January 9, 2024 • 11 mins
As you have probably heard, the Secretary of Defense went "missing" recently after a trip to the hospital. What should the consequences be for this?
Talking to A&G, military analyst Mike Lyons breaks it down for us.
Hear the entire conversation in a new episode of Armstrong & Getty's Extra Large Podcast....
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
On January fifth, Secretary Austin resuming his duties from the hospital.
The press and public finally told about it late in
the day, Secretary Austin issuing a statement from.
Speaker 2 (00:12):
His hospital bed. I recognize I.
Speaker 1 (00:14):
Could have done a better job ensuring the public was
appropriately informed.
Speaker 2 (00:18):
I commit to doing better.
Speaker 3 (00:20):
Yeah, that seems weasily to me, just in that the
public being informed. I don't need to know, but the
President probably should know. The National Security Advisor should probably know.
Your number two should probably know that they're in charge.
Speaker 2 (00:37):
I don't need to know. Well, it seems self evident
to me, but again, I'm a layman. I thought it
was striking that some of the newscasts said the effort
to hide the hospitalization just came out and said it.
Let's consult with somebody who knows what he's talking about.
Major Mike Lions retired in the United States military. He
respected military analyst for CNN among the other outlets. Always
(00:57):
good to have you, Mike. How are you, sir?
Speaker 4 (01:00):
Any guys happy New Year?
Speaker 3 (01:01):
Do you stand by your tweet from yesterday in which
you thought there needs to be repercussions for this? I'll
read it if there are no consequences for this action.
The result is a new standard of behavior for a
cabinet official.
Speaker 5 (01:15):
Well, I mean, all I really did was tweet out
leadership one on one, and then when a leadership, when
a leader, you know, kind of walks by and creates
this kind of problem and there's no consequence, and that's
we've created a new standard. So I don't I want
to take any outrage out of it with regard to,
you know, calling for his head or or anything like that.
That's not what I really meant to say. The level
of breakdown though, in this particular situation is concerning the fact,
(01:40):
you know, take take out all the components of it,
goes into the hospital. The second that he was medevac
to ICU should have triggered multiple communication channels with his
chief of staff, who now we come to find out,
was sick with the flu, with his deputy who was
off on vacation in Puerto Rico. He should have returned immediately,
(02:01):
and none of those things happened. And that's where the
breakdown I think happens. The Chairman of the Joint Chief
then gets notified I believe January second, which is a Tuesday,
he had by law responsibility to communicate. So to me,
this is you know, more of again leadership one oh one,
that when we create this kind of behavior, we set
a new standard and we'll see if there will be
(02:24):
a consequence. It doesn't necessarily mean he has to resign,
but there's going to be a consequence. There's going to
be an investigation. Now at a very minimum, we see.
Speaker 2 (02:33):
Well, ultimately, I guess the consequence is that the ballot box.
But so you seem to be suggesting this is just
good old fashioned this happened. Then that happened, and nobody
thought of it just incompetence, Mistakes were made, people were sick.
Speaker 4 (02:48):
Yeah, that's probably more alike.
Speaker 5 (02:49):
I mean, in order for these kind of things to happen,
lots of things have to go wrong, and all what
have taken is that one person back then, the chief
of staff notifying the president right away when he's an ICU,
because there's the regulatory requirements that have to happen. It orders,
you know, from a civilian defense, you know, pritary perspective
that the orders you would have to give out that
(03:10):
would have to be delegated to someone else. And so
none of those things happened. You factor in, it's the
end of the year, your factor in all those things,
the factor in the deputies on vacation doesn't. It's it's
just more incompetence. That's unfortunate. That likely they're going to
have to go back and put another you know, belt
and suspenders process and to make sure it doesn't ever
happen again.
Speaker 3 (03:29):
I don't want to try to get you to comment
on something that you don't know about, but maybe you
do know about this. It's surprising to me that the
President isn't talking to the Sect death like practically every day,
given you know, the events of the last couple of weeks.
Speaker 5 (03:46):
Well, I think that's one of these implied things that
have come out of this whole thing and the daily intelligence.
Speaker 4 (03:53):
Briefing and all of those things.
