Did We Kill the Iranian Nuke Program or Not? | EYES ON GEOPOLITICS

In this episode of "Eyes on Geopolitics," I join co-host Andy Milburn to discuss the recent U.S. bombing of Iran's nuclear sites in Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan. We delve into the efficacy of the strikes, particularly concerning the depth of Iran's centrifuges and the capabilities of the GBU-57 bunker buster bombs. Our conversation also explores the DIA assessment, which was leaked and reported on by CNN, suggesting the program was set back only by months, as well as the geopolitical implications for U.S.-Israel-Iran relations, potential Iranian blowback, the internal dynamics of the Iranian regime, and the future of nuclear negotiations.
Support the show on Patreon:⬇️
https://www.patreon.com/TheTeamHouse
New merch, patches, and stickers! ⬇️
https://theteamhouse-shop.fourthwall.com
Find Mick Mulroy here: 
Fogbow ⬇️
https://fogbow.com/
Lobo Institute ⬇️
https://www.loboinstitute.org/
Twitter ⬇️
https://x.com/mickmulroy?s=21&t=-Ze3F_Ix2vlJ18KFvORTCA
LinkedIn ⬇️
https://www.linkedin.com/in/michael-patrick-mulroy-31198b52/
Bluesky ⬇️
https://bsky.app/profile/mickmulroy.bsky.social
Mick’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=%2Fandymilburn8
LinkedIn ⬇️
https://www.linkedin.com/in/andrewmilburn2023
Substack ⬇️
https://amilburn.substack.com/
Andy’s book ⬇️
https://www.amazon.com/When-Tempest-Gathers-Mogadishu-Operations
Bluesky ⬇️
https://bsky.app/profile/andy-milburn.bsky.social
Find Jason Lyons here: 
LinkedIn ⬇️
https://www.linkedin.com/in/jason-lyons-666873316?utm_source=share&utm_campaign=share_via&utm_content=profile&utm_medium=ios_app
Bluesky ⬇️
https://bsky.app/profile/bgsilverback73.bsky.social

00:00 Start & U.S. Strikes on Iran's Nuclear Sites
02:26 DIA Assessment on Program Setback
03:20 GBU-57 Effectiveness & Centrifuge Depth
7:08: Geopolitical Timing & Strike Implications
13:11 Potential Iranian Blowback
22:37  Iranian Regime's Domestic Issues
32:13  Future of Nuclear Negotiations

Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-team-house--5960890/support.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
The question is, are the Uranians going to use this
right and they're going to weaponize it and use it
against us? And who knows? I mean, there's it's speculation,
but think about this, that's a finite amount of uranium.
It's a it's a fair amount in rich uranium, but
it's a finite amount anyway. Right at this stage, especially
when you are operating against two nuclear nations, it would

(00:21):
be near suicidal to load up a finite number of
weapons with your remaining enriched uranium and conduct strikes. The
Iranians are not suicidal. In fact, they are among all
our enemies, possibly the most rational of actors. I mean

(00:43):
by the Chinese, of course, I mean they're there, yeah,
very you know, they haven't stayed in power this long
through doing purely crazy shit.

Speaker 2 (01:06):
Hey, everybody, welcome to another episode of Eyes, an't you
a politics? A special one because we missed them so much.
Andy Milburn's here, the man, the myth, the legend. I
wanted to get his take on what went down over
the weekend with you know, the United States bombing the
nuclear sites and fod out Naton's and Isfahan. Obviously, you

(01:29):
guys know what went down. Be two bombers, fourteen gbus
you know, the big boy bunker Busters and thirty Tomahawks
from a submarine. Andy, what's going on? How are you? Yeah?

Speaker 1 (01:42):
Hey, d Well. First of all, great to be back.
And I'm sorry that my compotres are not here too,
because I think it puts undue pressure on the audience
just to have me here waxing lyrical. But on the
other hand, I'm happy to do so. And just a
couple of preliminary, preliminary comments. I was caught unawares by

(02:04):
the strike. No one gave me a heads up, and
actually I was mid flight between Tampa and Read and
spent a delightful twenty four hours in Istanbul as air
traffic controllers decided, or rather the powers that be decided
which flights to cancel, which as space was going to

(02:28):
remain open, And so I got into Read early hours
of yesterday morning and promptly had to go to work,
which has made my week so far delightful. And by
the way, you mentioned Isfahan, and I do not totally
arbitrarily want to say that that brings back memories myself.

