00:00:00
Speaker 1: The Talk Station.
00:00:03
Speaker 2: 829-55-KRC, The Talk Station. It is that time of week. Always look forward to this time as well. There's quite a few times during the week I look forward to. The Daniel Davis Deep Dive is what we call the segment. That's the podcast, too. You can find retired Lieutenant Colonel Daniel Davis Deep Dive wherever you get your podcasts. And, of course, you can tune in every Tuesday at this moment in time to hear what he has to say live. Daniel Davis, welcome back, my friend. Pleasure having you on.
00:00:24
Speaker 1: You know, it's always a pleasure to be here. Thanks for having me.
00:00:26
Speaker 2: I'm glad you enjoy it because I thoroughly do. And you've got all kinds of inside access and resources in connection with these wars that are being waged around. And before we get to unpackaging what's going on with the Iranians and the re-fortification of the nuclear sites and everything that's going on there and whether or not we're going to bomb before the election or after the election, what's going on with Vladimir Putin and Zelenskyy? Because the Trump administration, Donald Trump announced that he wants them to stop bombing each other's oil infrastructure because we got a global shortage of, of course, petroleum products, most notably diesel. Within moments of Trump saying, don't break the deal, we got the Russians bombing a power plant in Kiev and a thermal power plant in Kharkiv, among others. They didn't listen to him. And then now Donald Trump is calling for Zelensky to step down and have a new election. Can you provide a Daniel Davis deep dive unpackaging of this? Because I'm a little confused of where we are.
00:01:25
Speaker 1: Yeah, this is more wishful thinking from President Trump because he posted on True Social that both sides had agreed to an energy ceasefire. And he said, you better not break it. Problem is, neither side agreed to an energy ceasefire. Ukraine didn't do it. Russia didn't do it. So Russia's like, hey, that was not part of our deal. diesel deal we didn't say anything about a ceasefire we're still in the war we're willing to sell you diesel but we're not stopping our war And then Zelensky, for his part, says, yeah, you know, a ceasefire would be great. As a matter of fact, maybe you can give me a couple of months. You want me to have a new election? You want a new president? That's fine. We'll do that. But I need two months of a complete and total ceasefire in order to get ready for the elections or something, which the Russians have said, yeah, that's not going to happen. We'll give you a few days, maybe, and we'll give a complete ceasefire so you can have your elections, but on our terms, not on yours. And of course, now the war continues on. Zelensky, just this morning, posted one more time. He said, for the second straight night, we did not attack any of the Russian energy infrastructure, implying that that's got an expiration date. And if I keep getting hit, I'm going to go back to hitting two. And then we'll find out what President Trump does in between. But just one point, this happened also on the 14th of September, where Trump declared on Truth Social that both sides had agreed to an energy ceasefire. And that time, it was Ukraine that launched an attack against Russian infrastructure within three hours of And this time it was the Russians that did, but the Russians never agreed to anything. So it's a big mess.
00:03:00
Speaker 2: Oh, and we had that memorandum of understanding with the Iranians that about five minutes after that thing was signed, the Iranians started bombing boats. I just ask you this. I don't want to sound like I'm being overly critical of Trump, but it seems to me that there has to be some strategy because quite often he comes out and says something that is just not accurate in this particular case. He said out loud, both parties agree to it. You know it. I know it. The realities of what happened in real world time with the bombing, they didn't agree to it. They came out loud and said it. Why would he subject himself to that kind of criticism? Is there something that I'm missing in the strategy on saying it?
00:03:38
Speaker 1: Well, there might be something that we're just not willing to acknowledge because it's uncomfortable. And that is that President Trump could be having some genuine cognitive decline problems. Because yesterday, I don't know if you saw yesterday afternoon, One of the reporters out in front of the White House asked him, they said, hey, you said that there was an agreement on both sides, but both sides said there was no agreement. What do you say? And he goes, you know what? There was an agreement. You know why? Because I said there was. And, you know, everybody's kind of looking at each other like, what? Just because you say it doesn't mean that it's true. But somehow in his mind that did because he was pretty angry about it. And now that everybody else, and that means Zelensky, that means the Europeans, that means the Russians, everybody's got to try to figure out what is President Trump going to do? What does he mean? And if we don't do what he imagines we agree to, what is he going to do in response? And I mean, that's both sides, adversaries and allies alike. We all have to try to figure it out. And that is no way to do international business.
