The War in Ukraine Enters a New Phase

A ton of Shahi edrones, ton of ballistic missiles. It looked pretty bad from like what I saw on Twitter and stuff like that. Doesn't really seem, as we've talked about multiple times, that Russia really wants to make a

make a deal for a ceasefire or lasting piece of any sort. I mean, let's kick it off there. Andy, you go first. You tell me what you're tracking, what you're thinking about that.

nothing particularly shocking here. What is shocking is United States lack of response.

buffer zones, which are obviously self serving as well. It's time for the United States, I believe, to first pass the Sanctioning Russia Act. That's the act that's being sponsored by Lindsey Graham and Senator Blumenthal, so Senator Graham and Senator Blumenthal. It apparently has eighty senators already signed on to it, which in this day and time is almost

unheard of as far as bipartisan support. What it would do any country that purchases Russian oil and gas would then immediately have a five hundred percent tariff put on their goods coming into the United States. So even if this trade work were to go away, basically a five hundred percent tariff basically is an embargo.

going to be a substantial Russian push into Kharkiv. It's around fifty thousand troops massing on the border, to include some of their more elite forces. Kharkiev and Andy can tell you even more details about the significance, but it's

the second largest city. This be something that should trigger all the things that we've been talking about to happen, which includes substantial increase in security, absistence assistance from Europe, the United States, the releasing of troches of funds of Russian frozen assets, This sectioning of Russia acts should be passed, and we should start preparing for an even further involvement

of NATO countries into the conflict. But that's something I think everybody's going to start looking at because it, at least from the reporting, appears to.

been absolutely well, even back then, absolutely annihilated. And now the threat of drones, some of the use of drones on both sides, has become so ubiquitous that there's a personal aspect to these bombardaments, with drones actually seeking out people, locking onto them and killing them. Just a I don't think.

I don't think many people can just imagine what to what the environment there is like and people here, you know, as we approach Memorial Day and we get the usual tranch of retirees who want to post pictures themselves in uniform and on social media, and you know, the ubiquitous of the term use of the term here combat veteran. I don't think really anyone can understand what modern warfare looks like as it's been waged in Ukraine, and not just on the front line but against some of the

major cities there. But there are there are, you know, mentioned Kharkiv. The thing about it, though, is that although the Ukrainians have are certainly having manpower problems. They are they are more than holding their own on the front line. And you know, we've talked here about the offset. The disproportionate number of casualties have been inflected on both sides. The Russians are taking way more casualties, yes they can afford to. But on the other hand, the you know,

there has to there's going to be. There's going to be at some point, I think, a point of pain beyond which, you know, the Russian population just says no mass. You know, I've said that before that it's hard to tell when that's going to happen, and it's but it sooner or later. It is likely to happen after what happened in Afghanistan with far fewer casualties, only fifteen thousand dead. I say, only fifteen thousand in Afghanistan. And I think numbers vary in this war, but as high as one

hundred thousand Russian soldiers dead. They're losing a thousand every day. And now whether you look at the Ministry of Defense British Ministry of Defense figures, which are probably the most reliable, or other figures that go even higher. You know that subwords to a thousand killed every day. That's just unimaginable, isn't it. I mean, sorry, hundred casualties, one hundred thousand casualties every day, it's almost unimaginable. And the Ukrainians have

some advantages. They're using fiber optic drones now, which means a couple of things that they're much I mean, they're impossible to jam using EW by fiber optic means they are literally drones literally attached to the controller by a fiber optic keyboard. It's like a fishing line. And so you've got the Yeah, you've got the fact that they can't be jammed, which is one of the biggest problems on the front. The Russians are very good with EW.

