Podcasts about Warsaw Pact

Purpose, trust and laughter matter.  SUMMARY Dr. Heather Wilson '82, former secretary of the U.S. Air Force, and Gen. Dave Goldfein '83, former chief of staff of the Air Force, highlight the human side of leadership — honoring family, listening actively and using humility and humor to build strong teams. Their book, Get Back Up: Lessons in Servant Leadership, challenges leaders to serve first and lead with character.   SHARE THIS PODCAST LINKEDIN  |  FACEBOOK    TOP 10 LEADERSHIP TAKEAWAYS FROM THIS EPISODE Leadership Is a Gift and a Burden – Leaders are entrusted with the well-being and development of others, but that privilege entails tough, sometimes lonely, responsibilities. Servant Leadership – True leadership is about enabling and supporting those you lead, not seeking personal advancement or recognition. Influence and Teamwork – Lasting change comes from pairing authority with influence and working collaboratively; no leader succeeds alone. Embrace Failure and Own Mistakes – Effective leaders accept institutional and personal failures and use them as learning and teaching moments. Family Matters – Great leaders recognize the significance of family (their own and their team's) and demonstrate respect and flexibility for personal commitments. Be Data-Driven and Strategic – Borrow frameworks that suit the mission, be clear about goals, and regularly follow up to ensure progress. Listening Is Active – Truly listening, then responding openly and honestly—even when you can't “fix” everything—builds trust and respect. Humility and Curiosity – Never stop learning or questioning; continual self-improvement is a hallmark of strong leaders. Celebrate and Share Credit – Spread praise to those working behind the scenes; leadership is not about personal glory, but lifting others. Resilience and Leading by Example – “Getting back up” after setbacks inspires teams; how a leader recovers can motivate others to do the same.   CHAPTERS 0:00:00 - Introduction and Welcome 0:00:21 - Guest Backgrounds and Family Legacies 0:02:57 - Inspiration for Writing the Book 0:05:00 - Defining Servant Leadership 0:07:46 - Role Models and Personal Examples   CONNECT WITH THE LONG BLUE LINE PODCAST NETWORK TEAM Ted Robertson | Producer and Editor:  Ted.Robertson@USAFA.org Send your feedback or nominate a guest: socialmedia@usafa.org   Ryan Hall | Director:  Ryan.Hall@USAFA.org  Bryan Grossman | Copy Editor:  Bryan.Grossman@USAFA.org Wyatt Hornsby | Executive Producer:  Wyatt.Hornsby@USAFA.org      ALL PAST LBL EPISODES  |  ALL LBLPN PRODUCTIONS AVAILABLE ON ALL MAJOR PODCAST PLATFORMS     FULL TRANSCRIPT SPEAKERS Host: Lt. Col. (Ret.) Naviere Walkewicz '99 Guests: Dr. Heather Wilson '82, former Secretary of the U.S. Air Force, and former Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. (Ret.) Dave Goldfein '83  Naviere Walkewicz 0:09 Welcome to Focus on Leadership, our accelerated leadership series. I'm your host, Naviere Walkewicz, Class of '99. I'm honored to welcome two exceptional leaders whose careers and friendship have helped shape the modern Air Force, while inspiring thousands to serve with purpose and courage. Our guests today are Dr. Heather Wilson, USAFA Class of '82, the 24th secretary of the Air Force, now president at the University of Texas El Paso. And Gen. Dave Goldfein, Class of '83, the 21st chief of staff of the Air Force. Both are United States Air Force Academy distinguished graduates. Together, they've written Get Back Up: Lessons in Servant Leadership, a powerful reflection on resilience, humility and the courage to lead to adversity. And our conversation today will dive deeply into the lessons they learned at the highest levels of command and in public service, and what it means to serve others first. Thank you for being here. Gen. Dave Goldfein 1:08 Thank you for having us. Naviere Walkewicz 1:09 Absolutely. This is truly an honor. And I mentioned that I read this incredible book, and I'm so excited for us to jump into it, but before we do, I think it's really important for people to know you more than the secretary and the chief. I mean chief, so Gen. Goldfein, you came from an Air Force family. Your dad was a colonel, and ma'am, your grandpa was a civil aviator, but you really didn't have any other military ties. Dr. Heather Wilson 1:29 Well, my grandfather was one of the first pilots in the RAF in World War I, then came to America, and in World War II, flew for his new country in the Civil Air Patrol. My dad enlisted by that a high school and was a crew chief between the end of the Second World War and the start of Korea, and then he went back home and became a commercial aviator and a mechanic. Naviere Walkewicz 1:52 I love that. So your lines run deep. So maybe you can share more and let our listeners get to know you more personally. What would you like to share in this introduction of Gen. Goldfein and Dr. Wilson? Gen. Dave Goldfein 2:02 Well, I'll just tell you that if you know much about Air Force culture you know we all get call signs, right. Nicknames, right? I got a new one the day I retired, and you get to use it. It's JD, which stands for “Just Dave.” Naviere Walkewicz 2:17 Just Dave! Yes, sir. JD. I will do my best for that to roll off my tongue. Yes, sir. Gen. Dave Goldfein 2:25 And I will just say congratulations to you for your two sons who are currently at the Academy. How cool is that? Naviere Walkewicz 2:31 Thank you. We come from a Long Blue Line family. My dad was a grad, my uncle, my brother and sister, my two boys. So if I get my third son, he'll be class of 2037, so, we'll see. We've got some time. Gen. Dave Goldfein 2:41 We have grandchildren. Matter of fact, our book is dedicated to grandchildren and they don't know it yet, but at least on my side, they're Class of 2040 and 2043 at the Air Force Academy. Naviere Walkewicz 2:52 OK, so my youngest will be cadre for them. Excellent. Excellent. Dr. Heather Wilson 2:57 And my oldest granddaughter is 4, so I think we'll wait a little bit and see what she wants to do. Naviere Walkewicz 3:04 Yes, ma'am. All right. Well, let's jump in. You just mentioned that you wrote the book primarily for your film book. Is that correct? Gen. Dave Goldfein 3:09 Yes. Naviere Walkewicz 3:10 How did you decide to do this now together? Because you both have incredible stories. Dr. Heather Wilson 3:14 Well, two years ago, we were actually up in Montana with Barbara and Craig Barrett, who —  Barbara succeeded me as secretary of the Air Force. And our families, all six of us are quite close, and we were up there, and Dave was telling stories, and I said, “You know, you need to write some of these down.” And we talked about it a little bit, and he had tried to work with another co-author at one time and it just didn't work out really well. And I said, “Well, what if we do it together, and we focus it on young airmen, on lessons learned in leadership. And the other truth is, we were so tired of reading leadership books by Navy SEALs, you know, and so can we do something together? It turned out to be actually more work than I thought it would be for either of us, but it was also more fun.   