Assad Loses Aleppo & Israel/Hezbollah Ceasefire | EYES ON PODCAST

episodes add free. That's the big bonus for that. I mean, we also do some Patreon bonus episodes for our subscribers, but this is the biggest and best way that you can support the Teamhouse channel and podcast if you'd like to, and we really appreciate that, So go and check us out at patreon dot com slash the Teamhouse.

a chance of a cease firing gods or two? I'd like to touch on that after Who wants to take it first? Rating, guys, I.

under the seventeen oh one unscarre. But they were weren't complying obviously, So it's there's a lot to be seen. But the first step is there. They've they've started. There's there's skirmishes and both sides accusing the other of breaking it, but it does seem to beholding, and I think that's important.

What help, what hopefully will happen now is what should have been the case before, which is Hesbla withdraws the Tawny River, the laugh, the Lebanese Armed Forces UH gets down into southern Lebanon, insures that all their positions, you know, their armaments, their arsenals and them aren't there anymore. And that could give Israel confidence to be able to allow

their citizens to return. And the second part, although I think it was fair to say most people have given up on the seasfire in Gaza, I think this puts a moss in the position where they're more likely to accept something they wouldn't have accepted a four Why because they're isolated more obviously hesplaws about out at least for now.

They realized that there's an incoming Trump administration who could be more supportive even than the Biden administration of Prime Minister men Yahoo's efforts, and I think they can see the writing on the wall when it comes to that. So hopefully that does translate primarily to the ceasefire and the release of all hostages, and then of course a dramatic increase in humanitarian aid which is down to I think around thirty trucks a day, which is just not

sustainable for human life. So for all those reasons, I do think you know a lot of people said it wasn't going to happen in Lebanon. So hats off to the negotiators, Amos Hookstein and Brett and all the guys that work so hard on that. They deserve credit because they certainly got a lot of criticism for not getting it done. So that's one thing, and then I think that could could actually help when it comes to the negotiations for god Andy, Yeah, I think no.

Israeli team to support them. I mean, we had Inet wilthon the other day, and remember, you know, I just want to remind listeners that although some people seem to think that what she was saying was extreme, what she was saying kind of represents mainstream Israeli thought and in many ways, I mean, she was recommended by many people that I know in Israel, and so what she said on Lebanon was, hey, listen, our jobs to go in there and mow the grass whenever this happens, and it's

up to everyone else to fix it, right, So that kind of attitude was prevalent to you know, facing the negotiation team. So they did, I thought, a tremendous job. There's an uphill struggle and you know, good on them, and the killing has stopped. As Mick points out, some three to four thousand Lebanese, you know, whether civilians or I mean obviously mostly civilians. I'm dead, and and families

already moving back into southern Lebanon. The butt is this and it's there's but you know, the Israeli is obviously hearing the obstacle to this and the Litani River, yes, was bestified by seventeen or one resolution. It's a blated effort to enforce that. But some might argue that it's

almost irrelevant now for a couple of reasons. One is the you know, the although his bolla is on the ropes, they certainly have or capable of getting more missiles and rockets that range further than the Litani River, you know, and a lot of their sites are in the Bakar Valley all around bay Rout for the longer range missile system, so that that wasn't the greatest threat, and The other part is the part of seventeen o one. We've talked

about this before. Seventeen oh one was don't get me wrong, and you know, back when it was imposed back in seventeen oh six, it was the only possible solution. But the point six right, what's that six?

doesn't make sense they pulled with militia back. Now, if there is a concerted effort to disarm people, you know, conducted by the Laugh and Uniform, backed by Uniform, backed by the international community, to disarm militias south of the Tiny River, then you know, then then it'll.

the game. I don't know, and I don't know you know, Mignosis, but I mean the laugh suddenly, the laugh is that actually been a success story in many ways since two thousand and six.

And if there is that effort, and if there are you know, international they're going to need trainers, but they're going to need lots of weapons and support. And given that, then maybe this this piece, uh, this cease fire has some legs on it. A commitment.

you know, let's wait and see what happens. But the real issue for a lot of Israelis is return of the hostages, and you know, in the cease firing cars that that leads to that and to them, and it's I you know, I don't want to hazard to guess as to you know, a percentage of the Israelis, but certainly every everyone that I know is very concerned about a resolution on the hostage issue and they feel that this, well, now's the time to you know, hit Iran is kind

of a hand wave and a and a distraction. They don't you know, there isn't a feeling anymore that Iran is an imminent threat after the Israeli strike and they're kind of you know, the empty bomb ass that followed that. I think most people see that now there is the potential are as we talked about here, of Iran ramping up to nuclear weapons capability, but that's going to take some time. And for a lot of people, the most imminent problem on both sides is attaining a ceasefire in Gaza.

