situation is very tough.
That means I'm going to break it down with what
I know and what is being reported, and then you know,
this is how we do here. I'm not going to
give you an opinion on this. I'm just going to

(22:00):
tell you what I've read, what I have heard, and
then I'll leave it up to you guys to believe
it or just dismiss it.

Speaker 1 (22:07):
Oh, you'll give your opinion.

Speaker 2 (22:09):
You just try this. I'm not. I'm going to try
to not do that for this. I'm sorry.

Speaker 1 (22:14):
Okay, okay, well, we give our opinions, come on, man, But.

Speaker 2 (22:18):
I know, so what is being reported, all right, So
this is coming from the GHF and they are reporting
that HAMAS has allegedly placed bounties on its workers' heads.
They're offering monetary rewards for killing or injuring GHF's staff,
and that includes American security personnel but also local Palestinian

(22:40):
aid workers.

Speaker 1 (22:42):
Bounties. I mean, I mean, I can't say that I'm surprised,
but this seems like a desperate move for HAMAS.

Speaker 2 (22:50):
Yeah, if this is accurate, this is a very desperate move. Now,
the GHF calls these credible reports and they state that
HAMAS has positioned armed YES operatives near humanitarian zones specifically
to disrupt their operations. They've even attributed a deadly attack
earlier this month. That attack killed twelve local GHF workers,

(23:12):
involved torture, and they've said that this was HAMAS. Now,
from their perspective, HAMAS is trying to sabotage the only
functioning aid delivery system because it prevents HAMAS from controlling
or taxing the aid, which was a key tool for
HAMAS to control the Gaza population.

Speaker 1 (23:34):
And the Trump administration has been pretty vocal about the
lack of reporting on this right.

Speaker 2 (23:40):
Yeah, the Trump administration has openly criticized the UN's silence
on hamas's alleged brutality. They've emphasized that the GHF is
ensuring over eight hundred thousand people are currently receiving food
directly and for free. Now, just a quick reminder to
our listeners. Before GHF, the United Nations Relief and Works

(24:04):
Agency for Palestine Refugees, that's UNRA, in the UN's World
Food Program WFP, they were the ones that were providing
aid to Palestinians in Gaza. They were infamously outed for
having Hamas supporters, not pro Palestine. I'm talking about Hamas
supporters as part of its membership. Now, Hamas would then

(24:25):
take the aid, they would sell it to suffering Palestinians.
If they could not pay, they would not get the aid.
And this was all an effort to fund Hamas war
against Israel. Now I say all of that to explain
why Hamas would want to remove GHF from Gaza.

Speaker 1 (24:45):
Thank you for differentiating between pro Palestine and pro Gaza,
I mean pro Hamas in this situation, because I know
it's kind of this whole thing's kind of murky and
there's a lot of moving parts. So we do explain
things in detail so that you get a more well
rounded view of what is what's going on here? So

(25:10):
we have intense military action, a deepening humanitarian crisis with
serious allegations of aid site casualties, and now this targeted
threat against aid workers. Yet amidst all of this, there's
still talk of a ceasefire somehow. President Trump himself suggested
one could be weeks away. What is the latest on

(25:31):
those diplomatic efforts.

Speaker 2 (25:33):
Yeah, we haven't even been able to talk about that
with Israel and Iran fighting for weeks. So I did
want to I'm glad you bring us up because I
do want to get into where we are on ceasfire negotiations.
Then President Trump did say he believes a ceasefire could
be reached within the next week. But despite that optimism,

(25:54):
Israeli officials are cautioning that Hamas has shown no significant
movement towards an agreement. Now mediators like Egypt and Gutter,
they remain optimistic at this point, and US pressure is
definitely intensifying. And the more that US can pressure Israel,
I think that better suits a ceasefire deal getting in place,

(26:17):
and the US can pressure both sides on this one.

Speaker 1 (26:21):
So what are the key sticking points? Because it feels
like We've been.