(02:53):
I was, oddly enough, and I may be certainly in
a minority here among former US veterans. But I have
spent time in Isfahan, and I happen to have spent
time in Isfahan during a missile attack than this case
by the iraqis, which tells you how long ago it
was nineteen eighty eight from the War of the Cities. Wow,

(03:14):
it's a beautiful, yeah, beautiful city, absolutely lovely, which is
not making any comments about the strikes themselves, which I
know we're going to talk about.

Speaker 2 (03:25):
So what.

Speaker 1 (03:27):
Questions you have? Do you do you want me to
just to launch it?

Speaker 2 (03:30):
I think the biggest thing, I think obviously the seasfire right,
whether it holds or not. But I guess we could
talk about that after because the big news that trump that,
for lack of a better word, was the DIA assessment
that got leaked and reported on by CNN that stated
that the arranged nuclear program is basically set back a

(03:51):
few to several months. I think that was the wording.

Speaker 1 (03:55):
Yeah, yeah, so, and two, just by way of our
expectation management, I don't have any insights, and certainly if
I did have insights, I mean I do have insights,
of course I do. What I mean is I don't
have any access information if I did. Of course, I

(04:16):
couldn't share it here, but you will notice that there
are many views on this particular topic, and so I
will simply express an opinion. Before the strike even took place,
US intelligence, former intelligence officials opined that the most that
even the US could do with the GBU fifty seven,

(04:38):
which is the massive ordinance penetrator, which is actually what
we dropped, the most that we could do was set
the program back. I think you probably remember those comments,
and in fact you've had guests on air, former agency
guys who said the same thing. Well, that seems likely

(04:58):
to be the case for a number of reasons. One
is that when some of the planning of a decade
or so ago, when the first topic of striking, the
first time that the topic of striking Iran's nuclear facilities
came up, it was you know, it was possible that

(05:20):
the centrifuges were within range, or it was judged that
these centrifuges were within range at the GBU fifty seven.
But since then, and as you can imagine, the Iranians
have dug deeper literally all right. And so experts opene

(05:41):
now open source that while the limited at the penetration
limit of the massive ordinance penetrated. The GBU fifty seven
dropped by itself, admittedly is sixty five meters right, and
they estimate that the centrifuge isn't.

Speaker 2 (05:58):
For dow.

Speaker 1 (06:01):
For example, are at least ninety five to one hundred
meters deep, which means that they're about thirty meters on
the outside. Okay, Now, there's a couple of ways to
mitigate that. One is to drop two of these bombs
almost at once, I mean, one right after the other,
so that one penetrates into the you know, the creative

(06:22):
form by the other, and that seems to have been
the tactic here. By the way, the B two is
the only aircraft that can carry these things. I mean,
they're thirty thousand pounds of ease. So you imagine a
B two carrying two that's sixty thousand pounds amazing, you know,
fifteen tons of explosive yeah wild.

Speaker 2 (06:41):
I think if they said it's like two thousand pounds
of tungsten at the top of the the.

Speaker 1 (06:45):
Word yeah, which you know, which adds to its penetration capability.
So you know, hard to say. I mean, if if
things had gone exactly according to plan, and one had
been dropped on top of the other. In each case,
I think fourteen, yeah, fourteen bombs were dropped by seven

(07:06):
b twos then, although not on or on Furdell.

Speaker 2 (07:12):
I think twelve out of the fourteen were on four
to zero.

Speaker 1 (07:15):
Of twelve out of fourteen, Okay, in any case, Yes,
it's it's hard to say conclusively whether that plan should
have worked, right, but it's certainly believable, credible that that
they they you know, they didn't quite reach the centrifuges themselves.

(07:38):
I don't know if THEDIA leaked report what it's based on,
but I assume it's based on more than speculation, right,
I assume it's based on some kind of battle damage assessment.
But let me just say absolutely credible that that we've
set the Iranians back months but haven't destroyed the new

(08:00):
site completely. And I can't explain why the Israelis have
come out with a different estimate.

Speaker 2 (08:04):
They just did.