00:04:36
Speaker 2: Well, that's kind of my take on it. Again, I, you know, I can hear the listeners screaming at the radio. Ah, he's part of the conspiracy theory that, you know, it's Trump's not Biden. He's much better than all I can say is, well, he did say both sides agreed and both sides said they did not agree. So how do you make sense of it? It's a legitimate question, Daniel Davis. I just have to say it out loud. So in the ceasefire component, I guess I'm wondering why, But that would inure to Zelensky's benefit because if he had a short time to cease fire, obviously drone production goes on 24-7. They can build up a lot of additional drone resources that they can launch on the Russians if they get a two-month pause in the bombing. The Russians obviously don't have any strategic benefit in allowing that, do they? Or maybe I'm missing.
00:05:18
Speaker 1: Something on that point. Not only do you have it spot on, that is almost verbatim what the Russians said. That's why they said we're not going to have one of those because the only party that would benefit from that is our adversary. And if you're going to ask me to do something like that, there has to be a pretty big quid pro quo. And there's not anything offered. They don't see one. So they say, no, we're not going to do that. What they do say over and over is we are absolutely willing to go into end of war negotiations. We are looking for an end of war peace treaty, not just a temporary ceasefire that will only benefit you in coming back and hitting us harder. We're just not going to go there. And unfortunately for us. they have the leverage to make their version reality on the ground. We don't get to bypass that.
00:06:00
Speaker 2: Well, and of course the Russians have every interest in making life miserable for the Ukrainians that maybe haven't had life as miserable as they can be. If you bomb the infrastructure, you're going to, as you head on into winter, a lot of people are going to be freezing their collective butts off and starvation may become an issue for the Ukrainians.
00:06:19
Speaker 1: It is. In fact, that's one of the other problems that we have in this is that Kayakalis, basically the foreign minister for the European Union, made that very point. She says, you know, we're coming up because Russia's hit so much infrastructure over the last six or so months, heading in now to the beginning into the winter phase, there's going to be some real problems here. And she just said, listen, we need a ceasefire so that Ukraine can rebuild some of this stuff. And that's That's fine as far as it goes, but she offers Russia nothing to do that. And she just says, you know, Russia is bad, so we're not going to do anything different. We're not going to take anything off the table. We're not going to stop attacking Russia, but we want them to stop attacking Ukraine. And that's just unrealistic. And if I can say, hey, there may be some issues with President Trump, there's some cognitive problems here, you can't claim that on the European side. It's just delusional thinking. from European leaders across the board, and they have nothing to offer Ukraine that can help them win. All they can do, Brian, so important here, all they can do is keep the war going, can drag it out further, and then that makes sure more Ukrainian people die pointlessly. They're never going to defeat Russia. The only chance they have is to have some kind of negotiated settlement on ugly terms that we won't like, but on terms that will end the killing of Ukraine, at least preserve something of the state. Otherwise... we faced a prospect that they could one day physically lose.
00:07:45
Speaker 2: Well, a pause in kinetic activity would allow the Ukrainians to re-fortify some of their drone and arsenal, but that's kind of what's going on right now and so far with us vis-a-vis the Iranians, which I read are now re-fortifying the nuclear bases. They're building, I guess, berms around, so they're expecting ground forces to perhaps enter certain areas. Got Donald Trump's threat in that Well, we're going to start bombing them again either after the election or before the election. We've got another carrier group going on over there, which I think is to suggest that he plans on making good on it. But here they are using the time to re-fortify. I mean, they're expecting some kind of bombing campaign, but they're not backing off, Daniel Davis.