Speaker 2 (26:24):
Here before for years, right to has it even hasn't
been two years yet, but like eighteen months of ceasefire
negotiations right, and it largely comes down to the same
core issues. So the US backed proposal envisions a sixty
day halt to fighting, with a staggered release of around

(26:45):
half of the living and half of the deceased hostages
in exchange for Palestinian prisoners. Now, in those sixty days,
humanitarian aid would expand, but Hamas continues demand to demand
an upfront commitment from Israel to per minutely in the war.
We all know Israel refuses to do that. Hamas also

(27:05):
wants Israeli forces to withdraw from their current positions during
the sucty day ceasefire, and they object to the GHF
managing aid distribution, preferring their friends within the UN.

Speaker 1 (27:18):
To do that. G I wonder why that would be right?
So what about Israel's demands for a permanent resolution.

Speaker 2 (27:27):
So Israel wants the disarmament of Hamas, the exiling of
what is left of its leadership, and even the relocation
of some of Gaza's population to Egypt and Jordan. Now
they deny any breakthrough in negotiations, and they assert no
meaningful shift in Hamas's stance, which means no meaningful shift

(27:49):
in a ceasefire agreement. It's a classic case of both
sides holding firm on their core demands and this makes
any breakthrough incredibly difficult. Now have read that Saladi sources
are suggesting the intense US pressure it's going to make
these negotiations the most serious negotiations to date.

Speaker 1 (28:11):
Well, it sounds like there are a lot of tough
choices on the table, not just for the negotiators but
for the Israeli cabinet as well.

Speaker 2 (28:18):
Yeah, absolutely, you're absolutely right. The IDF chief of staff
is set to present options to the cabinet. Those are
options for continuing operations in Gaza that includes potentially taking
full control of the Gaza Strip under military rule if
no deal is reached. This is sort of an ultimatum
to try to get Hamas to agree more to Israel's side.

(28:43):
But some unnamed IDUP officials are reportedly conveying that after
nineteen months of ground operations, there aren't many significant military
goals that are left which don't risk the lives of
the remaining fifty hostages, who may or may not be alive.

Speaker 1 (29:01):
We don't actually know at this point. Unfortunately, that's just
the sad fact about this whole thing. So fifty hostages
still held, twenty eight of them are believed to be deceased. Unfortunately,
at this point, that number alone should compel everyone involved
to find a solution. This is absolutely frustrating for the

(29:24):
people on the ground as well as for everyone who watches,
waits and hopes for resolution, including the families and friends
of all of these hostages. Mean Karvin, as always, thank
you for helping us unpack this. But for now let's
shift our focus to the twelve day war between Israel
and Iran. But first we need to take a quick
break for a message from our sponsors, so stay with us.

(29:46):
We'll be right back. Welcome back, listeners. As we hinted
at before the break, we are diving deep into the
twelve day war between Israel and Iran. I know last
week we didn't put out an episode, well, a full
length episode, like we usually do. Curvin decided he wanted
to get more information before we came on here and
started running our mouths so Absoletely, it was more of

(30:12):
a public service that we kept our yapps shut last week.
So we're back at it now. It feels like we
just caught our breath from the last crisis, But here
we are diving straight into the aftermath of what happened
between Israel, Iran, and the United States. So let this
be at another reminder that peace is always a fragile

(30:33):
thing for those just catching up. This wasn't just a skirmish.
This was a full blown, intense conflict with significant US involvement.
So Curvin, from your vantage point, can you walk us
through what exactly transpired during those intense twelve days? And
I can say that because it was intense for you
as well, wasn't it. What was the immediate fallout?

Speaker 2 (30:56):
Yeah, as you well know, moments for me to take
a breath. We're few and far between. I'm saying that
to you, Tienna. You know especially, I did not have
much communication with you over the last twelve days, and
that's really just you.

Speaker 1 (31:13):
Yeah. I was calling, like, I'd text you on WhatsApp
and everything, and you wouldn't get back to me. So
I was calling you all the time like.

Speaker 2 (31:20):
Where are you?

Speaker 1 (31:20):
What are your going?

Speaker 2 (31:23):
Yeah? And yeah, it was just intense and a lot
of moving parts, and you're probably thinking, why you know,
you've got Israel Iran, But look, the Middle East. We
still have a huge contingent of US service members and
US equipment and personnel in the Middle East in the
Central Command. And so even if Israel and Iran are

(31:45):
fighting and the US isn't involved in it, at one point,
we still have to protect those service members because something
could happen. And this really kicked off on June thirteenth.
That's when Israel launched what they called Operation Rising Lion.
These were surprise attacks on key Iranian military and nuclear facilities.
For talking over two hundred Israeli fire jets. They dropped

(32:08):
more than three hundred and thirty munitions on about one
hundred targets across Iran. Now, the Israelis even claimed complete
air superiority, with MASAD operatives reportedly sabotaging Iranian air defenses
to clear the way for this.