You know, for those who care about the Palestinians, the the you know, as Mike pointed out, the crisis stare is is off the chance. I mean as far as the humanitarian rifries, this lack of food, influx of disease now and it's kind of dropped off the front pages of the papers because of what has been happening in Lebanon.

And for those who uh, you know, who caress still about the hostages, then that that there is nowhere near it resolution at all, and that is that that's becoming I mean, it continues to be a very emotional issue within this round.

in a good way. I guess the certain extent, except for these rebels are mostly the honest, I know we're getting into that, but this is all this is all connected right now.

equipment and training and stuff. It's just an insane like labyrinth of like you couldn't even like you needed the code ring to understand what's going on in Syria. And like you said, like I want a little bit more on like the HTS, like those like what are there? What's what's their deals?

these Shia militia's the hell out of their country. Of course, are a lot of them are from there, but and they're they're backed by Turkey, which has been an issue for US, the US for a while. But uh, you're right, it is a very complicated association, if you will.

in the problem indirectly since twenty fifteen. You know, remember when when it all started back in twenty eleven, and you know, it's fair to say back then, the majority of the rebel groups, the groups opposing Asade were probably not your hearty or the majority of people who had who had you know, seized arms were not your hearty. But then through a combination of factors, complex factors, not you know, not I'm not saying it's all the United States's fault, but remember our talk of a red line,

our efforts to arm a Serria militia that work. Honestly, you know, they were well intended, but they had embarrassing results. If you remember, you know, the testimony to Congress by someone who's prominent administration now been questioned closely about how many fighters we had raised, and it was pitiful numbers, right because you know, for we it is it is a it's one of our failed efforts to buy with

and through. Meanwhile, while we're stumbling along, you've got our Nuzra Front, who was which was how Keeda affiliated and ISIS And initially they had an alliance. Somewhere around twenty fourteen they parted ways violently, right, they were fighting against each other, the Islamic State against al Nusra Front against asade.

At the same time ISIS won. And remember the the you know, the Islamic State had this propaganda machine that was unbelievable, and young people opposed, young Muslims opposed to the Asade regime, and that was you know, that was their primary motivation. Flopped to the Islamic State, right to it. And and then of course they I'm not justifying people joined the Islamic State, but the motivation among you know, certainly among detainees who were questioned, if they'd be believed,

was to oppose the Islamic a Sad regime. And we lost that, you know, we couldn't we West, We the United States had nothing really to offer in return when we're trying to recruit our own, our own rather cat handed attempts. Now, some government agencies did better than the military, but we in the military have nothing to be proud of. Until the SDF came along. Well, the SDF was not

of our making. The SDF were a Kurdish anti ASSAD organization led by a very charismatic dynamed Masloum Maslom right, and yeah, you know, around twenty fifteen, Special Operations basically JASOK saw the opportunity to side with with SDF, and initially it was supporting them with indirect fire and casts, and then we started to put trainers in there, and that was our success effort in Syria. Back in the SDF,

but it wasn't of our making. And then as the SDF, you know, as we kind of pulled a lot of our horses out of Syria, as THEESDF became, you know, the Turks hated SDF. And this gets to, you know, there's a method to my manners here. This gets to why the Turks are now supporting the White es who, by the way, are al Qaeda affiliated, because they think any rebel group is better than the Kurds. Right, So the SDF got kind of whittled away, and frankly, they

were never really after a side. They just that a carve out an area for them where they could live in some you know, kind of autonomously in the same way that the Kurds did in the Rock. But every time they raised their head about the parapet that the Turks would pound them. And that is kind of how we get to where we are now, where we have an our Kaeda affiliated group going besieging Aleppo or entering a Leppo with the latest reports or to be believed.

And the sad thing is that these that, yes, the most capable groups fighting asade right now, tend to be extremist and be the ones that we in the United States don't want to see empowered. But the Turks, I mean, as long as it's not again, as long as it's not the keyword, they're fine with it.

that was twenty fourteen, correct me. Experts out there were wrong when Russia became fully fully involved. And there's only so much you know, any proxy element, covert or not can do against you know, not only regime like Hasade, but uh, you know it's superpower, you know, or rump

superpower in Russia. So uh, and perhaps the mechanism was working, but the political will and you know what they could it's reasonable for them to be able to accomplish simply wasn't there, and that I would just also add Andy's assessment of the SDF and the and the effort by Jason primarily supported by others. Uh, that was a great example of what a proxy force could do. They did ninety nine percent of the fighting. They were very capable.