Speaker 1 (08:05):
Yeah, yeah, you know, they were a little more a
little more optimistic, and I don't, you know, who knows
what the truth is or whether we will find out
in the near future. Of course, the you know, the timing,
the timing was as perfect as we can expect to
get it, except that this didn't happen five to ten

(08:29):
years ago before the sites had been buried deep yet
and by that mean as perfect as we can expect it.
And I'm sure that Mark and Mick have already commented
on this. You know, we've always there's been three things
holding us back from striking nuclear Iran's nuclear facilities before.

(08:49):
One is essentially for fear of repercussions, not fear, but
for concerned repercussions from Iran's proxies his BALLA, but more
notably the sheer militia in Iran, and that risk, I
mean that hasn't I wouldn't say that stopped us alone,
but it was certainly it was certainly something that we

(09:12):
took in consideration. Of course, the Rainier proxies are now
on the ropes for the time being, so the timing
was good from that perspective. Secondly, of course, you know,
you always run a risk when you penetrate in enemies
integrated their defense systems, You run a risk of being
shot down. And in this case, the Israelis have you know,

(09:36):
they cleared the way for us. And the third part
of this was, yes, we were concerned about the death
to which the centrifuges had been sunk and how much
damage we could actually do. Well. I don't know the
details on this, but apparently the Israelis had already created
the sites, which presumably meant that the bombs that we

(10:01):
dropped had less distance to penetrate. I don't know. I
can't say conclusively again whether that part is correct or not.
And it was also it was also well timed in
a sense from the point of view that it seemed
like as though negotiations were going nowhere. I mean, let's
be honest, it's taken two decades of both negotiating, planning,

(10:26):
and threatening to bring us to this point. If the
Iranians have lost their ability to generate nuclear weapons, I
think that's a good thing for the region. You know,
they have the ways that the way that they threatened
the region up to this point is by through a

(10:48):
massive array of ballistic missiles. So that was the other
reason too, right, we were concerned potentially about missile strikes
on Allied countries or even US spaces, missile win drone strikes,
and yet their inventory has been drastically reduced, hasn't been
obliterated in tally, but it has been reduced by the

(11:08):
Israeli strikes. So the timing was was propitious, but you know,
we gained. We were dealing with a physics problem and
it's hard to say whether how successful we were. Time
will tell.

Speaker 2 (11:29):
Yeah. Yeah, And what you mentioned with the Israeli called
me out saying that it's set it back many years.
That's from the Israeli Atomic Energy Commission through the Prime
Minister's office to talk a little bit about like the
geopolitical angle of this, because the DIA assessment early assessment
came out yesterday and you need to get it.

Speaker 1 (11:49):
I cut this stuff out of notion. Okay, go ahead,
I'm listening.

Speaker 2 (11:53):
So the DIA assessment, the early assessment that came out
yesterday that Trump's been refuting pretty pretty hard, pretty viscerally,
i'd say, pretty adamantly says that it came back only
a few months obviously compared to the Israeli one. It
is like, is this Israel trying to like play Kate

(12:14):
Trump to try and just to be like, hey, yeah, no,
we did this and it worked, and you know, the
regions better for it, because I do think it sets
while starting from last year bombing Iran sets like a
pretty dangerous precedent, like where Israel could just like pick
up and bomb them whenever they feel like it.

Speaker 1 (12:34):
Yeah, hard to say, I mean suddenly Netniel, who was
urging Trump to do this. But I like to think
that the United States did this fall for our own reasons,
because it was in our own national interests. In again,
you know, I don't think anyone can get sentimental about
Iran losing its ability to generate nuclear weapons and has

(12:54):
proven itself to be a to be a difficult actor
to say the least in the region. But at the
same time, yes, and we want to avoid for our
own interests. And this is me speaking obviously, not speaking
for the administration, but we want to avoid being closely
aligned to Israel. You know, here I am in Saudi Arabia.

(13:17):
Saudi Arabia is an ally of ours too. There is
a great deal of sensitivity about how closely from the
Arab world here, you know, how closely the United States
is aligning itself with the Israeli policy. I think we
have to be warey of that, and we have to
be our own actors if we are to maintain credibility

(13:41):
in the region. And by the way, whether we like
it or not, you know, the strike did help bolster
US credibility in the region. You know, we actually followed
through and did something. We did something that was you know,
outside Iran and outside of Iran's proxies, is widely regarded
in the Middle East, to include among Golf States and

(14:04):
Saudi Arabia as being generally a good thing.