Speaker 5 (03:55):
I mean, he's not reading them in the ICU and
like who is and you would think you would think
they're fifteen minutes with the NSC. You know, Jake Sullivan
was surprised as well. So it does show there is
somewhat of a disconnect. I think what this is showing
us is that the NSC, the Nasal Security Advisor and
Council are doing more to run the operation inside of
(04:18):
Israel and what's going on foreign policy wise than the
Secretary of Defensive That's the unfortunate, unintended consequence of this happening,
and this having been found out, he's not he's not
communicating with him for whatever reason, and the fact that
he's going to let this go, it just goes to
show you that they're with the current process.
Speaker 2 (04:38):
Yeah, speaking of the ballot box before we move on
to the situation in Israel, I'm just struck Mike by.
You know, I spent enough time as an athlete to
know that you don't have any idea how good your
team is until you play a game. And the Russians
found that out bitterly in Ukraine, where is the Chinese
(05:00):
are discovering that they are not nearly as well equipped
as they thought they were, hence the clean out of
the Chinese military Upper Eche lines. And I just have
a bad feeling about our military apparatus and how ready
we really are.
Speaker 5 (05:16):
Yeah, you know, it's great question because we thought that
was that way back in the eighties, and we saw
the Desert Storm proved that wrong. And I think the
same thing our military were almost sent me sometimes in
terms of how we feel the standard in the bar
is but we do answer the bell and rise to
the occasion. And at our reporting structure is always for example,
(05:37):
and if equipment is supposed to be ready, it is ready.
It's good to go. I saw those about water with
there were supposed to be fuel in those rockets in China,
and you know, China, I think was looking to get
by on masks. They were just they're looking to throw
bodies at things because that's what that's what their advantage is.
In a military perspective, the question comes back to whether
our technology and because they can out mass us, they
(05:58):
could do anything in that regard. We saw the pictures
of the carrier that they're trying, their practicing bombing all
those things, all those intimidate actors, but again to kind
of netted out. I think our military learned that lesson
in a bad way during Vietnam, and we still have
the leadership in our military making sure that that would
never happen. We've got high readiness for our active forces.
(06:19):
I'm confident in that.
Speaker 2 (06:20):
That's great to hear.
Speaker 3 (06:21):
So reading more of your tweets because you're one of
the people that anything happens in Israel Ukraine big anything
with the military.
Speaker 2 (06:29):
You're one of the first Twitter feeds.
Speaker 3 (06:31):
I go to your tweet from four days ago while
US conducts airstrike and bag Dad, why this target over
the hoofies?
Speaker 2 (06:39):
What were you talking about there?
Speaker 5 (06:41):
Yeah, I'm surprised that we chose to go pick a
target that of was logistical support, but it looks like
we had one of the leaders of one of those
Hezbola brigades that were there that was so close to Baghdad.
I think, you know, we're starting to go We're still
going after the logistics, but I'd like to see us
go after you know, the archers are not just the arrows,
(07:02):
and the archers are sitting in Yemen, and there's now
who these are. But then I kind of thought about it.
The reason why, the reason why we probably want attack
inside of Yemen is because we likely would kill Iranian
soldiers that are there helping them and supporting them in
Ranian public Guards, and I think that would show an escalation.
So I think they're keeping that in their back pocket.
(07:23):
This was as close to though, as a surprise to
me that the administration would approve this attack, just given
how far it was inside of a rock inside of Baghdad,
not in the hinterlands. You know, the Syrians and all
those other kind of outposts that those brigades are one thing.
But this is a close attack that again sent a
very very clear message, and it just it's delaying this
(07:44):
whole potential attack inside of Yemen. I saw admist Rebauties
basically say the same thing. We should be going after them.
But I think when you think about it, we would
attack and the kill Iranian soldiers, and I think that's
going to be a problem for this administration.
Speaker 3 (07:57):
Okay, interesting, Yeah, I was going to bring him up
because he said, whoever you're talking about Hezbolahamas or the Huthies,
it's all about you're talking about Iran And to your mind,
are even close to pushing back hard enough against all
of those attacks yet?
Speaker 4 (08:13):
Not yet.
Speaker 5 (08:13):
But we haven't seen any counter attacks of substance since
that last attack from you know, a week ago or
top five days ago. So again it's an interesting Maybe
we're starting to draw this line on military deterrence in
that area there, and maybe we're seeing I've seen intelligence
reports that are showing that the Iranians are sending message
to Hesbelah about backing off and not escalating. However, I've
(08:37):
seen the other side where you know, Israel might decide
that they want to escalate. I just the words of
the Defense minister saying it's time for war right now.