Speaker 1 (32:23):
So a swift, decisive strike from Israel. So how did
Iran respond to that kind of opening salvo? Right?

Speaker 2 (32:30):
So, as we reported the last podcast we put out together,
Iran retaliated with Operation True Promise three. This is the
third strike or the third intensive strike on Israel, and
they launched over five hundred ballistic missiles in one thousand
drones at Israel as well some US basis in the region,

(32:53):
including one end cutter. The human cost was significant, so
Iran reported six hundred and ten killed, nearly five thousand injured,
with considerable infrastructure damage. Now most of this was IRGC
members as well as nuclear scientists within Iran, and Israel
saw twenty eight killed, mostly civilians, as well as sixty

(33:13):
three injured.

Speaker 1 (33:15):
I mean, that's a heavy toll on both sides. And
then the US got directly involved, right yep.

Speaker 2 (33:22):
So that was June twenty second, the US executed Operation
Midnight Hammer. That this was the US using bunker buster
strikes on Iran's and attents Fordeaux and Esfahan nuclear facilities.
This was a clear signal of intent. The US did

(33:43):
this purposely to support Israel in an offensive effort, and
the conflict very quickly after that led to a ceasefire.
The ceasefire was broken by the United States and that
took effect on June twenty fourth. And Trump was even
the one who coined the term the Twelve Day War

(34:03):
for this conflict.

Speaker 1 (34:05):
The twelve Day War, the name itself sounds so definitive,
almost like the chapter is closed completely. But we know
in this region very little is ever truly over. So
was the ceasefire genuinely stable or was it merely a
pause in the fighting. What does stability even look like
in such a volatile landscape.

Speaker 2 (34:25):
Yeah, fragile, that's the word that quickly comes to mind.

Speaker 1 (34:30):
Now.

Speaker 2 (34:30):
Trump announced the ceasefire minutes after both sides were still
threatening new attacks. After the ceasefire was supposedly agreed to,
Iran even launched another attack, And I think that was
sort of Iran's test, or perhaps a sign of internal

(34:51):
disarray within Iran. We agreed to the ceasefire, but oh wait,
we're going to send more missiles to Israel because we
had already planned to do that. Now, the Middle East,
as we know, it's far from staple. From an analytical standpoint,
to me, this seems like a temporary pause. This is
not a fundamental shift. People are still on edge within

(35:14):
Israel and within Iran, and the military objectives were largely achieved,
I would say, between Israel and the United States. We
saw Iran's nuclear program be degraded, Its missile arsenal has
been halved, and its proxies like Hesperalah and the who
thiass those two proxies were very much silent during this conflict.

(35:39):
But the underlying tensions, the strategic ambitions, that hasn't gone anywhere.
And it's a strategic reset, not a resolution.

Speaker 1 (35:49):
See that's the part that always worries me. Like we
see the headlines, the military actions, but the deeper currents
of animosity and ambition remain in place. And speaking of headlines,
Sin Trump's rhetoric throughout this has been it's been Trump Like.
How has his unique approach, especially on sanctions and his
claims about saving Hameni shaped to this dynamic?

Speaker 2 (36:13):
Yeah? Look Trump, Yeah, very Trumpian, right. I think his
approach is a masterclass and transactional diplomacy, Sienna. He explicitly
stated he halted plans to ease sanctions on Iran immediately
after Supreme Leaderjmini publicly downplayed the success of the US

(36:35):
and Israeli air strikes at that point. So before that
he had been working on measures for Iran's full, fast
and complete recovery. But then Homini went on Twitter and
he maybe what Trump would call a statement of anger
hatred and discuss discussed sorry didn't say the tea there,

(36:59):
and that got Trump very pissed, and so he put
the sanctions back on Iran. And it's a direct reactive
link between Irani and rhetoric and US policy.

Speaker 1 (37:12):
He shouldn't have run his mouth on Twitter before the
sanctions were lifted, although he probably Trump would have put
them back in place immediately regardless.