Speaker 2 (14:07):
Yeah, in terms of blowback, do you think at some point,
I know, there's obviously a ceasefire right now, but Iran's
gotta be thinking about doing something, right I mean, I
can't really see them just cowering and just be like, Okay,
we'll give up everything. You know, we need to give
up and every you guys want our ballistic missiles too,

(14:29):
We could you know, all terms, all types of like
actual self defense to not just the nuclear program. Obviously
the nuclear programs no bueno. But what do you think
the blowback looks like?

Speaker 1 (14:41):
Yeah, that's a great question. And I don't know. I
do know that the regime must right now be feeling
quite desperate. You know, they're not now let me let
me rephrase that, okay, but they I mean they have
there's certainly there's certainly on the ropes has certainly had
a severe disadvantage. They haven't lost all of their ability

(15:04):
to cause harm and they still have a significant missile
inventory and Hezbolla as a matter of time before Hesbala
and even Hamas are back on their feet again. You know,
I mean, the amount of anger that it's been generated
in the last two years by Israeli actions, for instance

(15:26):
in the Middle Least is you know, it's not going
to die away, all right, and there's going to be
certainly there's going to be a resurgence that these two groups.
They're not down and out, but it's going to be
a while before Iran can really flex its muscles again,
if you know, if it can in the near future.
So that's a long winded way of saying that I

(15:48):
don't know, but I just want to remind listeners again
of the Vincennes incident, which is back in nineteen eighty
nine when the us AS Vincennes mistakenly shot down in
an Iranian air bus with some two hundred and fifty
civilian passengers on board, and almost a decade later, the Iranians,

(16:14):
one assumes, planted a bomb in the van of the
skipper of the Vincennes, the skipper at the time in
San Diego. He would turned out he didn't get in
the vehicle as his wife and she was civillly injured.
But I think, you know, it's just an example of
how the Iranians are willing to play, or perhaps that's

(16:35):
the only game they can play sometimes, is the long
game to exact vengeance. But I don't you know, to them,
Israel is the big enemy. It doesn't mean that we
have we've we're lily white as far as the concern.
We did just strike their nuclear facilities, but I don't
think striking back in the United States is going to

(16:57):
be a top priority. The missile attack on Aladide was
a pro former act done, as I think we all know,
for the sake of saving face. They gave Katar heads
up that it was going to happen. Only fifteen missiles
were fired, and they were fired in a half heart

(17:18):
hit type attempt. Right. It wasn't really a serious attempt.
It was just look, okay, now we're going to write back.
It was for domestic consumption. And you know, the Uranian media,
state owned media, of course, the trumpeting that we inflicted,
that we suffered casualties, et cetera, et cetera. But everyone
knows that didn't happen. Now, if they really wanted to

(17:41):
strike back at us, they would have gone after our
bases in Iraq using sheer militia drones, you know, which
they'd done before to greater effect or Syria. And by
the way, bases in Iraq and Syria are not protected
by patriot missile bat batteries, the one in Aladid is.
So it was kind of if they it was a

(18:01):
safe way to be seen to exact vengeance and look good.

Speaker 2 (18:08):
Let me ask why aren't those other bases in Iraq
and Syria not protected by patriot batteries?

Speaker 1 (18:16):
Yeah, great question. Well, there's only limited number of patriot
batteries to go round, right And now they may have
I you know, I I may my my information may
now be outdated. But but that that that was That
was certainly the case, you know, a few months ago.

Speaker 2 (18:37):
Yeah.

Speaker 1 (18:37):
And and in any case, you know, even protected by
patriot batteries is not when you when it comes to
short range head offense, patriots only do a certain amount
of good and they don't. They are not good at
blocking drones. So short range other short range missiles and

(18:58):
that's the threat really and Syria and in Iraq drones
and other shorter range missiles fined by local militias. Yeah,
that's not some delicious but Iraq certainly.

Speaker 2 (19:12):
Also another bit of the from the assessment, and even
before the early assessment got released yesterday about the four
hundred kilograms of enriched geranium like supposal, we don't know
where that is.