You know, Israel's not stopping their operations until they find
an Arab person that runs an Arab organization that says
we surrender, and they're going to keep going for as
long as that happens. That might be a very long
time still, so I think that is you will might
(09:00):
end up extending this if as long as as long
as they think they're going to win, and right now
they're doing just that.
Speaker 4 (09:07):
I think in Gada as well as eleven one, it.
Speaker 2 (09:10):
Seems pretty clear to me that the Israelis have said
this is time for total warfare. We will defeat our enemy.
And if the world is uncomfortable with that, well that's fine.
They will have to deal with it. And you know, honestly,
putting aside certain people in that region, the quote unquote
world will have forgotten about this in six months, so
I think they're probably doing the right thing. One more
(09:30):
note about Israel. When those bombs went off at the
big ceremony, unerring General Sulamani in the cemetery in Iran,
I with great confidence pronounced to my wife that, yep,
you don't mess with the Israelis. They take as long
as they need blah blah blah. And she looked at
me with admiring eyes. And it turns out I'm probably
(09:51):
completely wrong. Now people are saying that was icy. I
buy yeah, well right, do you buy that, mic I.
Speaker 5 (09:57):
Do I do the kind of attack that it was
tap where they go in and they bomb the first time,
wait for first responders to show up to help, and
then they bomb again. You know, that's just not something
Israel would do. That's not in their fingerprint. They're more surgical. Look,
they will go after leadership of Hamas. But I'm going
to go out and women say they're not going to
bomb civilians and make that kind of attack. That's clearly ice.
(10:20):
That's a terrorist attack. Now terrorism has come home to
roost in Iran. You know, the number one state supporter
or exporter of terrorist activities. Well, by the way, it
has enemies inside themselves as well. And we're took place
in the southern eastern portion of the country, maybe more
in the central portion. Easy to get terrorist organizations from
from Afghanistan and other people can come through those very
(10:40):
poor sports and set that up again away from the
flagpole of Tehran. So I think that's how that that's
that way that went down, and I think the Ranians
have got to be concerned about more ISIS attacks as
this conflict with inside the Muslim world exists of Shia
versus Sunni.
Speaker 2 (10:56):
Mike Lyons, military analyst, Mike, thanks a million, so interesting.
Happy new year to you and we're looking forward to
staying to touch this year.
Speaker 4 (11:02):
Great guys, thanks for me Armstrong and Getty
On January fifth, Secretary Austin resuming his duties from the hospital.
The press and public finally told about it late in
the day, Secretary Austin issuing a statement from.
Speaker 2 (00:12):
His hospital bed. I recognize I.
Speaker 1 (00:14):
Could have done a better job ensuring the public was
appropriately informed.
Speaker 2 (00:18):
I commit to doing better.
Speaker 3 (00:20):
Yeah, that seems weasily to me, just in that the
public being informed. I don't need to know, but the
President probably should know. The National Security Advisor should probably know.
Your number two should probably know that they're in charge.
Speaker 2 (00:37):
I don't need to know. Well, it seems self evident
to me, but again, I'm a layman. I thought it
was striking that some of the newscasts said the effort
to hide the hospitalization just came out and said it.
Let's consult with somebody who knows what he's talking about.
Major Mike Lions retired in the United States military. He
respected military analyst for CNN among the other outlets. Always
(00:57):
good to have you, Mike. How are you, sir?
Speaker 4 (01:00):
Any guys happy New Year?
Speaker 3 (01:01):
Do you stand by your tweet from yesterday in which
you thought there needs to be repercussions for this? I'll
read it if there are no consequences for this action.
The result is a new standard of behavior for a
cabinet official.
Speaker 5 (01:15):
Well, I mean, all I really did was tweet out
leadership one on one, and then when a leadership, when
a leader, you know, kind of walks by and creates
this kind of problem and there's no consequence, and that's
we've created a new standard. So I don't I want
to take any outrage out of it with regard to,
you know, calling for his head or or anything like that.
That's not what I really meant to say. The level
of breakdown though, in this particular situation is concerning the fact,
(01:40):
you know, take take out all the components of it,
goes into the hospital. The second that he was medevac
to ICU should have triggered multiple communication channels with his
chief of staff, who now we come to find out,
was sick with the flu, with his deputy who was
off on vacation in Puerto Rico. He should have returned immediately,
(02:01):
and none of those things happened. And that's where the
breakdown I think happens. The Chairman of the Joint Chief
then gets notified I believe January second, which is a Tuesday,
he had by law responsibility to communicate. So to me,
this is you know, more of again leadership one oh one,
that when we create this kind of behavior, we set
a new standard and we'll see if there will be
(02:24):
a consequence. It doesn't necessarily mean he has to resign,
but there's going to be a consequence. There's going to
be an investigation. Now at a very minimum, we see.