Speaker 2 (37:20):
I guess. Yeah. Once is real ast for him too,
And they'd been working so hard.

Speaker 1 (37:26):
On getting those sanctions lift and then he just ruined
it with a tweet or are they called tweets on
X Still.

Speaker 2 (37:32):
I still call it Twitter. I'm just waiting for Musk
to sell it to someone else and it become Twitter again.
But also, let this be a lesson. Stay off of Twitter.

Speaker 1 (37:45):
Yeah, it doesn't go so well, it doesn't. I mean,
it seems like it kind of you know, it gives
you access to public figures and stuff like closer access
to you know, yeah, because they're supposedly, you know, using
these Twitter accounts on their own and then it always
backfires whenever.

Speaker 2 (38:06):
You Yeah, I think it sounds great in theory, right, Well,
we get access to these elected officials that, yeah, some
of us look up to. I'm not I wouldn't say
everyone looks up to but you know, there are people
who look up to them, and then you get you
get a look into who they really are, and you
immediately don't never meet your heroes, right yeah, and you're like, oh,

(38:29):
you're an idiot just like me. Okay, cool, We're all.

Speaker 1 (38:34):
Just human, you mean humans, even that these people put
on a pedestal. So anyways, sanctions relief was on the
table and then it was off the table, just like
that in a tweet. So it feels personal, like almost
like a negotiation that's happening in public.

Speaker 2 (38:54):
It is death, That's exactly what it was. Uh. There
was also this extraordinary claim that President Trump saved Colmini
from assassination. He actually said he knew the exact location
of Supreme Leader Chmini and that he refused to authorize
this killing. He even blocked a large Israeli air operation

(39:18):
that would have killed many Iranians. Very trumpion of him.
Trump purbole there. And this adds a highly personal, almost
theatrical element to the US Iran dynamic. It's assigned to
I think stoke tension, confuse, and apply intense pressure on
Iran as we go through this and this is all

(39:39):
part of his maximum pressure diplomacy, and we're seeing this
play out in real time.

Speaker 1 (39:45):
It's certainly confusing from the outside in the maximum pressure
campaign that's been a cornerstone of his policy, hasn't it.

Speaker 2 (39:53):
Yeah, it has. This has been true since his withdrawal
from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action or the JIGBOA,
the JCPOA that he withdrew from that in twenty seventeen.
The JICKPOA was signed in twenty fifteen, and the goal
is to sever Iran's revenue and compel it to cease

(40:14):
uranium enrichment. They've targeted everything from shadow banking networks to
illicit oil traders. Even entities supporting Iran's drone and missile
programs are targeted. Now the state of objective is to
deny Iran all paths to a nuclear weapon.

Speaker 1 (40:33):
But then there's the China factor. He publicly said China
would continue buying or onion oil and that seems to
contract the whole maximum pressure idea.

Speaker 2 (40:44):
Yeah, it's quite the reversal, isn't it, Especially towards a
government that's considered the number one economic and military adversary
to the United States. This actually surprised a lot of people,
even within Trump's own administration. One senior White House official
tried to walk it back early on, but even though

(41:07):
that happened, the signal was sent. What I mean by
that is China already accounts for ninety nine five percent
of Iran's oil shipments, and after Trump's statements, China's imports
surged to record levels and it average one point eight
million barrels per day. They're also getting it at a discount,

(41:28):
and they've built a dark fleet of ships to go
through this. And they also used the wand to make
payments on this, not the US dollar, which is supposed
to be what all oil is traded at. And the
reason they do this is to circumvent sanctions.

Speaker 1 (41:48):
So China is essentially providing a crucial economic lifeline and
it undermines the very sanctions that were designed to cripple
or on. It sounds like trying to drain about with
the faucetst running.

Speaker 2 (42:00):
Exact That's exactly what's happening here, and it's why we
are so negative on sanctions. I told you we'd talk
about sanctions and how we hate them again, and here
we are. I think they're being used not for economic strangulation,
but they're being used as a flexible instrument of political leverage.
So what we're seeing here absolutely risks undermining the long

(42:24):
term credibility of the sanctions regime. That's what I call
Western Europe and the United States.