But the other thing is you're getting crystal clear imagery on these things, and the Ukrainians are churning these out, you know, the rate of hundreds to one thousand every day. And so it's again the kind of the face of warfare. And I'm always bouncing around between whether the character on the nature of warfare has changed, and you know, people who teach at war colleges get very offended if you

use the wrong term. But certainly the face of war has changed hugely there, and it is changing generally in the Ukrainians favor. So this feeling that Ukraine is on the ropes and we'll give in soon, I think it's mistaken. On the other hand, on the other hand, the problem is that it's hard to envision right now either side making a major breakthrough. I did. The Russians just don't have enough. They don't have enough gas in the tank,

I think to seize the rest of Donbass. I mean they've been trying to capture pock rossk now for I mean for about a year. And shithole of a town that it is. I just say that because there's one particular viewer who gets outraged when I say that, because he lives now or used to live there. But it's we all hope pop Ross does not fall. But it is a shithole of a town. But I mean, my point is the Russians are not They They are in places, making very very slow, incremental moves on the front line,

but at great, great cost. And it's certainly not you know, at Dundale to say that they're going to own all of Donbass. So and and if I guess what I'm heading on. This is the US. The US really can put its thumb on the scale and I you know, on on either side and make a big difference in

this conflict. If we went all in, all in on absolutely enforcing sanctions on Russia, on flooding the battlefield with with with long range precision strike weapons, for instance, then I think we could raise the pain level against Russia. And who knows. I mean, the war is already considered Putin's war. He's already already facing considerable opposition. This is an interesting point when he talks about freezing the front line.

So when the US talks about freezing the front lines as they are now, which is Russia holding two thirds of Donbas, surprisingly there is considerable opposition to that within the Russian army. And the reason is because they have seen these horrendous casualties over the course of three years, and they're saying, what, we've lost all of this just to take two thirds of don Bass, you know, not even a fifth of the country of Ukraine. Come on,

you must beginning. So the point is that Putince can be holding on by his fingernails if he agrees even you know, as far as being able to betray the war as a victory to his own people, even if the front lights were frozen the way they are. If the war continues and the Russian casualties ramp up, as they certainly will, if the US throats its way behind Ukraine, then I think you're going to see that he's on

the ropes and agreeing to far more agreeable terms. But right now, my point is, right now, we the US are playing to him, and he is sidestepping, and he talk of a ceasefire, and so again it gets back to the fact the only thing he understands, sadly, is pain, and that we can certainly bring that to him, but we seem reluctant to do so. On mixed point about prisoner exchanges. Very interestingly, we've seen this throughout the war

between the Ukrainians and the Russians. There is a tremendous amount of hatred and bitterness because it is, in a sense a civil war. And when you talk about ethnically culturally, Russians and Ukrainians of course have been closely affiliated, to say the least throughout the centuries, and many Ukrainians have

relatives in Russia vice versa. But there is also at the same time I've seen that brigade level, battalion level, and element of humanity And just one quick anecdote from my own experience, and we are in a place called solid Or, We're in the Mozart group. We're trying to get through to evacuate civilians and take out some the Ukrainian military casualties. And we were contacted by the commander.

Ukrainian brigade commander said, don't even try. We are you know, we're cut off, and the the intensity of the fire is such that I don't think anything's going to get through. Certainly we weren't going to win soft skinned vehicles. Well, the very next day we got a call and we're told, hey, the road is clear, just drive in, all right, you can come in and evacuate civilians. And the first thing

we noticed was the silence. Never you never hear things as quiet at that in Dombas, at least you happened in the last three years. And what had happened is overnight. I don't know who initiated, but either Russian or the Ukrainian brigade commander had called the other on a cell phone and said, you know, hey, Ivan greg Or Igor, let's do this, all right. You've got a bunch of casualties that you need to be evacuated, you can't get them out, But you've also got a ton of our prisoners.

Why don't we do this. You turn our prisoners over and we'll let you evacuate your casualties. And that's what the Russians and Ukrainians agreed to, And there was a twenty four hour ceasefire. Not only that, but the two brigade commanders met and everyone has forbidden from taking photographs of this because it wasn't something that was I think, I don't know, but it wasn't something that was advertised

up either side's chain of command. So these events have been taking place at tactical level, it's unusual to see them take place higher, but it doesn't necessarily auger the imminence of a longer term ceasefire.

of consistency is emboldening them. So do you think that us enacting those things, calling them out, you know, as in the President calling out Putin, could have a huge effect or you know?

and possible repercussions towards him. If you go back to twenty fifteen and when there was a lot of saber rattling between Russia and Turkey over the front line in Syria, and the Russians were flying planes of Turkish lines and Erdawan said, hey, if you do that again, we're going to shoot your planes down. And sure enough, the Turks did well. The Russians didn't escalate to go to war.