Speaker 1 (19:25):
Yeah, yeah, I mean, I know there's a great deal
of angst about that, and it's I I would say this, Okay,
I think it's the right thing to do to give
them a heads up. Okay, that kind of keeps things
again on this Not not a gentleman's playing. That's not
what I'm trying to say. What I'm trying to say
is that, hey, with the United States, it's saying we

(19:48):
live by values, we will save lives where we can,
but on the other hand, we are going to take
out your nuclear program. All right. The downside was four
hundred kilograms of apparently we don't know for sure, but
four hundred kilograms in rich uranium escaped. Well, the question

(20:09):
is are the Uranians going to use this? Right, They're
going to weaponize it and use it against us, and
who knows. I mean, there's it's speculation, But think about this,
that's a finite amount of uranium. It's a lot, it's
a fair amount of in enriched uranium, but it's a
finite amount anyway, all right, at this stage, especially when
you are operating against two nuclear nations, it would be

(20:30):
near suicidal to load up a finite number of weapons
with your remaining enriched uranium and conduct strikes. And the
Iranians are not suicidal. In fact, they are among all
our enemies, possibly the most rational of actors. I mean

(20:52):
by the Chinese, of course, I mean, but they're they're
very you know, they haven't stayed in power this long
through doing purely crazy shit.

Speaker 2 (21:03):
So what I meant by like not strapping like sixty
percent of rich geranium to like ballistic missiles and shooting
them into Tel Aviv, but I meant like, you know,
bringing them to you know, one of their shadow sites
or they There is some reporting that isfahan Is is
deeper than ford Ou where their centrifuges are, so like
bringing it right, bringing it there and like enriching it

(21:26):
and continuing their program.

Speaker 1 (21:28):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, I think that's always a risk and
you know, we know of those three sides, right, but
there are there's now reports that the program may be
more distributed than we thought, that there are more than
those three sides, so you know, the potential risks multiplying.
We did. We did what we could, but the intelligence

(21:50):
that we had at the time, but the time marches
on and the Iranians, as I said, are they you know,
they they're pretty smart.

Speaker 2 (22:02):
Yeah.

Speaker 1 (22:02):
People, Again, the regime state empowered this long and I'm
sure they haven't punted all their eggs into just three baskets.
So yeah, I think we can. We can go down
paths that lead us to many risky scenarios that have
resulted from this strike. But nevertheless, I still, you know,

(22:23):
I believe it was a It was a good thing,
even if we just sent back, set the program back,
because it's sent a very powerful message that we are
serious about doing this.

Speaker 2 (22:33):
Yeah, barakravated the Axios, not the other unit. Eighty two
hundred news reporter, I mean the Oxios reporter wrote just
recently Israel Israeli official with direct knowledge says they intercepted
comms to just Iranian military officials are lying to their
political leadership about the extent of the damage at the nuclear.

Speaker 1 (22:54):
Sites, oh right, lying as far as it's worse than
they're saying, right, yeah, yeah, yeah, again who knows, multiple reports, right, But.

Speaker 2 (23:05):
That also came out like literally minutes after the Israel
Atomic Energy Commission came out and said that it's going
to take many years for them to come back. So,
I mean, I'm sure there's a pr pr aspect to
all this. And like you know, who's winning the spin
game because you see any around what's going on there.
You know, they're touting it as like the victory over

(23:27):
Israel day there, right, Like they have like a whole
rally and stuff.

Speaker 1 (23:33):
So we'll think about think about the problems that the
Iranian regime is having with its domestic audience. You know,
we've talked about this that even in its pro former elections,
it is losing, it has lost ground in the last
few years, or the electorate has simply not bothered to

(23:55):
show up, and there have been you know, there is
a significant opposition group within Iran and they're fed up
with the economy being and the toilet. They're fed up
with with the IRGC's adventurism overseas, which is costing the
state in financial terms and in terms of being a

(24:18):
political parah and has done, you know, since the birth
of the Islamic Republic. And remember too that Iran has
a highly educated middle class. You know, it's I wouldn't
say unusual, but it's in a minority among Middle Eastern
countries to have such an advanced middle class. And you know,

(24:41):
they're not They've got to be careful how they exhibit
their opposition to the regime because of course we've seen
how the administration exerts crackdowns. But on the other hand,
it's real and the Iranian regime is concerned about it.
You know, you've probably heard anecdotal reports or even seen

(25:03):
YouTube videos about locals sharing even the Israeli strikes in
military facilities. Their discontent is real, and the administration is
concerned about that. So it isn't they're just not. They're
not just looking at what they're going to do as

(25:24):
far as taking on their geopolitical opponents. They're also worry
about how they appear to their domestic audience right now, Yeah,
and they are domestic audience does not appear to want
more even now.