Naviere Walkewicz 3:59 How long did it take you from start to finish? Dr. Heather Wilson 4:02 Two years. Naviere Walkewicz 4:03 Two years? Excellent. And are you — where it's landed? Are you just so proud? Is it what you envisioned when you started? Gen. Dave Goldfein 4:10 You know, I am, but I will also say that it's just come out, so the initial response has been fantastic, but I'm really eager to see what the longer term response looks like, right? Did it resonate with our intended tenant audience? Right? Did the young captains that we had a chance to spend time with at SOS at Maxwell last week, right? They lined up forever to get a copy. But the real question is, did the stories resonate? Right? Do they actually give them some tools that they can use in their tool bag? Same thing with the cadets that we were privileged to spend time with the day. You know, they energized us. I mean, because we're looking at the we're looking at the future of the leadership of this country. And if, if these lessons in servant leadership can fill their tool bag a little bit, then we'll have hit the mark. Naviere Walkewicz 5:07 Yes, sir, yes. Ma'am. Well, let's jump right in then. And you talked about servant leadership. How would you describe it? Each of you, in your own words, Dr. Heather Wilson 5:15 To me, one of the things, important things about servant leadership is it's from the bottom. As a leader, your job is to enable the people who are doing the work. So in some ways, you know, people think that the pyramid goes like this, that it's the pyramid with the point at the top, and in servant leadership, it really is the other way around. And as a leader, one of the most important questions I ask my direct reports — I have for years — is: What do you need from me that you're not getting? And I can't print money in the basement, but what do you need from me that you're not getting? How, as a leader, can I better enable you to accomplish your piece of the mission. And I think a good servant leader is constantly thinking about, how do I — what can I do to make it easier for the people who are doing the job to get the mission done? Gen. Dave Goldfein 6:08 And I'd offer that the journey to becoming an inspirational servant leader is the journey of a lifetime. I'm not sure that any of us actually ever arrive. I'm not the leader that I want to be, but I'm working on it. And I think if we ever get to a point where we feel like we got it all figured out right, that we know exactly what this whole leadership gig is, that may be a good time to think about retiring, because what that translates to is perhaps at that point, we're not listening, we're not learning, we're not growing, we're not curious — all the things that are so important. The first chapter in the book is titled, Am I worthy? And it's a mirror-check question that we both came to both individually and together as secretary and chief. It's a mere check that you look at and say, “All right, on this lifelong journey to become an inspirational servant leader, am I worthy of the trust and confidence of the parents who have shared their sons and daughters with the United States Air Force and expecting us to lead with character and courage and confidence? Am I worthy of the gift that followers give to leaders? Am I earning that gift and re-earning it every single day by how I act, how I treat others?” You know, that's the essence of servant leadership that we try to bring forward in the book. Naviere Walkewicz 7:38 Right? Can you recall when you first saw someone exhibiting servant leadership in your life? Dr. Heather Wilson 7:46 Good question. It's a question of role models. Maj. William S. Reeder was my first air officer commanding here. And while I think I can probably think of some leaders in my community, you know, people who were school principals or those kind of things, I think Maj. Reeder terrified me because they didn't want to disappoint him. And he had — he was an Army officer who had been shot down as a prisoner of war in Vietnam. He still had some lingering issues. Now, I think he had broken his leg or his back or something, and so you could tell that he still carried with him the impact of that, but he had very high expectations of us and we didn't want to disappoint him. And I think he was a pretty good role model. Gen. Dave Goldfein 8:47 You know, one of the things we say at the very end of the book is that we both married up. We both married incredible leaders, servant leaders in their own right. So in my case, I married my high school sweetheart, and we've now been together almost 43 years, coming up on 43. And when you talk about servant leadership, you know, very often we don't give military spouses enough credit for the enormous courage that they have when they deal with the separations, the long hours, very often not talked about enough, the loneliness that comes with being married to someone who's in the military. And so I just give a shout out to every military spouse that's out there and family to thank them for that very special kind of courage that equates to servant leadership on their part. Naviere Walkewicz 9:47 Excellent. Those are both really great examples, and I think, as our listeners are engaging with this, they're going to start to think about those people in their lives as well, through your descriptions. Early in the book, you make this statement: “Leadership is a gift and a burden.” Might you both expand on that?   Dr. Heather Wilson 10:03 So it's a gift in that it's a gift that's given to you by those whom you are privileged to lead, and it's not just an institution that, you know, it's not just the regents of the University of Texas who have said, “Yes, you're going to be the president of the University of Texas at El Paso.” It is those who follow me who have given me gift of their loyalty and their service and their time. It's a burden, because some days are hard days, and you have to make hard calls based on values to advance the mission and, as chief and service secretary, there are no easy decisions that come walking into that part of the Pentagon. The easy decisions are all made before it gets to the service secretary and chief and so. So there is that responsibility of trying to do well difficult things. And I think sometimes those are lonely decisions. Gen. Dave Goldfein 11:09 And I think as a leader of any organization, part of what can be the burden is if you care deeply about the institution, then you carry the burden of any failures of that institution, both individuals who fall short, or the institution itself. And we face some of those, and we talk about that in the book. One of our chapters is on Sutherland Springs and owning failure. There was no dodge in that. And there was, quite frankly, there was an opportunity for us to actually showcase and teach others how to take ownership when the institution falls short and fails, right? And you know, one of the interesting elements of the relationship between a secretary and a chief is that if you go back and look at the law and read the job description of the chief of staff of the Air Force, it basically says, “Run the air staff and do what the secretary tells you.” I'm not making that up. Because most of the decision authority of the institution resides in the civilian control, the military civilian secretary. So almost all authority and decision authority resides with the secretary. What the chief position brings is 30 years in the institution that very often can bring credibility and influence. And what we determined early in our tenure was that if we were going to move the ball, if we were going to actually move the service in a positive direction, neither of us could do it alone. We had to do it together. We had to use this combination of authority and influence to be able to move the institution forward. And so that was a — and we talked a lot about that, you know, in the book, and it sort of runs throughout our stories. You know, that that trust matters. Naviere Walkewicz 12:59 Absolutely. We're going to visit that towards the end of our conversation, because there's a particular time before you both — before you became the chief and before you became the service secretary, when you met up together. And I want to visit that a little bit. But before we do, Gen. Goldfein — JD — you shared a story in the book, and obviously we want everyone to read it, so I'm not going to go tell the whole story, but you know where you took off one more time than you landed, and you had to, you know, you were hit, you had to evade and then you had to be rescued. There was a particular statement you made to identify yourself. And many of our Long Blue Line members will know this: fast, neat, average, friendly, good, good. In that moment of watching the sun start to rise while you're waiting to be retrieved, how did that come to your mind? Of all the things you could be thinking of to identify yourself? Gen. Dave Goldfein 13:53 Well, you know, it's interesting. So, you know, for those who've never, you know, had gone through a high-speed ejection, people asked me, what was like? I said, “Well, I used to be 6-foot-3. This is all that's left, right?” And you know, my job once I was on the ground was, quite frankly, not to goof it up. To let the rescue team do what the rescue