Speaker 1 (42:31):
Well, it certainly makes you wonder about the true intentions
behind some of these moves. Now, let's turn back to Iran.
Their public stance has been incredibly defiant, claiming victory despite
all of these strikes. So what is really going on
behind the scenes with their messaging and what about this
alleged assassination plot against how many? That sounds like something

(42:54):
out of a spy novel. I've I've seen Iran's put
out a lot of AI images to prove that they.

Speaker 2 (43:03):
Oh I love the Iranian AI images. It's one of
my favorite things on the internet these days.

Speaker 1 (43:08):
Like they claimed they shot down one of our like
fighter jets or something, and it's massive, it's literal. All
the sequel they have like one hundreds of people surrounding
this city sized plane.

Speaker 2 (43:22):
Yeah, I believe they said they shot down in F
thirty five and I have seen an F thirty five
in person. I know many pilots that are f thirty
five pilots and this this image is incredibly hilarious to
me to see it's oh good.

Speaker 1 (43:38):
And it came out wait, it didn't come out on
like their official right. It was what what what was
the account? It was somebody who pushes their propaganda like.

Speaker 2 (43:49):
That Iran Radar or Iran News. It's a Twitter account
and it has to have underneath it that this is
a new commentary account and not an official state sponsored account.

Speaker 1 (44:06):
So but it's the state who gives them braise images
put out.

Speaker 2 (44:10):
To people.

Speaker 1 (44:12):
That I loved that huge That jet was like the
size of I don't know, it was huge. Like I said,
they have like hundreds of little people all stealing for.

Speaker 2 (44:25):
I mean, they were like images or videos of like
Star Wars tie fighters within Israeli buildings. It's I mean,
the propaganda machine. Like I said, it's one of my
favorite things to view. And I say it's my favorite thing.
I'm not trying to make light of the situation that's
going on, which is devastating for the world, and I

(44:45):
wanted to stop. But you got to find some humor
within all of this, and this is one of the
things I find humor in because it is so fantastically
uh and blatantly.

Speaker 1 (44:59):
Unbelievable.

Speaker 2 (45:03):
Very few people are believing it, and you know that
by looking at the comments and just how much people
are panning it. But through all this, Komini has publicly
declared victory over Israel. He said that Iran had delivered
a slap in the face to the United States because
they attacked a base in Cutter and he minimized the

(45:24):
impact of the strikes on their nuclear facilities. He said
that there was no major effect, nothing really happened, and
that they got everything out of those facilities before the
attacks occurred. Their foreign minister Araki, he kind of echoed this.
He warned that Iran would not hesitate to unveil its

(45:47):
real capabilities if it was provoked. Now, this defiance from Iran,
even in the face of military setbacks, serves a crucial purpose.
This is specifically for domestic consumption, and I say it absolutely,
and the reason for this is they want to preserve

(46:11):
the regime's credibility. The regime is the ier gc Homini,
and there is this restive population that they there's sort
of this unrest creeping up in Iran, and there's this
thought among moderate Iranians that regime change could be good

(46:31):
in Iran without Israel even doing anything, and so Iran
wants to deter further aggression within its own population. It's
about controlling the narrative here.

Speaker 1 (46:43):
So it's a show of strength for their own people,
you know, to rally them even if they're not quite
happy with the regime.

Speaker 2 (46:50):
Yes, exactly now. Externally, Iran's defiance is clear, but they're
messaging also hints at a conditional openness to negotiation. Iran
is signaling a willingness to engage, but not to capitulate
under duress. This is a strategic balancing act. So not

(47:10):
forget the assassination plot. While President Trump's claim that he
saved Homini's life by knowing his exact location, that he
blocked Israel's plans, Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz publicly admitted
Israel did plan to assassinate Homieni during the conflict, that
they viewed him as a target of opportunity, but they

(47:33):
noted Thatjmiini went into deep hiding, no one knew where
he was at the time, and that's what prevented the strike.

Speaker 1 (47:41):
So Israel confirms it but Trump claims he stopped it.
So that's a lot to unpact.

Speaker 2 (47:49):
The unpack usually is with Trump rit Yeah.

Speaker 1 (47:53):
Okay, but the fact that it was even considered, and
that Calmeni was reportedly shelling in a bunker shows how
high the stakes truly were. Yeah.