Speaker 2 (25:38):
Yeah, you could say that too about the United States
domestic audience as well, right, Like.

Speaker 1 (25:45):
Well, yeah, sixty percent opposed, only sixteen percent were for
US taking action against Iran until we did take action,
and then I believe the numbers are much higher. I
never realized. So that was it.

Speaker 2 (25:58):
Yeah, Well, I'm I mean hopefully that's it. Right. Uh yeah,
there was one more piece I wanted to talk to
you about. I'm just looking over Twitter to see if
something popped off. Hex Seth just announced about an hour
ago that they're gonna task the FBI to investigate the

(26:20):
leak of the DIA assessment. It seems like there is
a bit of a back and forth kind of going
on in the annals of government where you know, people
aren't exactly willing to just go by whatever sounds the best, right,

(26:40):
Because if I hadn't bet money, I would bet that
it's closer a few months rather than a few years
where this nuclear program is set back. And I just
don't know what the endgame looks like. Is it just
like every time we feel like it, or Israel feels
like it, we can hit Iran And uh no.

Speaker 1 (27:00):
I mean in Finnis, I think you know this was
two decades in coming. D I think I mean, the
generations of US planners have have planned this particular strike,
and it was conducting a very sophisticated way. I think
it was. It was in that sense, a one off,
and the timing was was absolutely right. I don't know

(27:25):
what the motivation is for leaking that report. It's kind
of interesting, and I don't know if even if it
was deliberately leaked. I assume of course it was. And
I find it highly unusual that there have been so
many leaks of secret and top secret information from US
from D O D in the last you know, the

(27:47):
last few months, the last five months. It's it's certainly
it's a strange strand I mean it is to say
it's unusual as an exaggeration. I mean, you don't really
you don't really see that. Yeah, only within dud.

Speaker 2 (28:02):
Oh. And going back, I remember what I wanted to
tell you, There have been reports of like the regime
in Iran rounding up like seven hundred or so suspected
Israeli agents, people that I guess helped facilitate stuff for
the for Masad in Israel. So yeah, it does seem
like they're very much cracking down. Also, last week I
had a former marine. I keep having marines on this

(28:25):
goddamn show. You gotta mix it up. John Hackett, who's yeah, yeah, No,
that's it's another John Hackett. Actually yeah, And he said
he's like they had a protest literally like once the
bombing started, like there was a protest, anti regime protest,
they started fucking snatching them up, and you haven't heard

(28:46):
from them since literally within a day. While they're getting bombed,
they were snatching up people who were like anti region,
with anti regime sentiment. So again, like you know, this
Iranian regime isn't exactly uh you know, fucking you know,
mellows and gum drops.

Speaker 1 (29:07):
I mean, I mean, the Ranian regime has kept people
in line through executions and torture and mass incarceration since
its birth. I mean, let's not let's not sightestep this issue.
It's a it's a highly disruptive bad influence throughout the

(29:30):
Middle East, malign and has been in despite every attempt
to alter its course external attempt to alter its course,
it has kept that course and has pursued a policy
of military adventurism overseas at a great cost to regional stability.

(29:53):
I mean, anyone who starts to get mushy eyed about
Iran just needs to look the fact that the Iranians,
you know, and of course the Russians subsequently extended and
exacerbated the war in Syria, which yeah, you know, I've
seen half a million deaths and a million and a

(30:14):
half refugees. I mean more than that, actually a million
and a half external refugees. I mean, it's just an
incredible suffering over the course of the last fourteen years.
That was that was Iran's playground, that was Hebola's playground.
As you know.

Speaker 2 (30:31):
The interesting thing to see is like how Hezbola hasn't
really done anything. I know they're in a bad way obviously,
but I'm still I'm pretty sure they still have some
of their rockets intact, right, and they're very close to Israel,
and it's interesting how they kind of not.