00:08:24
Speaker 1: Oh, not only are they not backing off, because I've talked to a number of folks associated– with from Tehran University, for example, and they categorically say they all expect there to be an attack. They don't even think it's probable. They think it's going to happen. So they're merely just saying we just don't know when it's going to happen, but we're ready for it. And they're preparing fully for everything, everything from like a local ground incursion, obviously not a ground invasion like, you know, in Iraq in 2003, but some kind of special forces kind of thing or a marine expeditionary unit, something like that. And then, of course, big missile strikes here. But the problem is we're never going to be able to penetrate those underground mountain caverns into missile cities with our conventional weapons or, and I'll be blunt, not even nuclear weapons because those things are so far underground of a grand mountain, we cannot knock them out with nuclear weapons even. So certainly conventional weapons won't. So if we go back and try to do again what we did in the first 40 days or the second 13-day process, All we're going to do is burn through more of our missiles. We'll kill a lot of Iranians. We'll blow up a lot of stuff on the surface, but not where the drone factories are, not where the missile factories are, not where the launch points are. We cannot knock those all out. So all that's going to do is Iran then is going to launch and potentially burn down the Middle East, which is what they've claimed to do. Now, ironically, the one thing that's putting a brake on that, it might be China, because they're saying don't do that to their ally Iran or their friend Iran. And they're saying because that will cause problems for us and the global economy that will drag us all down. So they're asking for some restraint. That might be the one thing to slow down what Iran might do, but I can guarantee you it's going to be ugly for our side if we return to combat operations.
00:10:08
Speaker 2: Well, and we didn't even get to the Houthis in Yemen bombing the Saudi Arabians again and blowing up the Air Force Base. Daniel Davis, we'll have to talk about that perhaps next week and hope for some better news between now and then. Daniel Davis.
00:10:20
Speaker 1: I'm sure that'll still be on the track. I know. I know.
00:10:25
Speaker 2: We'll face whatever we face next week. Daniel Davis, Daniel Davis, deep dive, find them where you find your podcast and tune into the morning show every Tuesday at eight 30. Take care and have a great week. My friend.
00:10:34
Speaker 1: You're there.
00:10:36
Speaker 2: Eight 40. We're going to learn about breast cancer, breast cancer awareness month. It is breast cancer awareness month. My friends from OHC specifically doctor. Who is it this morning?
00:10:45
Speaker 1: Dr. Abigail.
Speaker 1: The Talk Station.
00:00:03
Speaker 2: 829-55-KRC, The Talk Station. It is that time of week. Always look forward to this time as well. There's quite a few times during the week I look forward to. The Daniel Davis Deep Dive is what we call the segment. That's the podcast, too. You can find retired Lieutenant Colonel Daniel Davis Deep Dive wherever you get your podcasts. And, of course, you can tune in every Tuesday at this moment in time to hear what he has to say live. Daniel Davis, welcome back, my friend. Pleasure having you on.
00:00:24
Speaker 1: You know, it's always a pleasure to be here. Thanks for having me.
00:00:26
Speaker 2: I'm glad you enjoy it because I thoroughly do. And you've got all kinds of inside access and resources in connection with these wars that are being waged around. And before we get to unpackaging what's going on with the Iranians and the re-fortification of the nuclear sites and everything that's going on there and whether or not we're going to bomb before the election or after the election, what's going on with Vladimir Putin and Zelenskyy? Because the Trump administration, Donald Trump announced that he wants them to stop bombing each other's oil infrastructure because we got a global shortage of, of course, petroleum products, most notably diesel. Within moments of Trump saying, don't break the deal, we got the Russians bombing a power plant in Kiev and a thermal power plant in Kharkiv, among others. They didn't listen to him. And then now Donald Trump is calling for Zelensky to step down and have a new election. Can you provide a Daniel Davis deep dive unpackaging of this? Because I'm a little confused of where we are.