Speaker 2 (48:04):
Look, it escalates the nature of the conflicts significantly, targeting
leadership moves beyond infrastructure. We're talking about an attempt at
regime change from the Israelis. For Iran, it validates their
narrative that they are living through an existential threat, that
being Israel, and that can potentially unify a divided populace. Now,

(48:26):
for the US and Israel, this demonstrates resolve, but it
risks international condemnation and unpredictable retaliation. So post cease fire,
Israel has reportedly ruled out immediate assassination attempts. But as
always with the Middle East rhenacy, if that holds.

Speaker 1 (48:45):
And Israel can be pretty sneaky sometimes you know they're
not gonna fans, uh, which is hiers. Oh yeah, yeah.
So let's talk about the nuclear program itself. Now, the
report says around centrifuge enrichment program was effectively destroyed. So

(49:06):
how effective were the these strikes and what capabilities does
Iran still possess? It is the threat truly gone or
is it? You know, like Iran said, we hardly made
a dent in anything.

Speaker 2 (49:21):
Well, I think effectively destroyed is accurate for their centrifuge
enrichment program. The US and Israeli operations caused massive damage
to Iran's nuclear infrastructure. It set them back significantly. Now,
whether that's setting back months or years, we just don't
know right now. But I can say is that Natan

(49:42):
saw most of its centrifuges eliminated, others severely destroyed or damaged. Foordo,
which is that deeply buried nuclear site. It sustained significant damage.
That's because twelve to thirty thousand pound bunk or buster
bombs like destroyed Cascades responsible for nearly ninety percent of

(50:04):
the Iran's sixty percent enriched uranium production. So a lot
of numbers to throw at. But as we've talked about
on this podcast before, anything above sixty percent enriched uranium
is a red flag for the United States and Israel
because that can then produce a bomb that could be
used against Israel. Now, the Arak heavy water reactor was

(50:30):
also likely destroyed, and that eliminated a potential plutonium source.
They even eliminated at least fourteen nuclear scientists.

Speaker 1 (50:39):
So despite what Iran said on Twitter, I mean, X,
oh my gosh, I obviously don't have any of us there.
So that's why, that's why I can't get the name right.
So despite what iron says on social media, it was
a major blow. So does this mean that their timeline
to a nuclear weapon has been pushed back years?

Speaker 2 (51:01):
Or I said, yeah, so is it months? Is it years?
That's really the discussion. But the estimated time Iran would
need to build even a non missile deliverable nuclear weapon,
what I can say is it has increased significantly. That
timeline has increased significantly. It's going to take a long

(51:23):
time for them to recover their pre attack capabilities. But
and this is crucial. While the capacity for rapid overt
enrichment is degraded, the material itself and some foundational components
for future reconstitution that persists the.

Speaker 1 (51:42):
Quote residuals end quote as the report calls them. So
what exactly are we talking about here?

Speaker 2 (51:48):
We're talking about existing stocks of sixty percent, twenty percent
and singular percentage points of enriched uranium. Once again, anything
over sixty percent is a concern to the US and Israel. Also,
the centrifuges that were manufactured but not yet installed are

(52:10):
still there. These non destroyed components could still be used
to produce weapons grade uranium in the future. Now, some
intelligence assessments even suggest Iran's highly enriched uranium stockpile remains
largely intact because conventional explosives cannot destroy enriched uranium, it'll

(52:30):
only bury it further.

Speaker 1 (52:33):
So it's not a complete eradication, but a significant setback.
It buys time, but the threat isn't gone.

Speaker 2 (52:40):
Yeah, exactly, It's a strategic pause, not a definitive. And now,
prior to this, the IAEA assessed Airons overall and enriched
uranium stock at over nine thy two hundred kilograms. That
was the report I saw when I knew that Israel
was going to attack Iran. Be that to have that

(53:01):
much uranium stock, to be that close to a nuclear weapon,
I knew Israel had no other choice from their belief Now,
their focus on sixty percent enrichment far beyond civilian needs.
That was a clear indicator of non civilian intent from Iran.
The IAEA by what they by what.

Speaker 1 (53:20):
They tried to say, but try to say, we're doing
this for energy purposes. This is for our civilian population.