team needed to do, and to play my part, which was to put them at the least amount of risk and be able to get out before the sun came up. And at the very end of the rescue when the helicopters — where I was actually vectoring them towards my location. And I had a compass in my hand, and I had my eyes closed, and I was just listening to the chopper noise and then vectoring them based on noise. And then eventually we got them to come and land, you know, right in front of me. Well, they always teach you, and they taught me here at the Academy during SERE training, which I think has been retitled, but it was SERE when we went through it, survival training. Now, I believe they teach you, “Hey, listen, you need to be nonthreatening, because the rescue team needs to know that you're not — this is not an ambush, that you are actually who you say you are. Don't hold up a weapon, be submissive and authenticate yourself. Well, to authenticate myself required me to actually try my flashlight. And I could see the enemy just over the horizon. And as soon as the helicopter landed, the enemy knew exactly where we were, and they came and running, and they came shooting, and they were raking the tree line with bullets. And so, you know, what I needed to do was to figure out a way to do an authentication. And I just, what came to mind was that training all those years ago, right here at the Academy, and I just said, “I could use a fast, neat, average rescue,” and friendly, good, good was on the way. Naviere Walkewicz 15:53 Wow, I just got chill bumps. Dr. Wilson, have you ever had to use that same kind of term, or, you know, reaching out to a grad in your time frequently? Dr. Heather Wilson 16:04 Yes, ma'am. And, you know, even in the last week, funny — I had an issue that I had to, I won't go into the details, but where there was an issue that might affect the reputation, not only of the university, but of one of our major industry partners, and it wasn't caused by either of us, but there was kind of a, kind of a middle person that was known to us that may not have been entirely acting with integrity. And I just looked up the company. The CEO is an Academy grad. So I picked up the phone and I called the office and we had a conversation. And I said, “Hey, I'd like to have a conversation with you, grad to grad.” And I said, “There are some issues here that I don't need to go into the details, but where I think you and I need to be a little careful about our reputations and what matters is my relationship as the university with you and your company and what your company needs in terms of talent. But wanted to let you know something that happened and what we're doing about it, but I wanted to make sure that you and I are clear.” And it was foundation of values that we act with integrity and we don't tolerate people who won't. Naviere Walkewicz 17:30 Yes, ma'am, I love that. The Long Blue Line runs deep that way, and that's a great example. JD, you spoke about, in the book, after the rescue — by the way, the picture in there of that entire crew was amazing. I love that picture. But you talked about getting back up in the air as soon as possible, without any pomp and circumstance. “Just get me back in the air and into the action.” I'd like to visit two things. One, you debriefed with the — on the check ride, the debrief on the check ride and why that was important. And then also you spoke about the dilemma of being dad and squad comm. Can you talk about that as well? Gen. Dave Goldfein 18:06 Yeah, the check ride. So when I was in Desert Storm, an incredible squadron commander named Billy Diehl, and one of the things that he told us after he led all the missions in the first 30 days or so, he said, “Look, there will be a lot of medals, you know, from this war.” He goes, “But I'm going to do something for you that happened for me in Vietnam. I'm going to fly on your wing, and I'm going to give you a check ride, and you're going to have a documented check ride of a combat mission that you led in your flying record. I'm doing that for you.” OK, so fast forward 10 years, now I'm the squadron commander, and I basically followed his lead. Said, “Hey, I want…” So that night, when I was shot down, I was actually flying on the wing of one of my captains, “Jammer” Kavlick, giving him a check ride. And so, of course, the rescue turns out — I'm sitting here, so it turned out great. And so I called Jammer into a room, and I said, “Hey, man, we never did the check ride.” I said, “You know, you flew a formation right over the top of a surface enemy missile that took out your wingman. That's not a great start.” And he just sort of… “Yes, sir, I know.” I said, “And then you led an all-night rescue that returned him to his family. That's pretty good recovery.” And so it's been a joke between us ever since. But in his personal — his flying record, he has a form that says, “I'm exceptionally, exceptionally qualified.” So I got back and I thought about this when I was on the ground collecting rocks for my daughters, you know, as souvenirs from Serbia. I got back, and I looked at my wing commander, and I said, “Hey, sir, I know you probably had a chance to think about this, but I'm not your young captain that just got shot down. I'm the squadron commander, and I've got to get my squadron back on the horse, and the only way to do that is for me to get back in the air. So if it's OK with you, I'm gonna go home. I'm gonna get crew rest and I'm going to fly tonight.” And he looked at me, and he looked at my wife, Dawn, who was there, and he goes, “If it's OK with her, it's OK with me.” Great. Dawn, just a champion, she said, “I understand it. That's what you got to do.” Because we were flying combat missions with our families at home, which is, was not in the squadron commander handbook, right? Pretty unique. What I found, though, was that my oldest daughter was struggling a little bit with it, and so now you've got this, you know, OK, I owe it to my squad to get right back up in the air and lead that night. And I owe it to my daughter to make sure that she's OK. And so I chose to take one night, make sure that she and my youngest daughter, Diana, were both, you know, in a good place, that they knew that everything's going to be OK. And then I got back up the next night. And in some ways, I didn't talk about it with anybody in the media for a year, because my dad was a Vietnam vet, I'd met so many of his friends, and I'd met so many folks who had actually gotten shot down one and two and three times over Vietnam, in Laos, right? You know what they did after they got rescued? They got back up. They just went back up in the air, right? No fanfare, no book tours, no, you know, nothing, right? It was just get back to work. So for me, it was a way of very quietly honoring the Vietnam generation, to basically do what they did and get back in the air quietly. And so that was what it was all about. Naviere Walkewicz 21:25 Dr. Wilson, how about for you? Because I know — I remember reading in the book you had a — there was something you said where, if your children called, no matter what they could always get through. So how have you balanced family? Dr. Heather Wilson 21:36 Work and life. And so, when I was elected to the Congress, my son was 4 years old. My daughter was 18 months. First of all, I married well, just like Dave. But I also think my obligations to my family don't end at the front porch, and I want to make a better world for them. But I also knew that I was a better member of Congress because I had a family, and that in some ways, each gave richness and dimension to the other. We figured out how to make it work as a family. I mean, both my children have been to a White House Christmas ball and the State of the Union, but we always had a rule that you can call no matter what. And I remember there were some times that it confounded people and, like, there was one time when President Bush — W. Bush, 43 — was coming to New Mexico for the first time, and he was going to do some events in Albuquerque. And they called and they said, “Well, if the congresswoman wants to fly in with him from Texas, you know, she can get off the airplane in her district with the president. And the