They'd learned that lesson and they backed off the same thing when the US killed a bunch of Russian contractors, when was that twenty seventeen or twenty eighteen in the Middle Euphrates Valley, the same thing. I mean, the Russians didn't threaten us with war. They backed off and they pulled back down lions. Again, we don't seem to we learned from this. We went through this whole period of escalaitis. We were just terrified that he was going to do something,

but history shown that he doesn't. He reacts to things being done against him that inflict pain. Oh and you know the other example you could use. I know progosion came to a sticky end in the end, but remember when almost said the Mozart group, Remember when the Partner group was rebelling and advancing on Moscow, I mean Putin. Putin went quiet right, and there was very little done, and in fact, the army looked as though it was collaborating with pregosion. I think that must have terrified Putin.

And and yes he got he got revenge, but he didn't he didn't reach out and try and crush and I don't know if he was even able to do that. He didn't try and crush the rebellion while it was happening. That was amos quote from Lettin. I'll paraphrase when probing with Baydets. If you find mush push, if you find steel withdraw, right.

But if he doesn't see it's going to be a strategic disaster.

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.

Very I'm very familiar with the place. But the Russians apparently launched an attack this last week using with about an estimated who knows about a company sized attack entirely on motorcycles, just just riding at the Ukrainian lines, and Ukrainians mowed them down and drove them back. But it's

it's not easy, you know. It's it's no longer these attacks and lumbering armored vehicles with infantry fighting vehicles or EPs covered by a few tanks, because with drones and at gms that the Ukrainians were having an easy task of just carving them up. But when you have like a hundred motorcycles riding at you, you know, on your flanks and everywhere, there's a chance that a good bunch of them are going to be able to outflank you.

You know, it's a very interesting change in tactics. And if and even if you it doesn't matter, I mean, you just don't aren't going to have enough drones to be able to stop them all. So you know, what's what's evolved here is rather than combining a bunch of guys in an infantry finding vehicle an APC where they

can be incinerated with one shot. The Russians have learned to spread them in you know, across across smaller platforms, faster moving and it's kind of the same lesson that for instance, US Marine Corps has been learning in twenty nine Palms and their peer on peer exercise is called Magtif war fighting exercises. Not so much in the attack, although they should have learned these lessons in the attack, but the Marine Corps just didn't have that many motorcycles.

But they've learned it. As far as in logistics resupply that it's no longer it's it's suicidal now to to try and resupply forces using the traditional way that we used to in Iraq in Afghanistan with these big convoys, and the best way to do it is on razors or quad bikes with little petty packets of logistics resupply.

cable just enables it to fly. It's primary means of connection with the ground control station. Uh. But the but I don't know how they avoid snagging. And I don't know what the range is on these things.

of the experience. I mean, these are very very experienced, combat experienced, hardened soldiers, and if they are determined to keep on fighting, no peacekeeping army that we or any European nation fields can prevent them from doing so. And I'm thinking when I talk about there somethings particularly about the Russians, of course, but you know the point is that the Russians really have to be frightened into wanting

this peace. It's not going to be a piece enforced by any security force in that area.

going nowhere. Meanwhile, people are in the wood chipper like literally people are just getting killed every day, both Russian and Ukrainians, right, Like.

scale of production is incredible, you know. That's what I mean about the US defense industrial defense complex being so slow moving that it just cannot keep pace with the It cannot keep up with the pace modern warfare, right, I mean, shit, how many how many mq nins we had shot down at over Yemen? Yeah, twenty yeah, at thirty million bucks a pop, right, I mean it's and yet we still haven't learned. I know we talked about it and there, but we still haven't learned to mass

produce expendable but fairly sophisticated drones. We're not learning as fast as we should from this war.

of what was going on in Afghanistan. I don't know if that's true or if you guys have any insight into that, but that was like supposedly the word on the street in twenty eighteen when we stepped up the drone program in Afghanistan to bring the Taliban to the table.

it'd be something I'm sure the Pentagon has looked at. Is to Andy's point, could we go on a wartime footing and actually keep up with deminitions and weapons systems that we would need to be successful. I don't know that's the case.