Speaker 2 (53:28):
Absolutely. Yeah. So anything over sixty percent is not for
civilian use. And that's how we know Iran wants a weapon.
They want to become one of the big boys with
a nuclear weapon, and obviously through other forms of intelligence,
we understand that they want to use that against Israel. Now,
the IAEA Director General emphasized the need for a cessation

(53:52):
of hostilities to resume file vital inspection work and verify
Iran's stockpiles. I can say that that's not going to
happen no matter what the Director General asks for, because
Iran's not going to let them in there anymore. And Trump,
for his own purposes, has also stated that any future
talks would demand Iran's surrender its remaining enriched uranium.

Speaker 1 (54:18):
That is a critical point. The material is still there,
so Iran can start their nuclear program back up, with
obvious delays due to Israel's and the United States actions.
But Kurvin, we've talked about some really heavy stuff today,
from the lasting ripple effects of the US strikes on
Iran's nuclear facilities, to the intricate dance of powers in

(54:39):
Europe and the Middle East. It is a lot to
take in, even for us. But before we sign off,
I wanted to turn our attention to something that, against
all odds, offered a flicker of hope this week for
those who might have missed it, the Democratic Republic of
the Congo and Rwanda signed a significant peace agreement this week.
We've watched that reaching grapple with so much instability, so

(55:02):
much pain, for so long. So Carvin, what makes this
agreement particularly noteworthy in your analysis?

Speaker 2 (55:11):
Well, at what stands out here is the comprehensive nature
of the agreement. It's not just a ceasefire. It actually
addresses the underlying issues. So they're committing to mutual respect
for sovereignty and territorial integrity. This has been a huge flashpoint.
They're explicitly moving away from military solutions, they are acknowledging

(55:33):
the need for political resolution, and most importantly, they're establishing
a joint security coordination mechanism and a regional economic integration framework.
That last part, the economic integration, that is crucial. It
suggests a long term vision, moving beyond just stopping the
fighting to actually building shared prosperity.

Speaker 1 (55:56):
So it's not just about stopping the immediate bloodshed, but
trying to address the root causes of the instability, the
economic drivers that so often fuel these conflicts, especially in
research resource rich areas like the DRC.

Speaker 2 (56:11):
It's hopeful, Yeah, it is, and it has to be.
We've seen peace stills come and go. Some are stronger
than others. But I think this one has the backing
of certain key international players. It's got the backing of
the African Union, it's got the backing of a cutter,
but most notably the backing of the United States that

(56:32):
kind of sustained international engagement, especially in the Joint Oversight
Committee that's going to monitor the implement the implementation of this.
This is truly vital. It reminds me of the time
I spent in Iraq in Afghanistan and we would have agreements,
we'd have ceasefires, and we'd have peace, and they'd crumble
because there was not that consistent external push for accountability.

(56:56):
This seems to be different. This seems to be trying
to void that lack of accountability.

Speaker 1 (57:03):
Well, as someone who has lived through your rotations and deployments,
with the constant worry and the updates from Afar, any
news of de escalation of a genuine attempt at peace
feels like they can take a deep breath.

Speaker 2 (57:17):
Finally, Yeah, it really does. And for the people on
the ground in the DRC and Rwanda, this isn't just
geopolitical maneuvering. It's about families returning home, about humanitarian access
to aid, about the very real prospect of a safer
future for the children of those countries. And it's a
reminder that even in the toughest landscape a landscapes the

(57:39):
continent of Africa. Amidst all the darkness that we often
discuss on this podcast, sometimes the poking of fun at diplomacy.
Sometimes diplomacy can still carve out a path. It might
be a narrow path, but it's still a path towards
something better.

Speaker 1 (57:58):
A path towards something better. That is a good note
to end on. It's a powerful testament to what's possible
when nations, even those with a history of conflict, choose
dialogue over destruction and working together and trying to get
to the root causes. We don't often get to highlight
genuine peace on this podcast so this moment of relief

(58:21):
of seeing diplomacy at work, it's truly welcome, especially with
all the conflicts, all the other conflicts that we have
going on. Is there anything else that you would like
to discuss?

Speaker 2 (58:31):
No, I think that's it for now. How about you.

Speaker 1 (58:34):
I would like to discuss my favorite video from the week.

Speaker 2 (58:38):
Okay, that's what is saying.

Speaker 1 (58:43):
Now? That is Trump saying the capacity.

Speaker 2 (58:49):
Oh boy, but one of the most honest political statements
I may have ever heard in my life.