answer was, “That's the first day of school, and I always take my kids to school the first day, so I'll just meet him here.” And the staff was stunned by that, like, she turns down a ride on Air Force One to arrive in her district with the president of the United States to take her kids to school. Yes, George Bush understood it completely. And likewise, when the vice president came, and it was, you know, that the one thing leading up to another tough election — I never had an easy election — and the one thing I said to my staff all the way through October, leading — “There's one night I need off, and that's Halloween, because we're going trick or treating.” And wouldn't you know the vice president is flying into New Mexico on Halloween for some event in New Mexico, and we told them, “I will meet them at the stairs when they arrive in Albuquerque. I'll have my family with them, but I won't be going to the event because we're going trick or treating.” And in my house, I have this great picture of the vice president of the United States and his wife and my kids in costume meeting. So most senior people understood that my family was important to me and everybody's family, you know — most people work to put food on the table, and if, as a leader, you recognize that and you give them grace when they need it, you will also have wonderful people who will work for you sometimes when the pay is better somewhere else because you respect that their families matter to them and making room for that love is important. Naviere Walkewicz 24:36 May I ask a follow on to that? Because I think that what you said was really important. You had a leader that understood. What about some of our listeners that maybe have leaders that don't value the same things or family in the way that is important. How do they navigate that? Dr. Heather Wilson 24:52 Sometimes you look towards the next assignment, or you find a place where your values are the same. And if we have leaders out there who are not being cognizant of the importance of family — I mean, we may recruit airmen but we retain families, and if we are not paying attention to that, then we will lose exceptional people. So that means that sometimes, you know, I give a lot of flexibility to people who are very high performers and work with me. And I also know that if I call them at 10 o'clock at night, they're going to answer the phone, and that's OK. I understand what it's like to — I remember, you know, I was in New Mexico, I was a member of Congress, somebody was calling about an issue in the budget, and my daughter, who was probably 4 at the time, had an ear infection, and it was just miserable. And so I'm trying to get soup into her, and this guy is calling me, and she's got — and it was one of the few times I said — and it was the chairman of a committee — I said, “Can I just call you back? I've got a kid with an ear infection…” And he had five kids. He said, “Oh, absolutely, you call me back.” So you just be honest with people about the importance of family. Why are we in the service? We're here to protect our families and everybody else's family. And that's OK.   Naviere Walkewicz 26:23 Yes, thank you for sharing that. Anything to add to that, JD? No? OK. Well, Dr. Wilson, I'd like to go into the book where you talk about your chapter on collecting tools, which is a wonderful chapter, and you talk about Malcolm Baldridge. I had to look him up — I'll be honest — to understand, as a businessman, his career and his legacy. But maybe share in particular why he has helped you. Or maybe you've leveraged his process in the way that you kind of think through and systematically approach things. Dr. Heather Wilson 26:49 Yeah, there was a movement in the, it would have been in the early '90s, on the Malcolm Baldrige Quality Awards. It came out of the Department of Commerce, but then it spread to many of the states and it was one of the better models I thought for how to run organizations strategically. And I learned about it when I was a small businessperson in Albuquerque, New Mexico. And I thought it was interesting. But the thing that I liked about it was it scaled. It was a little bit like broccoli, you know, it looks the same at the little flora as it does at the whole head, right? And so it kind of became a model for how I could use those tools about being data driven, strategically focused, process oriented that I could use in reforming a large and not very well functioning child welfare department when I became a cabinet secretary for children, youth and families, which was not on my how-to-run-my-career card. That was not in the plan, but again, it was a set of tools that I'd learned in one place that I brought with me and thought might work in another. Naviere Walkewicz 28:02 Excellent. And do you follow a similar approach, JD, in how you approach a big problem? Gen. Dave Goldfein 28:07 I think we're all lifelong students of different models and different frameworks that work. And there's not a one-size-fits-all for every organization. And the best leaders, I think, are able to tailor their approach based on what the mission — who the people are, what they're trying to accomplish. I had a chance to be a an aide de camp to a three-star, Mike Ryan, early in my career, and he went on to be chief of staff of the Air Force. And one of the frameworks that he taught me was he said, “If you really want to get anything done,” he said, “you've got to do three things.” He said, “First of all, you got to put a single person in charge.” He said, “Committees and groups solve very little. Someone's got to drive to work feeling like they've got the authority, the responsibility, the resources and everything they need to accomplish what it is that you want to accomplish. So get a single person in charge. Most important decision you will make as a leader, put the right person in charge. Second, that person owes you a plan in English. Not 15 PowerPoint slides, right, but something that clearly articulates in one to two pages, max, exactly what we're trying to accomplish. And the third is, you've got to have a way to follow up.” He said, “Because life gets in the way of any perfect plan. And what will happen is,” he goes, “I will tell you how many times,” he said, “that I would circle back with my team, you know, a couple months later and say, ‘How's it going?' And they would all look at each other and say, “Well, I thought you were in charge,” right? And then after that, once they figure out who was in charge, they said, “Well, we were working this plan, but we got, you know, we had to go left versus right, because we had this crisis, this alligator started circling the canoe, and therefore we had to, you know, take care of that,” right? He says, “As a leader, those are the three elements of any success. Put someone in charge. Build a plan that's understandable and readable, and always follow up. And I've used that as a framework, you know, throughout different organizations, even all the way as chief to find — to make sure that we had the right things. Dr. Heather Wilson 30:21 Even this morning, somebody came by who reminded us of a story that probably should have been in the book, where we had — it was a cyber vulnerability that was related to a particular piece of software widely deployed, and the CIO was having trouble getting the MAJCOMMS to kind of take it seriously. And they were saying, “Well, you know, we think maybe in 30, 60, 90 days, six months, we'll have it all done,” or whatever. So I said, “OK, let all the four-stars know. I want to be updated every 36 hours on how many of them, they still have, still have not updated.” I mean, this is a major cyber vulnerability that we knew was — could be exploited and wasn't some little thing. It was amazing; it got done faster. Naviere Walkewicz 31:11 No 90 days later. Oh, my goodness. Well, that was excellent and actually, I saw that in action in the story, in the book, after the attack on the Pentagon, and when you stood up and took charge, kind of the relief efforts, because many people were coming in that wanted to help, and they just needed someone to lead how that could happen. So you were putting into practice. Yes, sir. I'd like to get into where you talk