keep manufacturing. You keep manufacturing, well one five five rounds when you're not having a war that's using them up. You're going to you're going to build a factory to build one five five rounds. But at some point you're going to reach a point where the prominent offence just

goes no mass, we don't need anymore. Right Whereas if you have an aircraft or something, you're always going to have to keep building those parts because you have maintenance issues, you have replacement and a fleet of aircraft is going to be projected to be you know, in operation for at least thirty years, so you had there's a future to it. I mean, I'm guessing that's that's partly it.

it's too cost costly. If we had like Indonesia or Philippines or someplace like that, where not only is the cost go way down because the cost to make them go way down, but they're also ford, right, so then you don't have to you have to worry about getting them from Texas to you know, if you fight China over you know, Taiwan or something like that. So that's another thing I know the United States has been looking at, and it would be a beneficial to the country that's

we partnered with. Obviously they'd get more jobs making these and we get them for deployed and at less cost. Because that's one of the problems with North Korea, for example, the totalitarian state. They can simply tell people they're making one to five five for the rest of their lives. That's their job period, and they're going to pay them enough to survive. It's hard to keep up with that in the current the current way we do business.

high end shit to include air defense systems and offensive weapons now, which is a first and so again and we talked about this before that there's been positive aspects of this. The Baltic nations have all stepped up to the plate. Poland is spending four percent or more of GDP on its defense and has modernized upgraded its entire military is now kind of a leading nation within NATO.

And then of course we talked about Finland and Sweden who have joined NATO despite or perhaps because of, partly US apparent lack of resolve in reinforcing well backing the security of Europe. A lot of European nations are are indeed stepping out the plate and NATO is and NATO is more alive than it has been in a while.

he owns the plane that he flies around on. So he probably should have came up with a better excuse than.

super unpopular. They should want to see these sanctions, which could increase because there's potential for snapback sanctions under the original twenty fifteen JCPOA to happen because Europe is now talking about that, so that would increase the sanctions on Iran and make it even more I think beneficial to

them to reach an agreement. So the question is will they or I guess one of the potential answers is will they go with something like the UA did, which is a regional consortium of enriched uranium that's imported into the country in this case are on. They can use it for civilian nuclear power, but they don't have the capacity to do it themselves. But there is an uninterrupted, agreed upon supply of this. I think that's what the

US is going to ask for. Whether the Iranians will agree with it, I don't know if they don't think. I don't think Israel is bluffing. I think they are always going to be ready to take the strike, even if they do it unilaterally. They have the capacity, you know, as we've seen with their strikes and new data and to get there. The question then becomes, do they have the munitions necessary to actually destroy or significantly degrade all these facilities at for now and Aton's and is Stefan

and I can't remember last one, but there's several. So if they did that, it would end probably the discussions that are ongoing. But there's going to be a time when the US and Israel are going to determine whether you know, they're on the tenth, twelve fourteenth meeting and it's not going anywhere, and they're still stuck. As your point, it's still stuck on the same issues. Whether it's just Iran trying to drag this out and then make they

make their own determination on the strikes. If there is strikes, whether it's bilateral with the US and Israel or Israel by itself, the consequences, of course, are what Iran does in retaliation, and that could be substantial and it could really not only disrupt what's going on in the region, but it could disrupt international energy markets considerably.

hundred percent. And you know, frankly, I would be more worried about Iran being a responsible actor, a regional responsible actor, and I'm more and so perhaps shaping sanctions and shaping the way that these negotiations are taking place to prevent remove incentives and impose disincentives for Iran back making regional proxies that are closing disruption throughout the throughout the region. That is that to me, would be a priority, right because we may or may not be able to stop them.

That that's the sad fact. We may or may not be able to stop them generating a UK weapon. I'm not saying I'm not saying that's okay, I'm just saying that's reality.

done this without direct coordination. I don't care what the Intel says of with Iran, at least their knowledge. And either way, if you're providing the terrorist organization, you know, all its military capacity, you're responsible for their actions. It's pretty simple to me. And then of course hesblad chimed in UH and then the Huthis. So this is this is the regional instability in the Middle East is the result of Iran, and I think we should be crystal

clear about that. So that's gonna have to be addressed. Even if we do get to an agreement, which I hope we do, of course on the nuclear front.

against like the Net and Yahoo government. He said in his op beed essentially that the idea f in Israel is potentially waging war of annihilation, premeditatively adopting a policy of starvation, massacring civilians. And uh, he declared it a genocide.