Speaker 2 (02:33):
Well, ultimately, I guess the consequence is that the ballot box.
But so you seem to be suggesting this is just
good old fashioned this happened. Then that happened, and nobody
thought of it just incompetence, Mistakes were made, people were sick.
Speaker 4 (02:48):
Yeah, that's probably more alike.
Speaker 5 (02:49):
I mean, in order for these kind of things to happen,
lots of things have to go wrong, and all what
have taken is that one person back then, the chief
of staff notifying the president right away when he's an ICU,
because there's the regulatory requirements that have to happen. It orders,
you know, from a civilian defense, you know, pritary perspective
that the orders you would have to give out that
(03:10):
would have to be delegated to someone else. And so
none of those things happened. You factor in, it's the
end of the year, your factor in all those things,
the factor in the deputies on vacation doesn't. It's it's
just more incompetence. That's unfortunate. That likely they're going to
have to go back and put another you know, belt
and suspenders process and to make sure it doesn't ever
happen again.
Speaker 3 (03:29):
I don't want to try to get you to comment
on something that you don't know about, but maybe you
do know about this. It's surprising to me that the
President isn't talking to the Sect death like practically every day,
given you know, the events of the last couple of weeks.
Speaker 5 (03:46):
Well, I think that's one of these implied things that
have come out of this whole thing and the daily intelligence.
Speaker 4 (03:53):
Briefing and all of those things.
Speaker 5 (03:55):
I mean, he's not reading them in the ICU and
like who is and you would think you would think
they're fifteen minutes with the NSC. You know, Jake Sullivan
was surprised as well. So it does show there is
somewhat of a disconnect. I think what this is showing
us is that the NSC, the Nasal Security Advisor and
Council are doing more to run the operation inside of
(04:18):
Israel and what's going on foreign policy wise than the
Secretary of Defensive That's the unfortunate, unintended consequence of this happening,
and this having been found out, he's not he's not
communicating with him for whatever reason, and the fact that
he's going to let this go, it just goes to
show you that they're with the current process.
Speaker 2 (04:38):
Yeah, speaking of the ballot box before we move on
to the situation in Israel, I'm just struck Mike by.
You know, I spent enough time as an athlete to
know that you don't have any idea how good your
team is until you play a game. And the Russians
found that out bitterly in Ukraine, where is the Chinese
(05:00):
are discovering that they are not nearly as well equipped
as they thought they were, hence the clean out of
the Chinese military Upper Eche lines. And I just have
a bad feeling about our military apparatus and how ready
we really are.
Speaker 5 (05:16):
Yeah, you know, it's great question because we thought that
was that way back in the eighties, and we saw
the Desert Storm proved that wrong. And I think the
same thing our military were almost sent me sometimes in
terms of how we feel the standard in the bar
is but we do answer the bell and rise to
the occasion. And at our reporting structure is always for example,
(05:37):
and if equipment is supposed to be ready, it is ready.
It's good to go. I saw those about water with
there were supposed to be fuel in those rockets in China,
and you know, China, I think was looking to get
by on masks. They were just they're looking to throw
bodies at things because that's what that's what their advantage is.
In a military perspective, the question comes back to whether
our technology and because they can out mass us, they
(05:58):
could do anything in that regard. We saw the pictures
of the carrier that they're trying, their practicing bombing all
those things, all those intimidate actors, but again to kind
of netted out. I think our military learned that lesson
in a bad way during Vietnam, and we still have
the leadership in our military making sure that that would
never happen. We've got high readiness for our active forces.
(06:19):
I'm confident in that.
Speaker 2 (06:20):
That's great to hear.
Speaker 3 (06:21):
So reading more of your tweets because you're one of
the people that anything happens in Israel Ukraine big anything
with the military.
Speaker 2 (06:29):
You're one of the first Twitter feeds.
Speaker 3 (06:31):
I go to your tweet from four days ago while
US conducts airstrike and bag Dad, why this target over
the hoofies?
Speaker 2 (06:39):
What were you talking about there?