00:01:25
Speaker 1: Yeah, this is more wishful thinking from President Trump because he posted on True Social that both sides had agreed to an energy ceasefire. And he said, you better not break it. Problem is, neither side agreed to an energy ceasefire. Ukraine didn't do it. Russia didn't do it. So Russia's like, hey, that was not part of our deal. diesel deal we didn't say anything about a ceasefire we're still in the war we're willing to sell you diesel but we're not stopping our war And then Zelensky, for his part, says, yeah, you know, a ceasefire would be great. As a matter of fact, maybe you can give me a couple of months. You want me to have a new election? You want a new president? That's fine. We'll do that. But I need two months of a complete and total ceasefire in order to get ready for the elections or something, which the Russians have said, yeah, that's not going to happen. We'll give you a few days, maybe, and we'll give a complete ceasefire so you can have your elections, but on our terms, not on yours. And of course, now the war continues on. Zelensky, just this morning, posted one more time. He said, for the second straight night, we did not attack any of the Russian energy infrastructure, implying that that's got an expiration date. And if I keep getting hit, I'm going to go back to hitting two. And then we'll find out what President Trump does in between. But just one point, this happened also on the 14th of September, where Trump declared on Truth Social that both sides had agreed to an energy ceasefire. And that time, it was Ukraine that launched an attack against Russian infrastructure within three hours of And this time it was the Russians that did, but the Russians never agreed to anything. So it's a big mess.
00:03:00
Speaker 2: Oh, and we had that memorandum of understanding with the Iranians that about five minutes after that thing was signed, the Iranians started bombing boats. I just ask you this. I don't want to sound like I'm being overly critical of Trump, but it seems to me that there has to be some strategy because quite often he comes out and says something that is just not accurate in this particular case. He said out loud, both parties agree to it. You know it. I know it. The realities of what happened in real world time with the bombing, they didn't agree to it. They came out loud and said it. Why would he subject himself to that kind of criticism? Is there something that I'm missing in the strategy on saying it?
00:03:38
Speaker 1: Well, there might be something that we're just not willing to acknowledge because it's uncomfortable. And that is that President Trump could be having some genuine cognitive decline problems. Because yesterday, I don't know if you saw yesterday afternoon, One of the reporters out in front of the White House asked him, they said, hey, you said that there was an agreement on both sides, but both sides said there was no agreement. What do you say? And he goes, you know what? There was an agreement. You know why? Because I said there was. And, you know, everybody's kind of looking at each other like, what? Just because you say it doesn't mean that it's true. But somehow in his mind that did because he was pretty angry about it. And now that everybody else, and that means Zelensky, that means the Europeans, that means the Russians, everybody's got to try to figure out what is President Trump going to do? What does he mean? And if we don't do what he imagines we agree to, what is he going to do in response? And I mean, that's both sides, adversaries and allies alike. We all have to try to figure it out. And that is no way to do international business.
00:04:36
Speaker 2: Well, that's kind of my take on it. Again, I, you know, I can hear the listeners screaming at the radio. Ah, he's part of the conspiracy theory that, you know, it's Trump's not Biden. He's much better than all I can say is, well, he did say both sides agreed and both sides said they did not agree. So how do you make sense of it? It's a legitimate question, Daniel Davis. I just have to say it out loud. So in the ceasefire component, I guess I'm wondering why, But that would inure to Zelensky's benefit because if he had a short time to cease fire, obviously drone production goes on 24-7. They can build up a lot of additional drone resources that they can launch on the Russians if they get a two-month pause in the bombing. The Russians obviously don't have any strategic benefit in allowing that, do they? Or maybe I'm missing.
00:05:18
Speaker 1: Something on that point. Not only do you have it spot on, that is almost verbatim what the Russians said. That's why they said we're not going to have one of those because the only party that would benefit from that is our adversary. And if you're going to ask me to do something like that, there has to be a pretty big quid pro quo. And there's not anything offered. They don't see one. So they say, no, we're not going to do that. What they do say over and over is we are absolutely willing to go into end of war negotiations. We are looking for an end of war peace treaty, not just a temporary ceasefire that will only benefit you in coming back and hitting us harder. We're just not going to go there. And unfortunately for us. they have the leverage to make their version reality on the ground. We don't get to bypass that.
00:06:00
Speaker 2: Well, and of course the Russians have every interest in making life miserable for the Ukrainians that maybe haven't had life as miserable as they can be. If you bomb the infrastructure, you're going to, as you head on into winter, a lot of people are going to be freezing their collective butts off and starvation may become an issue for the Ukrainians.