about living your purpose, and that's a chapter in there. But you know, Gen. Goldfein, we have to get into this. You left the Academy as a cadet, and I think that's something that not many people are familiar with. You ride across the country on a bike with a guitar on your back for part of the time — and you sent it to Dawn after a little while — Mini-Bear in your shirt, to find your purpose. Was there a moment during the six months that you that hit you like lightning and you knew that this was your purpose, or was it a gradual meeting of those different Americans you kind of came across? Gen. Dave Goldfein 32:04 Definitely gradual. You know, it was something that just built up over time. I used to joke — we both knew Chairman John McCain and always had great respect for him. And I remember one time in his office, I said, “Chairman, I got to share with you that I lived in constant fear during every hearing that you were going to hold up a piece of paper on camera and say, ‘General, I got your transcript from the Air Force Academy. You got to be kidding me, right?' And he laughed, and he said, Trust me, if you looked at my transcript in Annapolis,” he goes, “I'm the last guy that would have ever asked that question.” But you know, the we made a mutual decision here, sometimes just things all come together. I'd written a paper on finding my purpose about the same time that there was a professor from Annapolis that was visiting and talking about a sabbatical program that Annapolis had started. And so they started talking about it, and then this paper made it and I got called in. They said, “Hey, we're thinking about starting this program, you know, called Stop Out, designed to stop people from getting out. We read your paper. What would you do if you could take a year off?” And I said, “Wow, you know, if I could do it, I'll tell you. I would start by going to Philmont Scout Ranch, you know, and be a backcountry Ranger,” because my passion was for the outdoors, and do that. “And then I would go join my musical hero, Harry Chapin.” Oh, by the way, he came to the United States Air Force Academy in the early '60s. Right? Left here, built a band and wrote the hit song Taxi. “So I would go join him as a roadie and just sort of see whether music and the outdoors, which my passions are, what, you know, what it's all about for me.” Well, we lost contact with the Chapin connection. So I ended up on this bicycle riding around the country. And so many families took me in, and so many towns that I rode into, you know, I found that if I just went to the library and said, “Hey, tell me a little bit about the history of this town,” the librarian would call, like, the last, you know, three or four of the seniors the town, they'd all rush over to tell me the story of, you know, this particular little town, right? And then someone would also say, “Hey, where are you staying tonight?” “I'm staying in my tent.” They said, “Oh, come stay with me.” So gradually, over time, I got to know America, and came to the conclusion when I had to make the decision to come back or not, that this country is really worth defending, that these people are hard-working, you know, that want to make the world better for their kids and their grandkids, and they deserve a United States Air Force, the best air force on the planet, to defend them. So, you know, when I came back my last two years, and I always love sharing this with cadets, because some of them are fighting it, some of them have embraced it. And all I tell them is, “Hey, I've done both. And all I can tell you is, the sooner you embrace it and find your purpose, this place is a lot more fun.” Naviere Walkewicz 35:13 Truth in that, yes, yes, well. And, Dr. Wilson, how did you know you were living your purpose? Dr. Heather Wilson 35:19 Well, I've had a lot of different chapters to my life. Yes, and we can intellectualize it on why we, you know, why I made a certain decision at a certain time, but there were doors that opened that I never even knew were there. But at each time and at each junction, there was a moment where somehow I just knew. And at South Dakota Mines is a good example. You know, I lost a race to the United States Senate. I actually had some interns — I benefited from a lousy job market, and I had fantastic interns, and we were helping them through the loss. You know, they're young. They were passionate. They, as Churchill said, “The blessing and the curse of representative government is one in the same. The people get what they choose.” And so I was helping them through that, and one of them said, “Well, Dr. Wilson, you're really great with students. You should be a college president somewhere. Texas Tech needs a president. You should apply there,” because that's where this kid was going to school. And I said, “Well, but I don't think they're looking for me.” But it did cause me to start thinking about it and I had come close. I had been asked about a college presidency once before, and I started looking at it and talking to headhunters and so forth. And initially, South Dakota Mines didn't seem like a great fit, because I'm a Bachelor of Science degree here, but my Ph.D. is in a nonscientific discipline, and it's all engineers and scientists. But as I went through the process, it just felt more and more right. And on the day of the final interviews, that evening, it was snowing in South Dakota, there was a concert in the old gym. I mean, this is an engineering school, and they had a faculty member there who had been there for 40 years, who taught choral music, and the students stood up, and they started singing their warm up, which starts out with just one voice, and eventually gets to a 16-part harmony and it's in Latin, and it's music is a gift from God, and they go through it once, and then this 40th anniversary concert, about 50 people from the audience stand up and start singing. It's like a flash mob, almost These were all alumni who came back. Forty years of alumni to be there for that concert for him. And they all went up on stage and sang together in this just stunning, beautiful concert by a bunch of engineers. And I thought, “There's something special going on here that's worth being part of,” and there are times when you just know. And the same with becoming cabinet secretary for children, youth and families — that was not in the plan and there's just a moment where I knew that was what I should do now. How I should use my gifts now? And you hope that you're right in making those decisions.   Naviere Walkewicz 38:43 Well, probably aligning with JD's point in the book of following your gut. Some of that's probably attached to you finding your purpose. Excellent. I'd like to visit the time Dr. Wilson, when you were helping President Bush with the State of the Union address, and in particular, you had grueling days, a lot of hours prepping, and when it was time for it to be delivered, you weren't there. You went home to your apartment in the dark. You were listening on the radio, and there was a moment when the Congress applauded and you felt proud, but something that you said really stuck with me. And he said, I really enjoy being the low-key staff member who gets stuff done. Can you talk more about that? Because I think sometimes we don't, you know, the unsung heroes are sometimes the ones that are really getting so many things done, but nobody knows. Dr. Heather Wilson 39:31 So, I'm something of an introvert and I've acquired extrovert characteristics in order to survive professionally. But when it comes to where I get my batteries recharged, I'm quite an introvert, and I really loved — and the same in international negotiations, being often the liaison, the back channel, and I did that in the conventional forces in Europe negotiations for the American ambassador. And in some ways, I think it might have been — in the case of the conventional forces in Europe negotiations, I was on the American delegation here. I was in Vienna. I ended up there because, for a bunch of weird reasons, then they asked me if I would go there for three months TDY. It's like, “Oh, three months TDY in Vienna, Austria. Sign me up.” But I became a very junior member on the delegation, but I was the office of the