He said the word genocide in his op ed. And for a former Israeli prime minister to do this, whether he's liberal or whatever, I mean, we had a liberal member of parliament from the you know, from the Kanesset, and you know they still are hardcore in terms of security and security of Israel and all that. So for him to come out, it's I feel like that's relative. That's pretty scathing of a of an op ed about what's going on in Gaza, and I happen to agree

with him. So I don't know what, what do you I mean, I have no question here, It's just I wanted to throw your thoughts everybody, whoever, you get pictures, figure out who goes first.

push a lot of the population into the south. The humanitarian conditions are extraordinarily dire my group, for people that know we do humanitarian stuff all over the world, We're not involved in it at all, but the conditions are to the point where almost the entire population is in what's called IPC Phase four, which is acute shortages of food.

About five hundred thousand are in IPC Phase five, which is catastrophic levels of food insecurity, with sixty six thousand kids on the verge of starvation, children infants if nothing's done. So there's two parts to that. There's multiple parts of this.

This needs to come to a stop. That's clearly with the United States and Europe wants Hamas needs to let out, let go of all the hostages, and there needs to be a path that not only brings in humanitarian aid at scale, because the food stores are about out completely, so the bakeries are shutting down. There's nothing to even make the food of excuse me, the water is now ninety five percent of the ability to clean water because there's no fuel coming in is gone, so everybody's drinking

contaminated water, which is exasperating the crisis itself. And there's of course very little hospital still standing. So that needs to change immediately, and I think the US is going to push for that and should, But there also needs to.

doing whatsoever. It's insane. I know, you want to be secure and stuff like that, but the fact is they dropped the ball on October seventh, and it was horrific what went down, absolutely horrific. Twelve hundred people, like you know, citizens don't deserve to die at a music festival. They're like hippies and kaboots is They do not deserve to fucking get slaughtered the way they did. But the reaction by Israel is a complete, in my opinion, a complete

and utter overreaction and starving kids. Sorry, guy, I can't. I cannot fuck with that whatsoever. Their kids, what do they do? They were just born in a place they couldn't They didn't control it.

do deserve to be secure. Israel definitely deserves to be secure, and they do have one of the best militaries, one of the best intelligence services. They dropped the ball on October seventh, and they could have done what they're very good at, which is like strategic You saw the pagers, You saw what they did with Israala. They can really cut the head off the beast relatively easy what they did and Iran with hamas leadership during the funeral and

stuff like that. They are extremely capable, and it's just I feel like they've overreacted by ten x that's my opinion, and I think people should get fed.

I mean, it's really hard, Like I just try and to ask people to put themselves in other people's positions and see where they're coming from and have and tell you ask yourself how you would react. Right, Like, imagine somebody invaded the United States. You know, we're fucking shoot. You know, we all have guns. I don't. I don't have a gun. I mean I do have a gun, but you know we're gonna.

fantasy land. Unless we have one hundred and fifty years. The interesting part is like Israel and Gaza are right next to each other. So if counterinsurgency was ever gonna have a chance to work, because you'll be there for generations, you would think it would work there instead of sending some kids from Brooklyn or Nebraska or Alabama over Iraq and stuff like that and try be they were going to be there for twenty four months, they'll have their own elections and they'll be a great country.

state solution. And no one can accuse him of being an Israeli trader. He was a patriot, had risked his life many times and was considered actually to be more on the right wing until he started to negotiate with the PLO, which led to his assassination. But what you've seen then since then is a steady shift to the right within Israeli politics, the rise of Netnya Who and the rise of those who support Netta Who and their dominance within you know, kind of the the Israeli political environment.

And then of course the events of seven October solidified that and put it arguably put an end to hopes for a two state solutions because even those on the left in Israel couldn't imagine living side by side with a possible repetition of that threat. What is sad and I think mix is that as part of this and mixed figures really tell the story. I mean, sixty thousand kids facing starvation that should never happen, regardless regardless of

what the cause was or what the intent is. Sixty thousand kids starving a civilian population is not in accordance with the law of conflict. That is period, black and white. Okay, how do we get here? Well, as I've said, you know, I think within Israel that you've seen that shift to the right. But you know, having visited Israel about half a dozen times since seven October. There's something else that I find disturbing in discussions about Palestinians. It's a very

