One comment from Donald Trump cuts through the usual talking points: Ukraine should stop hitting Russian diesel refineries. We dig into why that matters, what it says about U.S. intelligence support for Ukrainian strikes, and how energy infrastructure attacks ripple into global diesel supply and American prices. If you’ve wondered why fuel feels expensive in ways that don’t match the headlines, this conversation ties the pump to policy in plain terms.

From there, we zoom out to the U.S. posture toward Iran and the Strait of Hormuz, arguing that Washington’s real priority shows up in what it tries to protect and what it’s willing to risk. We talk refinery realities, why crude type and shipping lanes matter, and how a Middle East squeeze can force Washington to “manage” the Ukraine war through restrictions and messaging instead of strategy.

We also challenge claims about depleted U.S. munitions stockpiles by separating what was sent to Ukraine from what’s being consumed in the Middle East, including Patriots and other high-end systems. Then we hit a fast-moving Yemen update: Ansar Allah’s (Houthis) territorial gains, Red Sea choke points, Saudi vulnerability, and what it could mean for regional leverage. Finally, we stop a 9/11 anniversary clip defending the Global War on Terror and lay out why the moral story being sold doesn’t match the outcomes.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

World War II is the one war we’re still not allowed to talk about like history, and that’s exactly why we should. I’m joined by Darryl Cooper to dig into what happens when a past conflict becomes a civic religion, complete with taboos, approved villains, and moral shortcuts that shape how Americans see today’s wars. When you try to tell the German perspective with real nuance, people often assume you’re “carrying water” for the worst actors. We explain why that reaction is so common, what it reveals about politics now, and how asking better questions can actually make us harder to manipulate.

From there, we pivot to the 25-year shadow of 9/11 and the War on Terror. Daryl breaks down the difference between what’s politically possible in the moment and what a strategic, humane response would require long term. We talk blowback, the gravity of using force overseas, and why a country can’t repeatedly accept civilian deaths “in our name” without it changing who we are. If war becomes routine, moral reflexes fade, and even people who oppose these policies can end up numb.

We close with a blunt look at the United States as a late-stage empire. The post-1945 order gave America a historically rare level of dominance, and the real task now is dialing back to something sustainable without triggering bigger disasters. If you care about US foreign policy, military history, and anti-war realism, this conversation is for you. Subscribe, share the episode, and leave a review, then tell us: what’s the hardest truth Americans avoid about war today?

Podcast (kyle): Play in new window | Download

Bush says America didn’t overreact after 9/11. We don’t let that pass. Kyle Anzalone sits down with Scott Horton to walk through what Washington knew before the attacks, what it chose to ignore, and how a moment that demanded focused justice became an open-ended Global War on Terror. If you’ve ever wondered whether there was a serious middle ground between “do nothing” and “invade half the world,” this talk lays it out in plain terms.

We dig into the intelligence warnings that piled up, the political incentives to widen the fight, and al-Qaeda’s strategy of baiting the United States into a costly overreaction. Then we get specific about Afghanistan: Taliban frustrations with bin Laden, reported offers to try or transfer him if the US provided evidence, and why negotiation was dismissed even when it could have put the actual perpetrators in custody. We also revisit Tora Bora and the argument that bin Laden’s escape wasn’t inevitable, raising hard questions about priorities in late 2001.

From there, we trace the aftershocks: the Iraq War’s weak connection to 9/11, the 2001 AUMF as a permanent blank check, drone-war blowback, and the “redirection” era that helped empower extremist factions in conflicts from Syria and Libya to Yemen. We end by talking about realistic security: stopping support for violent proxies, avoiding new wars, and focusing on keeping attackers off US soil. Subscribe, share the episode with a friend, and leave a review with the biggest claim you agreed or disagreed with.

Podcast (kyle): Play in new window | Download

Dave Smith joins Kyle Anzalone for a wide-ranging conversation about Trump’s failures, the changing American political landscape, and what Dave sees as the rise of “Woke 2.0.”

After years of backlash against progressive politics, is the pendulum beginning to swing back? Dave and Kyle discuss whether the Trump administration’s record is breathing new life into a movement many on the right believed had already been defeated.

They also break down the growing frustration with Trump, the political realignment happening on both the left and right, foreign policy, war, MAGA, and where libertarians fit into an increasingly divided political environment.

Is the Woke Left really making a comeback — and if so, is Trump helping make it happen?

Podcast (kyle): Play in new window | Download

The loudest voices keep insisting the U.S. is “winning” against Iran, but winning should be measurable and explainable, not just repeated until it feels true. We sit down with Matt Hoh to test the claims against what’s happening in the Persian Gulf, where the Strait of Hormuz remains a pressure point and U.S. forces are still absorbing attacks and burning through tempo. If the public story is victory, why does the conflict look like it’s settling into a long grind with no clear off-ramp?

We also go straight at the most frightening escalation risk: low-yield nuclear weapons and the Washington idea that some nukes are “usable.” Matthew explains how that doctrine was built over years, why it’s designed for exactly this kind of scenario, and what happens when political leaders want a dramatic finale they can sell as success. It’s a conversation about incentives, not just personalities, and why a war that can’t be honestly defined can still be dangerously expanded.

From there we confront civilian casualties and the strike on a wedding, the familiar pattern of official denials, and the deeper question of accountability in modern U.S. air war. We talk about intelligence failures, wasted munitions, and how corporate media narratives can dull outrage even when the facts are grim. Finally, we examine the emerging sanctions-and-blockade strategy, compare it to Iraq in the 1990s and early 2000s, and ask what the economic blowback means for Americans as energy prices climb.

Subscribe for more honest foreign policy coverage, share this conversation with someone who follows the Middle East, and leave a review with your take: what would a real end to this war require?

Podcast (kyle): Play in new window | Download