secretary of defense's representative, and walked into this palace where they were negotiating between what was then the 16 NATO nations and the seven Warsaw Pact countries. And the American ambassador turned to me, and he said during this several times, “I want you to sit behind me and to my right, and several times I'm going to turn and talk to you, and I just want you to lean in and answer.” I mean, he wasn't asking anything substantive, and I just, “Yes, sir.” But what he was doing was credentialing me in front of the other countries around that table. Now, I was very young, there were only two women in the room. The other one was from Iceland, and what he was doing was putting me in a position to be able to negotiate the back channel with several of our allies and with — this was six months or so now, maybe a year before the fall of the Berlin Wall. So things were changing in Eastern Europe, and so I really have always enjoyed just that quietly getting things done, building consensus, finding the common ground, figuring out a problem. Actually have several coffee mugs that just say GSD, and the other side does say, Get Stuff Done. And I like that, and I like people who do that. And I think those quiet — we probably don't say thank you enough to the quiet, hardworking people that just figure out how to get stuff done. Naviere Walkewicz 41:59 Well, I like how he credentialed you and actually brought that kind of credibility in that way as a leader. JD, how have you done that as a leader? Champion, some of those quiet, behind the scenes, unsung heroes. Gen. Dave Goldfein 42:11 I'm not sure where the quote comes from, but it's something to the effect of, “It's amazing what you can get done if you don't care who gets the credit.” There's so much truth to that. You know, in the in the sharing of success, right? As servant leaders, one of the things that I think both of us spend a lot of time on is to make sure that credit is shared with all the folks who, behind the scenes, you know, are doing the hard, hard work to make things happen, and very often, you know, we're the recipients of the thank yous, right? And the gratefulness of an organization or for somebody who's benefited from our work, but when you're at the very senior leaders, you know what you do is you lay out the vision, you create the environment to achieve that vision. But the hard, hard work is done by so many others around you. Today, in the audience when we were there at Polaris Hall, was Col. Dave Herndon. So Col. Dave Herndon, when he was Maj. Dave Herndon, was my aide de camp, and I can tell you that there are so many successes that his fingers are on that he got zero credit for, because he was quietly behind the scenes, making things happen, and that's just the nature of servant leadership, is making sure that when things go well, you share it, and when things go badly, you own it. Naviere Walkewicz 43:47 And you do share a really remarkable story in there about accountability. And so we won't spend so much time talking about that, but I do want to go to the point where you talk about listening, and you say, listening is not passive; it's active and transformative. As servant leaders, have you ever uncovered challenges that your team has experienced that you didn't have the ability to fix and you know, what action did you take in those instances? Dr. Heather Wilson 44:09 You mean this morning? All the time. And sometimes — and then people will give you grace, if you're honest about that. You don't make wild promises about what you can do, but then you sit and listen and work through and see all right, what is within the realm of the possible here. What can we get done? Or who can we bring to the table to help with a set of problems? But, there's no… You don't get a — when I was president of South Dakota Mines, one of the people who worked with me, actually gave me, from the toy store, a magic wand. But it doesn't work. But I keep it in my office, in case, you know… So there's no magic wands, but being out there listening to understand, not just listening to refute, right? And then seeing whether there are things that can be done, even if there's some things you just don't have the answers for, right? Gen. Dave Goldfein 45:11 The other thing I would offer is that as senior leadership and as a senior leadership team, you rarely actually completely solve anything. What you do is improve things and move the ball. You take the hand you're dealt, right, and you find creative solutions. You create the environment, lay out the vision and then make sure you follow up, move the ball, and if you get at the end of your tenure, it's time for you to move on, and you've got the ball moved 20, 30, yards down the field. That's actually not bad, because most of the things we were taking on together, right, were big, hard challenges that we needed to move the ball on, right? I If you said, “Hey, did you completely revitalize the squadrons across the United States Air Force?” I will tell you, absolutely not. Did we get the ball about 20, 30 yards down the field? And I hope so. I think we did. Did we take the overhaul that we did of officer development to be able to ensure that we were producing the senior leaders that the nation needs, not just the United States Air Force needs? I will tell you that we didn't solve it completely, but we moved the ball down the field, and we did it in a way that was able to stick. You know, very often you plant seeds as a leader, and you never know whether those seeds are going to, you know, these seeds are ideas, right? And you never know whether the seeds are going to hit fertile soil or rocks. And I would often tell, you know, young leaders too. I said, you know, in your last few months that you're privileged to be in the position of leadership, you've got two bottles on your hip. You're walking around with — one of them's got fertilizer and one of them's got Roundup. And your job in that final few months is to take a look at the seeds that you planted and truly determine whether they hit fertile soil and they've grown roots, and if they've grown roots, you pull out the fertilizer, and the fertilizer you're putting on it is to make it part of the institution not associated with you, right? You want somebody some years from now say, “Hey, how do we ever do that whole squadron thing?” The right answer is, “I have no idea, but look at how much better we are.” That's the right answer, right? That's the fertilizer you put on it. But it's just equally important to take a look at the ideas that, just for whatever reason, sometimes beyond your control — they just didn't stick right. Get out the Roundup. Because what you don't want to do is to pass on to your successor something that didn't work for you, because it probably ain't going to work for her. Dr. Heather Wilson 47:46 That's right, which is one of the rules of leadership is take the garbage out with you when you go. Naviere Walkewicz 47:51 I like that. I like that a lot. Well, we are — just a little bit of time left. I want to end this kind of together on a story that you shared in the book about laughter being one of the tools you share. And after we share this together, I would like to ask you, I know we talked about mirror checks, but what are some things that you guys are doing every day to be better as well, to continue learning. But to get to the laughter piece, you mentioned that laughter is an underappreciated tool and for leaders, something that you both share. I want to talk about the time when you got together for dinner before you began working as chief and service secretary, and I think you may have sung an AF pro song. We're not going to ask you to sing that today, unless you'd like to JD? But let's talk about laughter.   Gen. Dave Goldfein 48:31 The dean would throw me out. Naviere Walkewicz 48:33 OK, OK, we won't have you sing that today. But how have you found laughter — when you talk about — when the questions and the problems come up to you?   