We enhanced their capabilities and that led to the defeat of isis right in Syria and the enduring defeat for the most part. So it's it's it's it's one of those things that I think we're getting very good at doing it. It just has to fit into the right policy dynamics with realistic, you know, determinations of what they can actually accomplish. But I would I would certainly agree,

and yes, all the stuff with the Turks. That was one of the reasons why we had such a tumultuous time in the Pentagon when I was there with the STF and being told to leave a couple of times, which we never have We're still there.

Russians have done in Syria. I mean they at a cost to them, Yes, they but but remember even when we even when we pummeled them back in when was that was it twenty fifty No, it was twenty seventeen, right, we killed bi like.

strategic ambitions. And and the last thing, the fact that that I would say is that remember they also had help from Iran, whether they you know, they've had bumpy relationship with the ran but in Syria they've generally gone along pretty well, and the Iranians have done the front of the actual fighting fighting. I mean again, you know, the Russian military has plenty of advisors there, but the frontline troops the Russians are using in the past at

least have generally been contractors. So they're achieving. Yeah, and look, they they've got a Mediterranean port, They've got tremendous I mean, if you talk to people who've been journalists, who've been you know, into the regime held Syria, you hear Russian voices everywhere. You even have Russian tourists going to the Mediterranean. Uh, you know resorts there. I mean it is heavily under Russian influence.

in white. But so some of the points that I point out from General Kellogg, he he was actually critical of not supplying more weapons to Ukraine before the invasion, and that the decisions to provide weapons to Ukraine after which should have came faster, with less deliberation and certainly more effect on the battle. Now. Part of that might be I'm just criticizing the other guy kind of thing, but I do think you know, if he agrees with that, then his overall posture should be that he wants the

Ukrainians to win, which is a good, good thing. Now the question is, how is this actually going to work. I looked in specifically into what it seems like they're proposing. Yes, it's a freeze in the conflict. Yes, there'll be some kind of demilitarized zone with NATO troops who my knowledge haven't signed on NATO troops non us to do it.

But from my understanding, it won't require that Ukraine, if they agree with it, of course, they have to agree give up on their claim to their own sovereign territory. So it isn't a concession of these you know, twenty percent of Ukraine. It is. It is a stop in the fighting, and I potentially an agreement not to try to militarily take it back during the terms of whatever the ceasefires. And then of course they can't join NATO

until you know, a specified time in the future. But the question really comes down to yes, okay, that's potentially, and then there there will be something called a levee on There'll be some sanctioned relief for Russia, but there'll be a levee on their foreign assets that pays for

the reconstruction. I understand. So, you know, I guess I'm not advocating for that plan, but I think we should look at all the details because oftentimes it gets short stripped when it comes to the explanation in the media of what it what it entails. Others that are not associated with the incoming transition team have said, you know, let's take a look at it, because ultimately this is this is up to Ukraine and obviously Russia. The other part of this equation is how many people believe Russia

would adhere to this. I mean, why did they launch an invasion just to you know, to end up with this salemate with you know, a lot of the region where they have simply not valuable terrain. So and then of course, how many times have you Russia broken agreements with Ukraine? So how valid is the agreement when you have somebody like Russia on one signment and their word. So there's a lot going into this. But I do think, well, and I do I do think he's a good selection.

Certainly his experienced, he's he's going in this with decades and decades of experience and somebody who, by all statements I've seen, is is supportive of our partner in Ukraine, you know, being successful in the lockdown.

And it's I think, you know, I think if you look at polls, even the majority of Ukrainians now are are realizing that and saying that some kind of negotiated they would accept some kind of negotiated ceasefire, even if it meant seeding some territory to rush over the time being. But I would I hope that there are two parts to this, Okay, that one is the moratorium on joining NATO makes me very uncomfortable. I feel like that's an overconcession right, you know what I mean, Russia wants to

end the war too. We don't have to trip over ourselves and saying oh here, and by the way, you know we I think we should hold that off as a in the wings, say hey, we're going to look at this, see how this cease file works out, all right, before we make any commitment on not bringing Ukraine into NATO, because Russia, if you start, you know, if anything starts happening, then we're going to rush to bring Ukraine into NATO.

We need to have that there as a kind of a clause to make sure Putin does it here to this because he's terrified of that happening. Number two is I hate to see any moratorium on providing weapons to Ukraine. All right. We should not agree to that. We should say, hey, you shouldn't worry about what we're providing Ukraine as long as you adhere to the rules of you know, this ceasefire. And then we should flood the Ukrainians with weapons to

ensure that the ceasefire holds right. And if the Ukrainians don't want to violate the seas fire, well there's you know, there's going to be there's going to be penalties obviously for them. But the point is again to mixed point. You know, Putin is still in control in Russian Putin is not someone you can negotiate with. He's not a man. As I think one of our own presidents said that you can come to a deal with at all unless he is afraid of the consequences of it going wrong.