Speaker 1 (30:50):
Done much well. I mean, I think they're probably having
I would guess it's not just by the rockets, but
come on, and control problems, succession of leadership problems, they whatever,
who knows. I mean, the Urranians never had kind of
carte blanche do it, don't do it, authority over Hisbolla

(31:11):
and azraela was his own man. And we don't know
how Isbolla has emerged from that, how it is now,
but it's certainly probably not the right time viewed by
most Hisbolla surviving. HASBOLLA leaders to pop its head about
the parapet again.

Speaker 2 (31:31):
Yeah, I could totally see there being a huge power
vacuum there right now, right like people jostling for control
or maybe not because like your number one target.

Speaker 1 (31:39):
List, Yeah, hard to tell. I mean they had Hasboala
had a pretty a pretty well designed succession of command,
you know what I mean? Remember used to say. I
used to say that among all decapitation strikes, the one
was likely to really have some last thing, in fact,

(32:00):
was if Nazrala was taken out, Because he was he
embodied his baller in a way that few other leaders
embody their organization. And he was, you know, say what
you like, but yes, a bad actor, but he was
a highly talented, charismatic bad actor who will did extraordinary
influence not just within his organization but throughout Lebanese politics

(32:24):
and indeed throughout kind of the militant politics of the
of the region. He was an icon, and so losing
him undoubtedly put no one really thought that he would
be lost. It's losing him undoubtedly has put his baller
in the ropes for a while, and that is probably
why you're not seeing any coherent decision making coming out

(32:45):
of the organization, at least for the time being.

Speaker 2 (32:48):
Yeah, well, Andy, I mean I'm trying to think. I
think I'm good. I think I have enough for all
that I need.

Speaker 1 (32:55):
Well, well, so what I'm looking forward to reappearing with
everyone else too. I can't wait for time.

Speaker 2 (33:03):
What do you think do you think is Iran comes
back to the nuclear negotiation table?

Speaker 1 (33:09):
I mean, the question is did the nuclear negotiations go on?
I mean, what do we negotiating about or for anymore?
That's that's really the issue in honestly, it was kind
of a half hearted approach by both sides, right, So
I don't see there being more nuclear negotiations anytime soon,
cerbtainly not under this administration.

Speaker 2 (33:31):
Andy Milburn, everybody check them out. The links are in
the description grab his book, When the Tempest Gathers excellent memoir.
When's the new book coming out?

Speaker 1 (33:41):
Oh yeah, hopefully my publishers not watching right now. But
he's just given me an extension to the end of
the month, so it'll be coming out before the end
of the year.

Speaker 2 (33:50):
All right, great, all right, so awesome, So we'll keep
an eye out for that. Guys. Help support the Showpatreon
dot com slash the Team House, both eyes On Geopolitics
and The Teamhouse completely AD free, and a lot more
perks that go with it. Of course, remember check out Andy.
His links are into description. Andy's got a substack too.

(34:11):
It's good and yeah, thanks Andy. This is awesome as usual.

Speaker 1 (34:16):
Yea, all the best everyone, see you see you again
in a few days. Thanks dey, thank you.

Speaker 3 (34:22):
Hey, guys, it's Jack. I just want to talk to
you for a moment about how you can support the show.
If you've been watching it enjoying it, but you'd like
to get a little bit more involved and help us
continue to do this, you can check out our Patreon
It is patreon dot com slash the Teamhouse, and for
five dollars a month you can get access to all
of these episodes of The Teamhouse ad free. The same

(34:45):
goes with our affiliated podcast eyes On with Andy Milburn
Jason Lyons mcmulroy. That one you will also get all
of those episodes ad free, and you support the channel
and the show, and we really appreciate it. The Patreon
members or literally what has helped this company and this
small business survive, especially during our early years, and you

(35:08):
are what continues to help this thing going even as
we navigate the turbulent world of YouTube advertising. So we
really appreciate all of you.

Speaker 2 (35:17):
Guys.

Speaker 3 (35:18):
There's going to be a link down in the description
to that Patreon page, and there is also going to
be a link to our new merch shop, so if
you guys want to go and get some Teamhouse merchandise,
we got stickers and we also have patches, and I
should mention if you sign up for Patreon at ten
dollars a month, we will mail you this patch as well,

(35:39):
so we really appreciate that. But they're also for sale
on the merch shop. And additionally, they got t shirts
up there, water bottles, a tote bag, coffee mugs, all
that good stuff, so please go and check them out
and support the show. We really appreciate it, guys. Thank you,