Speaker 1 (58:58):
I I appreciated him calling out both sides.

Speaker 2 (59:03):
It was factually correct, but the F word, you know,
it really just put.

Speaker 1 (59:09):
It over the top. For me. I was like, finally,
finally I understand this language.

Speaker 2 (59:14):
What was great? I think what was great about it
and I'm glad you brought this up was that statement. So,
you know, typically political statements and you got the press
there and you're very cautious about what you're saying, and.

Speaker 1 (59:29):
Someone who is very versed on you know, trumpurbole.

Speaker 2 (59:33):
Yes, and knowing you know what he wants to say,
you know, big beautiful Bill and all this kind of stuff.
It was a very honest moment where you knew at
like I could sense at that moment. He was frustrated
because this was right after the ceasefire and Aaron sent

(59:53):
missiles over Israel. Said okay, now then we get to
since you broke the ceasefire, and you knew at that
point it was a very human moment for Trump. For me, yeah,
that he was very frustrated. He really did want to
see peace in the situation and this happened and he
was like, oh, no, all bets are off.

Speaker 1 (01:00:17):
I know, I know a lot of people didn't appreciate
the the curse word, and you know, I under I
understand that, but you know, there was a lot of feelings.
There were a lot of feelings behind that f word,
and sometimes you got to get that fricative out.

Speaker 2 (01:00:33):
Yep, feel better.

Speaker 1 (01:00:35):
He's like the fricative, the creative, you get the cricative out.

Speaker 2 (01:00:41):
Absolutely, I agree.

Speaker 1 (01:00:42):
I appreciated that he just said it. I know a
lot of people didn't. They're like that, you know, tarnishes
the Office of America. But I'm not going down that road.

Speaker 2 (01:00:54):
I am Monroe. I think residents before Monica, he was.

Speaker 1 (01:01:02):
A tap that wasn't Taft. Taft was the big guy. Yeah,
the one who hid his mistress.

Speaker 2 (01:01:10):
And the elt that they had yet empire. You'll learn
all about that.

Speaker 1 (01:01:16):
Yeah, it's like a major plat point boardwalk empire.

Speaker 2 (01:01:18):
But I mean the office of the President of the
United States has been tarnished.

Speaker 1 (01:01:27):
Because we're all human beings. You can't expect perfection from anybody.
Nobody's perfect nobody anyway. Anyway, I just I really appreciated.

Speaker 2 (01:01:39):
If you disagree.

Speaker 1 (01:01:41):
I don't care if you disagree or not. That's this
is my opinion on it. I'm allowed to have an
opinion you don't have to like it.

Speaker 2 (01:01:48):
I'm trying to just up some comments here.

Speaker 1 (01:01:52):
Why just kidding basically.

Speaker 2 (01:01:57):
Anyway, Well, thank you for that. Anything else I mean.

Speaker 1 (01:02:01):
Now, I think I'm good.

Speaker 2 (01:02:04):
That was a good one. I did like that one.
I was going to a second.

Speaker 1 (01:02:10):
I was going to bring it up earlier when we
were talking about the Twelve Day War, but I was like, no,
wait till the end. This deserves its own special spot.

Speaker 2 (01:02:19):
Yeah, and you were right, you nailed it on this one.

Speaker 1 (01:02:23):
Yeap, thank you, thank you. I'm here all week.

Speaker 2 (01:02:26):
Yeah.

Speaker 1 (01:02:27):
Anyways, thank you for listening to this Week Explained. We
hope you found it both informative and engaging. And if
you have any feedback or suggestions for future episodes. We'd
love to hear from you. For more in depth coverage
of these stories and more, be sure to follow us
on social media at this

Speaker 2 (01:02:42):
Week Explained Tianna, Thank you so much, and until next week,
stay safe out there.

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

On Purpose with Jay Shetty

Crime Junkie

Cardiac Cowboys

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}12-Day War Aftermath: Iran Strikes, Gaza Ceasefire Hopes, & Ukraine's New Front

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}On Purpose with Jay Shetty

Crime Junkie

Cardiac Cowboys

All Episodes

12-Day War Aftermath: Iran Strikes, Gaza Ceasefire Hopes, & Ukraine's New Front

On Purpose with Jay Shetty