00:06:19
Speaker 1: It is. In fact, that's one of the other problems that we have in this is that Kayakalis, basically the foreign minister for the European Union, made that very point. She says, you know, we're coming up because Russia's hit so much infrastructure over the last six or so months, heading in now to the beginning into the winter phase, there's going to be some real problems here. And she just said, listen, we need a ceasefire so that Ukraine can rebuild some of this stuff. And that's That's fine as far as it goes, but she offers Russia nothing to do that. And she just says, you know, Russia is bad, so we're not going to do anything different. We're not going to take anything off the table. We're not going to stop attacking Russia, but we want them to stop attacking Ukraine. And that's just unrealistic. And if I can say, hey, there may be some issues with President Trump, there's some cognitive problems here, you can't claim that on the European side. It's just delusional thinking. from European leaders across the board, and they have nothing to offer Ukraine that can help them win. All they can do, Brian, so important here, all they can do is keep the war going, can drag it out further, and then that makes sure more Ukrainian people die pointlessly. They're never going to defeat Russia. The only chance they have is to have some kind of negotiated settlement on ugly terms that we won't like, but on terms that will end the killing of Ukraine, at least preserve something of the state. Otherwise... we faced a prospect that they could one day physically lose.
00:07:45
Speaker 2: Well, a pause in kinetic activity would allow the Ukrainians to re-fortify some of their drone and arsenal, but that's kind of what's going on right now and so far with us vis-a-vis the Iranians, which I read are now re-fortifying the nuclear bases. They're building, I guess, berms around, so they're expecting ground forces to perhaps enter certain areas. Got Donald Trump's threat in that Well, we're going to start bombing them again either after the election or before the election. We've got another carrier group going on over there, which I think is to suggest that he plans on making good on it. But here they are using the time to re-fortify. I mean, they're expecting some kind of bombing campaign, but they're not backing off, Daniel Davis.
00:08:24
Speaker 1: Oh, not only are they not backing off, because I've talked to a number of folks associated– with from Tehran University, for example, and they categorically say they all expect there to be an attack. They don't even think it's probable. They think it's going to happen. So they're merely just saying we just don't know when it's going to happen, but we're ready for it. And they're preparing fully for everything, everything from like a local ground incursion, obviously not a ground invasion like, you know, in Iraq in 2003, but some kind of special forces kind of thing or a marine expeditionary unit, something like that. And then, of course, big missile strikes here. But the problem is we're never going to be able to penetrate those underground mountain caverns into missile cities with our conventional weapons or, and I'll be blunt, not even nuclear weapons because those things are so far underground of a grand mountain, we cannot knock them out with nuclear weapons even. So certainly conventional weapons won't. So if we go back and try to do again what we did in the first 40 days or the second 13-day process, All we're going to do is burn through more of our missiles. We'll kill a lot of Iranians. We'll blow up a lot of stuff on the surface, but not where the drone factories are, not where the missile factories are, not where the launch points are. We cannot knock those all out. So all that's going to do is Iran then is going to launch and potentially burn down the Middle East, which is what they've claimed to do. Now, ironically, the one thing that's putting a brake on that, it might be China, because they're saying don't do that to their ally Iran or their friend Iran. And they're saying because that will cause problems for us and the global economy that will drag us all down. So they're asking for some restraint. That might be the one thing to slow down what Iran might do, but I can guarantee you it's going to be ugly for our side if we return to combat operations.
00:10:08
Speaker 2: Well, and we didn't even get to the Houthis in Yemen bombing the Saudi Arabians again and blowing up the Air Force Base. Daniel Davis, we'll have to talk about that perhaps next week and hope for some better news between now and then. Daniel Davis.
00:10:20
Speaker 1: I'm sure that'll still be on the track. I know. I know.
00:10:25
Speaker 2: We'll face whatever we face next week. Daniel Davis, Daniel Davis, deep dive, find them where you find your podcast and tune into the morning show every Tuesday at eight 30. Take care and have a great week. My friend.
00:10:34
Speaker 1: You're there.
00:10:36
Speaker 2: Eight 40. We're going to learn about breast cancer, breast cancer awareness month. It is breast cancer awareness month. My friends from OHC specifically doctor. Who is it this morning?
00:10:45
Speaker 1: Dr. Abigail.