dispassionate discussion. It's almost as though they're not referred to as human beings but as a problem to be solved. And I think a lot of Israelis, even very Israelis who would consider themselves compassionate humanitarian people, refer to Palestinians in those terms. And once you start disassociating your enemy from or disassociating, yes, your enemy, because all of Palestinians, all of Guards are lumped in as their enemy. You've heard this talk about that there are two million supporters

of her Mass within Guards. That you hear that time and again. We've heard it from one of our guests on this show. They just cannot differentiate between the civilian population and her mask. Now there's undoubtedly her Mass had widespread support within Gaza, but you know, as we all know in former military, you've got to there's a difference between widespread support and actually being a fighter, and you

cannot punish the civilian population. You cannot ethically punish the civilian population for what the you know, the minority, and they are a minority, are doing of armed insurgents. So Olmert's Olmert speaking out I see as positive, but you also see that he is very quickly He's not he's already sidelined and he's going to be attacked vehemently as being a trader. There is a very low level of torrance within Israel for dissent against what is happening in Gaza,

and in the international community. There is no major actor who is really speaking out and doing anything. And I think that is yeah, certainly of certainly of concern for anyone who cares about humankind.

invade Fallujah. When we did in November, we were signaling. We were on television saying, hey, we're going to come in and evade. If you are a civilian, leave all right, And we gave them free passage, and we dropped leaflets and we broadcast to them. We made every effort to bring them out. And when we went in, we were under strict, believe it or not, strict rules of engagement. We weren't allowed to use We couldn't just blast away

at buildings unless we were taking fire. At least those were the roel under It might have been the battalion I was attached to, And that's why we went in and cleared all those fucking buildings, right, We didn't we didn't flatten them. We didn't even we didn't have drones to send in. But that's why you got dudes kicking open doors in the twenty first century, going down dark hallways and fighting toe to toe with a mooge, partly

out of concern for civilian casualties. So yeah, I mean, we made a lot of mistakes, and I saw a lot of dead civilians in Iraq who didn't need to die. But we also overall, we US military did our best revent that from happening.

Iraqi army. And but but there was you know, yes, the connections with with the ninety eleven, the connections with weapons semess destruction were notoriously wrong. But at the end of the day, many Iraqis at the time did think of US as liberators. Let's not forget that.

and he was just a horrible person. So I think we could be proud of that, but I don't think it had the nexus to the nine to eleven that we claimed it did, or Nandy already addressed the chemical weapons. I do think we've learned our lesson there, and I don't think it will happen again.

It didn't need to die. But again, overall down to the individual and soldier and marine, I saw a great deal more humanity in their dealings with the local populace. And we you know, with a few, with a few exceptions, we we treated them like human beings and you know

a lot of cases. Working as an advisor with the Iraqi and Afghan armies and special forces and police, I saw very strong relationships formed between them and their American advisors, you know, even at a time when distrust was being when when we were taking some blue and Blue casualties from said Afghan soldiers. So I mean I've seen, I saw more to be proud of in the US military than I did to be ashamed of. Yes, I'm ashamed of US foreign policy, of course, I mean it was

I ashamed is probably the wrong word. Disappointed is probably the wrong word. Disgusted perhaps, but yes, certainly. But as far as the behavior of Americans in uniform, I mean, overall, I'm just very you know, I've been proud of being proud to be part of that organization. Even if we pursued a cause that was doomed from the start, the way it was carried out was not, and the way it was carried out was yes, tactically and strategically flawed.

But from the point of view of how we behaved on the ground, I don't think we have anything to be ashamed of.

when we didn't necessarily need to do that. And so when I say commanders dissipate orders, subsequently by recruiting a number of these guys, it was in small groups, you know, like the Iraqi intervention, brigade. But there's no doubt about it that on the side of the mooge were a

number of these guys who had been made unemployed. And I know that personally because when they came back as an advisor and we I was within an Iraqi for the Iraqi Intervention Brigade, a lot of guys who form a Saddam Republican Guard or special forces, they would call their bodies on the other side in the mooge to have discussions.

pro pro Alcada. They were nationalists who had been who had been emasculated basically by having their weapons and their jobs taken from them by an invader, and they wanted to fight back, and we created that nationalism against ourselves.

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.