Dr. Heather Wilson 48:40 So I'm going to start this because I think Dave Goldfein has mastered this leadership skill of how to use humor, and self-deprecating humor, better than almost any leader I've ever met. And it's disarming, which is a great technique, because he's actually wicked smart. But it's also people walk in the room knowing if you're going to a town hall meeting or you're going to be around the table, at least sometime in that meeting, we're going to laugh. And it creates a warmth and people drop their guard a little bit. You get to the business a little bit earlier. You get beyond the standard PowerPoint slides, and people just get down to work. And it just — people relax. And I think Dave is very, very good at it. Now, my husband would tell you that I was raised in the home for the humor impaired, and I have been in therapy with him for almost 35 years.   Naviere Walkewicz 49:37 So have you improved? Dr. Heather Wilson 49:39 He thinks I've made some progress.   Naviere Walkewicz 49:41 You've moved the ball.   Dr. Heather Wilson 49:44 Yes. Made some progress. I still don't — I used to start out with saying the punch line and then explain why it was funny. Naviere Walkewicz 49:52 I'm in your camp a little bit. I try. My husband says, “Leave the humor to me.” Dr. Heather Wilson 49:54 Yeah, exactly. You understand. Gen. Dave Goldfein 49:58 I used to joke that I am a member of the Class of 1981['82 and '83]. I am the John Belushi of the United States Air Force Academy, a patron saint of late bloomers. But you know, honestly, Heather doesn't give herself enough credit for building an environment where, you know, folks can actually do their very best work. That's one of the things that we do, right? Because we have — the tools that we have available to be able to get things done very often, are the people that are we're privileged to lead and making sure that they are part of an organization where they feel valued, where we're squinting with our ears. We're actually listening to them. Where they're making a contribution, right? Where they believe that what they're being able to do as part of the institution or the organization is so much more than they could ever do on their own. That's what leadership is all about. Dr. Heather Wilson 51:05 You know, we try to — I think both of us see the humor in everyday life, and when people know that I have a desk plate that I got in South Dakota, and it doesn't say “President.” It doesn't say “Dr. Wilson.” It says, “You're kidding me, right?” Because once a week, more frequently as secretary and chief, but certainly frequently as a college president, somebody is going to walk in and say, “Chief, there's something you need to know.” And if they know they're going to get blasted out of the water or yelled at, people are going to be less likely to come in and tell you, right, what you need to know. But if you're at least willing to laugh at the absurdity of the — somebody thought that was a good idea, you know. My gosh, let's call the lawyers or whatever. But you know, you've just got to laugh, and if you laugh, people will know that you just put things in perspective and then deal with the problem. Naviere Walkewicz  52:06 Well, it connects us as humans. Yeah. Well, during my conversation today with Dr. Heather Wilson and Gen. Dave Goldfein — JD — two lessons really stood out to me. Leadership is not about avoiding the fall, but about how high you bounce back and how your recovery can inspire those you lead. It's also about service, showing up, doing the hard work and putting others before yourself with humility, integrity and working together. Dr. Wilson, Gen. Goldfein, thank you for showing us how courage, compassion and connection — they're not soft skills. They're actually the edge of hard leadership. And when you do that and you lead with service, you get back up after every fall. You encourage others to follow and do the same. Thank you for joining us for this powerful conversation. You can find Get Back Up: Lessons in Servant Leadership, wherever books are sold. And learn more at getbackupeadership.com. If today's episode inspired you, please share it with someone who can really benefit in their own leadership journey. As always, keep learning. Keep getting back up. Keep trying. I'm Naviere Walkewicz, Class of '99. This has been Focus On Leadership. Until next time. Producer This edition of Focus on Leadership, the accelerated leadership series, was recorded on Monday, Oct. 6, 2025.   KEYWORDS Leadership, servant leadership, resilience, humility, integrity, influence, teamwork, family, trust, listening, learning, purpose, growth, accountability, service, courage, compassion, balance, values, inspiration.     The Long Blue Line Podcast Network is presented by the U.S. Air Force Academy Association & Foundation  

Double Tap Episode 442 This episode of Double Tap is brought to you by: C&G Holsters, Die Free Co., Night Fision, Blue Alpha, Second Call Defense, and Swampfox Optics   Welcome to Double Tap, episode 442! Your hosts tonight are Jeremy Pozderac, Aaron Krieger, Nick Lynch, and me Shawn Herrin, welcome to the show! Text Dear WLS or Reviews +1 743 500 2171 - Dear WLS Dependable Don - So what holsters do you run with your fanny pack? I got the qilo prison wallet which is Velcro backed so crossbreed has holsters that work but not crazy about it. Switch to a blapha or are Velcro backed holsters acceptable? Adam W - I am looking for a red dot that can stand up to a .357 magnum Chippa Rhino. I have put 2 other dots on it I had laying around and now I just want one I don't have worry about. I was thinking the Judge XL from Gideon. Would this be a good choice? The use case for this gun is local matches and range toy. Also, I am looking for a holster for this setup. The Chippa Rhino is the 60ds model with the pic rail in front of the cylinder. Your help is much appreciated. Scanks Adam Luis G - I am in Florida and do a lot of lake bank fishing. What would be a good caliber to carry and what type of rounds to use against alligators? Should I run a couple of snake shot rounds first for moccasins then the gator rounds? Jack B - Matt diniman just did a kickstarter campaign where 2 of the reward tiers included getting killed in a future DCC book. If you were get this prize for another cast member, which option would you choose and how would they die? Option, They are a crawler who gets killed. Option 2, They are a monster or NPC that gets killed by Donut and T-bagged by mongo. Ny(e)gerski - "This one is mostly for Mr. Saggins. Scroto, what are you signed up to hunt this year? I feel like we haven't had any 47 minute long hunting stories in a while and are due for one or 2. P.S.....are you sure you and Kevin from Q aren't kindred spirits?.....I can't tell who tells longer hunting stories... Pee Pee S.....i had something for here, but forgot....and now got you to say pee pee...." Eli K - I am building a new house soon. It will have a vault room in the basement. The floor, ceiling, and all four walls will be poured concrete. Other than that, I'm leaving it unfinished after framing and insulation, and I will take it form there. It will have HVAC and electrical available. What else should I do? Seems like a good idea to put a drain in. I'm tentatively planning to do Lockdown walls. Anything other suggestions? Jerry F - Do either of you guys have any idea where i can find Accurate Nitro 100NF for sale? I've been checking all of the reputable dealers online (Brownells, Midway usa, ammoseek etc) and I haven't been able to find any 4 or 8lb bottles all summer. I shoot trap every weekend with my dad and our local league just started and I commonly go through a hundred plus rounds each weekend. I believe accurate is a division of Hodgdens. Any help would be greatly appreciated. And in your opinions where is all the powder going? Love the show, thank you. Jeremy is not a cunt, he just doesn't have any patience for stupidity. John J - I've recently realized I'm a fan of both Jeremy and Aaron. Which probably means I'm either deeply complex, or there's something wrong with me. Thoughts? Also, would love to see some more Dangerous Freedom videos. I am looking forward to the red dot - magnifier comparison. One of my AR's has a CompM5 with a 3x magnifier. I want to love it for what the combo cost, but I find myself removing the magnifier more often than not. Thanks for the show.   