No urinals on the USS Ford.

This is a feature and not a bug.

The main issue is breakdowns with the ship’s Vacuum Collection, Holding and Transfer (VCHT) system, which controls its toilets and sewage collection. The system is split across ten independent zones and supports more than 600 toilets on the ship. Acid flushes can clear and restore the system, but according to that 2020 GAO report, each flush costs the Navy $400,000.

Approx 15% of the crew are female.

“Nine hot dogs for every bun” as my Navy colleague would mention.

Don’t look away when you see the video footage of the toilets overflowing underway. You cannot reliably use commodes in WMO Sea State 4 (moderate and above) but you can employ water-less urinals.

This is from 2017:

https://www.navytimes.com/news/your-navy/2017/07/21/no-urinals-on-the-new-navy-aircraft-carrier/

PROF. Mohammad Marandi joins Kyle live from Moscow. His Internet connection is a little sketchy but the audio is fine. Be sure to comment to help us with the YT algorithm.

What if the real battlefield isn’t a border but a bottleneck? We sit down with Professor Mohammad Marandi to examine how Iran calculates risk, leverage, and legitimacy across a map defined as much by energy corridors as by military bases. From the broken promises of the JCPOA to the aftershocks of a 12-day war, we trace why Tehran insists on a narrow negotiating lane—nuclear assurances only—while locking every other door.

Marandi argues that missiles, drones, and regional alliances won’t be traded for sanctions relief, pointing to lessons from Syria and recent clashes that, in Iran’s view, validated conventional deterrence. He walks through why trust collapsed: inconsistent U.S. compliance, shifting goalposts, and the absence of automatic penalties when commitments are breached. The proposed fix is mechanical rather than symbolic—snap, balanced consequences for violations that make cheating too costly. Alongside this, we explore Iran’s stated religious and strategic opposition to nuclear weapons, paired with an explicit caveat about existential threats that functions as deterrence without overt weaponization.

The most provocative claim centers on geography and economics. Iran’s core deterrent, he says, is aimed at the Persian Gulf, not Israel: dense, vulnerable infrastructure, U.S. bases within range, and shipping lanes that tie oil and gas to global stability. A major war would rupture supply chains, spike markets, and outpace neat military outcomes. That logic, combined with a domestic pivot toward BRICS and the SCO, sets the political price for any new deal. Expect discussions to focus on recognition of enrichment rights, rigorous but bounded inspections, and automatic reciprocity for noncompliance—nothing more on missiles or allies.

We close by testing media narratives of Iranian fragility against mass mobilizations at home and a wider global mood swing on Israel-Palestine. Agree or challenge these assessments, the takeaway is the same: any agreement that lasts must align with how power, risk, and credibility are actually distributed on the ground and at sea. If this conversation sharpened your view, follow the show, share it with a friend, and leave a review with the one clause you believe any durable deal must include.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Headlines keep colliding: sudden airspace closures, a foreign leader urging new wars, and a deluge of Epstein revelations that raise more questions than answers. We cut through the noise to map the pattern—who benefits from distraction, why certain names stay hidden, and how selective secrecy corrodes the rule of law and our shared sense of justice.

With Lt. Col. Karen Kwiatkowski, we examine the stakes of the Epstein files beyond the horror of child sex trafficking: alleged blackmail, influence peddling, insider trading, and a culture of impunity for elites. We contrast how local law enforcement handles similar crimes with how federal power seems to shield the well-connected, and we explore what that double standard does to public trust. On the domestic front, we look at job-market friction, surging applicant pools, and why rising gold and silver hint at dollar risk and policy uncertainty—economic signals that don’t match the official happy talk.

Abroad, we confront the moral and strategic costs of Gaza, U.S. complicity in escalating violence, and renewed talk of strikes on Iran. “Limited” actions rarely stay limited; supply routes, oil flows, and regional deterrence hang in the balance. We discuss the very real risk of miscalculation and what it would take to step back from the brink. Finally, we outline a path that could actually restore confidence: protect victims but fully name co-conspirators, fire officials who misled Congress, prosecute crimes without fear or favor, and prioritize diplomacy over performative force.

If you’re tired of euphemisms and ready for clarity, this conversation connects the dots and offers a concrete checklist for accountability at home and restraint abroad. Listen, share with someone who cares about justice, and leave a review telling us the one action you most want leaders to take now.

Podcast (kyle): Play in new window | Download

What happens when a “surgical strike” meets a country that’s spent years hardening its air defenses, extending missile range, and practicing asymmetric warfare? We sit down with Larry Johnson to test the myths, map the ranges, and weigh what a U.S. or Israeli hit on Iran would truly unleash. From carrier standoff distances and Tomahawk limits to GPS disruption and Russian-made air defenses, we break down the real capabilities and constraints that rarely make it into headlines—and why quick wars promised from podiums so often become long, costly stalemates.

The conversation widens to Israel’s calculus and the political push in Washington. Can Jerusalem act alone if Iran crosses a ballistic red line? Johnson argues the “12-day war” already answered that: retaliation arrived within hours, pressure mounted by day six, and only a quiet workaround ended the exchange. We also unpack the emerging China–Russia–Iran defense ecosystem—3D radar, GPS jamming, naval drills—that raises the cost of any strike and heightens the chance of spillover into the Gulf, the Red Sea, and global energy routes. Deterrence by threat of nukes sounds simple; in a crowded neighborhood of nuclear and near-peer powers, it’s a dangerous bet.

With the last U.S.–Russia arms control guardrail gone, tensions don’t just simmer—they set the stage for miscalculation. Johnson lays out how New START’s collapse, escalating sanctions, and unkept diplomatic signals leave Moscow convinced that only battlefield facts count. That leads us to Ukraine’s outlook: dwindling manpower, training pipelines under missile threat, and a Russian campaign that advances by attrition and pressure. We explore why Odessa remains pivotal, how air defense shortages compound losses, and what a negotiated end might look like when one side insists on new borders and the other can’t regenerate combat power fast enough.

If you value clear-eyed analysis over slogans, this deep dive connects the dots between Iran, Israel, Russia, China, and Ukraine with a focus on capabilities, logistics, and consequences. Follow the show, share this episode with a friend who tracks geopolitics, and leave a review telling us where you think the off-ramp lies.