Speaker 5 (06:41):
Yeah, I'm surprised that we chose to go pick a
target that of was logistical support, but it looks like
we had one of the leaders of one of those
Hezbola brigades that were there that was so close to Baghdad.
I think, you know, we're starting to go We're still
going after the logistics, but I'd like to see us
go after you know, the archers are not just the arrows,
(07:02):
and the archers are sitting in Yemen, and there's now
who these are. But then I kind of thought about it.
The reason why, the reason why we probably want attack
inside of Yemen is because we likely would kill Iranian
soldiers that are there helping them and supporting them in
Ranian public Guards, and I think that would show an escalation.
So I think they're keeping that in their back pocket.
(07:23):
This was as close to though, as a surprise to
me that the administration would approve this attack, just given
how far it was inside of a rock inside of Baghdad,
not in the hinterlands. You know, the Syrians and all
those other kind of outposts that those brigades are one thing.
But this is a close attack that again sent a
very very clear message, and it just it's delaying this
(07:44):
whole potential attack inside of Yemen. I saw admist Rebauties
basically say the same thing. We should be going after them.
But I think when you think about it, we would
attack and the kill Iranian soldiers, and I think that's
going to be a problem for this administration.
Speaker 3 (07:57):
Okay, interesting, Yeah, I was going to bring him up
because he said, whoever you're talking about Hezbolahamas or the Huthies,
it's all about you're talking about Iran And to your mind,
are even close to pushing back hard enough against all
of those attacks yet?
Speaker 4 (08:13):
Not yet.
Speaker 5 (08:13):
But we haven't seen any counter attacks of substance since
that last attack from you know, a week ago or
top five days ago. So again it's an interesting Maybe
we're starting to draw this line on military deterrence in
that area there, and maybe we're seeing I've seen intelligence
reports that are showing that the Iranians are sending message
to Hesbelah about backing off and not escalating. However, I've
(08:37):
seen the other side where you know, Israel might decide
that they want to escalate. I just the words of
the Defense minister saying it's time for war right now.
You know, Israel's not stopping their operations until they find
an Arab person that runs an Arab organization that says
we surrender, and they're going to keep going for as
long as that happens. That might be a very long
time still, so I think that is you will might
(09:00):
end up extending this if as long as as long
as they think they're going to win, and right now
they're doing just that.
Speaker 4 (09:07):
I think in Gada as well as eleven one, it.
Speaker 2 (09:10):
Seems pretty clear to me that the Israelis have said
this is time for total warfare. We will defeat our enemy.
And if the world is uncomfortable with that, well that's fine.
They will have to deal with it. And you know, honestly,
putting aside certain people in that region, the quote unquote
world will have forgotten about this in six months, so
I think they're probably doing the right thing. One more
(09:30):
note about Israel. When those bombs went off at the
big ceremony, unerring General Sulamani in the cemetery in Iran,
I with great confidence pronounced to my wife that, yep,
you don't mess with the Israelis. They take as long
as they need blah blah blah. And she looked at
me with admiring eyes. And it turns out I'm probably
(09:51):
completely wrong. Now people are saying that was icy. I
buy yeah, well right, do you buy that, mic I.
Speaker 5 (09:57):
Do I do the kind of attack that it was
tap where they go in and they bomb the first time,
wait for first responders to show up to help, and
then they bomb again. You know, that's just not something
Israel would do. That's not in their fingerprint. They're more surgical. Look,
they will go after leadership of Hamas. But I'm going
to go out and women say they're not going to
bomb civilians and make that kind of attack. That's clearly ice.
(10:20):
That's a terrorist attack. Now terrorism has come home to
roost in Iran. You know, the number one state supporter
or exporter of terrorist activities. Well, by the way, it
has enemies inside themselves as well. And we're took place
in the southern eastern portion of the country, maybe more
in the central portion. Easy to get terrorist organizations from
from Afghanistan and other people can come through those very
(10:40):
poor sports and set that up again away from the
flagpole of Tehran. So I think that's how that that's
that way that went down, and I think the Ranians
have got to be concerned about more ISIS attacks as
this conflict with inside the Muslim world exists of Shia
versus Sunni.
Speaker 2 (10:56):
Mike Lyons, military analyst, Mike, thanks a million, so interesting.
Happy new year to you and we're looking forward to
staying to touch this year.
Speaker 4 (11:02):
Great guys, thanks for me Armstrong and Getty
Hosts And Creators
Joe Getty
Jack Armstrong
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!