And so we need to hold those consequences close to our chest. With a stronger country by far, you know, we can't. We've got to be wary of building Russia up into this you know, this this bogey man and with you know, talks of new non nuclear kinetic weapons blah blah blah. Remember three years ago we were everyone was in think tank land was pissing themselves at the thought of the Russian army, you know, facing the Russian army, and we find that the Russian army is a peeper tiger.

They can't even invade Ukraine, for Christ's think a country one further of their size, and they've been stemied. They're losing, as we said on this show, a thousand men a day, and you can look that up and you know, a thousand to include casualties a day. To put that in some kind of context, the Allies during the breakout from Normandy. We're taking that many casualties with an army many times the size of the Russian army and Ukraine, right, I mean,

it's the phenomenal casualties. So Russia may not consider itself on the ropes. That may, but at the same time there's strong reasons for them to want to end this conflict too, and rather than trip over ourselves by giving them concessions, we need to repair that in mind as we go into this. But yes, absolutely I agree with Mick.

You know, there's a solid guy, at least not a Fox News presenter who's in charge of the of the negotiations here, perhaps a guy who understands the Russians is what that have, you know, as well as anyone in D O D. And I think that's all positive.

conceive on the table to start the negotiations. I mean, that's uh, that's something we should probably consider, maybe general a.

even dwarfing Gaza right now. So over two million have left. It's about twenty five million that are bury food insecure, ten million on the verge of starvation, and they are actually per day ended up to two and a half million. People could die by the beginning of the new year, right, so people, many people, hundreds of thousand people are surviving on boiling leaves and water pods right now. So in the the un requirement to even deal with the current

there's only fifty percent funded. So this is this is a crisis. It's only going to be more and more prominent to people around the world. This is Ethiopia nineteen eighty four. Quite frankly, we're going to see thousands, potentially tens of thousands dying, you know, in a week if something's not done. So yes, I'm not talking about us. But there's a lot of folks groups here helping, but there needs to be a lot more and needs to

be funded. It's it's the there is no positive but the rainy seasons are about to come to an end, and when they do, it'll be easier to get food to people that are somewhat obviously, but it also means that the fighting will just intensify and they'll be it'll be all over to Dan, which makes it even more complicated, and both sides, I think, to some extent not equally or limiting humanitariany getting the populations as means war pair particularly the RSF. So those are things that have the

international community has to be interested. It should be interested in for the sake that we shouldn't allow people to start a death, but also because this is going to create it, I would guess, and not just be guessing but sort of being predicted massive migration flows of people who aren't just going to sit there and let their kids start, and they're going to go throughout Africa, obviously causing instability in the region and potentially he headed toward Europe.

So this is something that the world should be concerned about, not only for the sake of the Sudanese, but the sake of their own stability. And I think that's that everybody should about it.

Sudan is not. And yet there are multiple countries involved in this. It is a proxy war right in many ways, and that there are members of the international community, to include countries that we are friendly with who are fueling this with you know, no one, no, no, no one. To put the brakes on them and the effects on the African continent.

to say. You've been in war zones a lot, You've seen it go down, and what you're doing now really like, I don't know, it's like you, I don't know if you've gained perspective from what's gone on in the last twenty years so years where you're like doing more to help people. Not saying you weren't helping people before, but it was more of a kinetic place where it wasn't like you weren't really thinking about aid to impoverish people

and stuff like that. So I'd love to like sit down with you for like a long form thing and talk about like that kind of arc, you know what I mean.

have that could still be put to use. Right. You know, the US military does more humanitarian operations around in the world than any other group period and they do it more effectively because that's their capabilities are astounding when it comes to the ability of expeditionary operations and basically figure and shit out when nobody else can. So it doesn't need to be with us. We're a small group, but

there's a lot of groups out there. There's already groups that exist, and there's probably more groups that could exist and should exist of veterans if they're looking for that. So I'd be happy to talk about it from that perspective. Maybe bring some other folks on that are doing that, maybe a group thing to really give give veterans that are looking for something potentially different than they might thinker is available to them an idea for sure.

Jason's on LinkedIn and blue Sky and the best Yeah, the best way to support the show is Patreon, dot com, slash the teamhouse. You get AD free shows, so no annoying ads interrupting and uh yeah, thanks guys, This is great.