The winner of this week's swag pack is John J! To win your own, go to welikeshooting.com/dashboard and submit a question!   Gun Industry News O/LINK Modular Trauma Panel (MTP) Analysis: A low-profile, "cyberpunk" inspired attachment designed by Evan Ohl to extend MOLLE webbing below mounted pouches for medical gear. Made from rigid yet lightweight 8-layer Tegris®, it attaches hardware-free to 4 columns of webbing and includes shock cord for securing items. Price / Availability: $25.00 / Available now at evanohl.com (Made to order, ~2 week lead time). Zaffiri Precision to Unveil Their First Complete Pistols at SHOT 2026 Analysis: Zaffiri Precision is shifting focus from à la carte parts to pre-configured complete uppers and will debut their first three complete pistols. The new lineup features five tiers (ZULU, ECHO, X-RAY, VECTOR, and IBS), each available in standard or "Elite" configurations with upgrades like threaded barrels and tritium night sights. Price / Availability: Pricing not listed / Unveiling at SHOT Show 2026; product shift begins January 2026. Weatherby Model 307 Cuts Barrel to 16 Inches for 7mm Backcountry Analysis: Weatherby introduces the Model 307 Alpine MDT SB, a compact rifle optimized for suppressor use and backcountry hunting. It features a 16-inch barrel specifically paired with Federal Premium's 7mm Backcountry ammunition to maintain performance in a short package. Built on the Model 307 action (Remington 700 footprint compatible), it sits in an MDT HNT26 carbon fiber chassis with a folding stock, reducing overall length by over 9 inches for transport. Price / Availability: $3,249 MSRP / Released late Dec 2025; available now. Turkish MMT Machine Gun Completes NATO Qualification Tests Analysis: The MKE MMT (Milli Makineli Tüfek) is a Turkish 7.62x51mm machine gun that has passed NATO qualification. Based on the Soviet PKM design (two-stage feed, right-side feed), it features modern updates like a detachable trigger mechanism, receiver cover Picatinny rail, and a new brass deflector. Weighing only 8 kg (17.6 lbs), it is lighter than the M240 and HK421. Price / Availability: No civilian price listed / Cleared for serial production as of Dec 2025; likely for Turkish military and potential export to African or former Warsaw Pact nations. Henry Honors America's 250th With Ultra-Limited Spirit of ‘76 Rifle Analysis: A highly exclusive collector's edition celebrating the U.S. Semiquincentennial (250th anniversary). Built on the "New Original Henry" platform (1860 patent reproduction) in .44-40 WCF. Features an engraved nickel-plated brass receiver with 24-karat gold accents depicting Revolutionary War imagery (Independence Hall, George Washington's sword, early flags). Includes a polished blued octagon barrel, hand-selected rosewood stock, and crescent buttplate. Price / Availability: $4,115 MSRP / Limited to 250 units; sold factory-direct. Released Dec 2025. Less Length, Same Strength: Samson Unveils The SAS-K Stock Analysis: A compact variant of the Samson Adjustable Stock (SAS) system, the SAS-K reduces the length of pull (LOP) by one inch (9"-10") compared to the standard model while maintaining the same durability and features. It includes a side-folding mechanism, 5-position adjustable LOP, 4-position adjustable cheek riser, and ambidextrous QD sling points. Designed for body armor users or confined spaces. Price / Availability: $315.65 / Available now. Badger Ordnance Forged Condition One Charging Handle (C1CH) Analysis: The C1CH differentiates itself by being machined from forgings rather than billet or extrusion for superior strength. It features a raised gas fence for gas mitigation (ideal for suppressed shooting), ergonomic ambidextrous latches with vertical serrations, and snag-free rounded edges. The width is streamlined at 2.42 inches, and it weighs 1.1 oz. Price / Availability: $100.00 / Available now in 5.56 (Black/Tan); 7.62 and MCX versions coming in 2026. CrossBreed Holsters Introduces The LightGuard Holster Analysis: The LightGuard is a new IWB holster built on CrossBreed's MultiFlex platform, specifically designed for pistols with weapon-mounted lights. It features a hybrid construction with a replaceable light-specific Kydex lower shell (allowing light upgrades without replacing the whole holster) and an injection-molded adjustable upper shell for firearm retention. It supports multiple mounting clips and carry positions (appendix, strong-side, cross-draw). Price / Availability: $44.95 (Base Price) / Available now directly from CrossBreed. New Product Highlight: Build A Custom Rifle Case With Lynx Defense Analysis: Lynx Defense now offers fully customizable rifle cases made in the USA (North Carolina) using 1,000D Cordura. Users can mix and match colors for the main body (solids, camo, splatter), exterior pocket, zippers, and logo. Available in four sizes: Byte (21" for PDWs), Bureau (32" for SBRs), Bronx (36" for 16" carbines), and Gigabyte (42" for long rifles). Price / Availability: $319.99 - $644.99 depending on size / Available now (made to order). Pistollo 77° Secures U.S. Distributor - Limited Launch Edition Planned Analysis: The Pistollo 77° semi-automatic pistol is coming to the U.S. civilian market via exclusive distributor Deluxe Imports (Boerne, Texas). The first release will be a "Launch Edition" designed for collectors with unique elements. To comply with U.S. regulations and market needs, the U.S. version features a rear Picatinny rail for braces, an upper receiver rail for optics, and a 1/2×28 threaded muzzle. A proprietary stabilizing brace is also in development. Price / Availability: Pricing not listed / Launch planned for Q2 2026; waitlist currently exceeds 2,000 customers.   Before we let you go - Join Gun Owners of America   Tell your friends about the show and get backstage access by joining the Gun Cult at theguncult.com.   No matter how tough your battle is today, we want you here fight with us tomorrow. Don't struggle in silence, you can contact the suicide prevention line by dialing 988 from your phone.

Send us a textToday, we begin a multipart series on the Cold War, a battle of ideologies between the United States and the Soviet Union.Support the show

Welcome to The Daily Wrap Up, an in-depth investigatory show dedicated to bringing you the most relevant independent news, as we see it, from the last 24 hours (12/10/25). As always, take the information discussed in the video below and research it for yourself, and come to your own conclusions. Anyone telling you what the truth is, or claiming they have the answer, is likely leading you astray, for one reason or another. Stay Vigilant. !function(r,u,m,b,l,e){r._Rumble=b,r[b]||(r[b]=function(){(r[b]._=r[b]._||[]).push(arguments);if(r[b]._.length==1){l=u.createElement(m),e=u.getElementsByTagName(m)[0],l.async=1,l.src="https://rumble.com/embedJS/u2q643"+(arguments[1].video?'.'+arguments[1].video:'')+"/?url="+encodeURIComponent(location.href)+"&args="+encodeURIComponent(JSON.stringify([].slice.apply(arguments))),e.parentNode.insertBefore(l,e)}})}(window, document, "script", "Rumble");   Rumble("play", {"video":"v70ocx8","div":"rumble_v70ocx8"}); Video Source Links (In Chronological Order): https://www.thelastamericanvagabond.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/Bondi_Memo_On_Countering_Domestic_Terrorism_And_Organized_Political_Violence.pdf A Journalist Reported From Palestine. YouTube Deleted His Account Claiming He's an Iranian Agent. (22) Thomas Massie on X: "Second federal judge has just approved release of Epstein (Maxwell) grand jury material based on the Epstein Files Transparency Act @RepRoKhanna and I ushered through Congress (and Trump signed). It's happening. https://t.co/1sWjearTKJ https://t.co/KIah7Szjgu" / X (22) Chris Rossini on X: "NATO should have disbanded when the Warsaw Pact disbanded in 1991. 34 years later, we're still waiting to get rid of it. Massie is right as usual." / X (22) Thomas Massie on X: "Why does this Jocelyn Ballantine still have a job in @realDonaldTrump and @AGPamBondi ‘s DOJ ? And why is she working on the pipe bomb case after what she did in the past?" / X (22) Jason Bassler on X: "Let me get this straight. One month after investigators found a 94% gait match between the J6 pipe bomber and a former U.S. Capitol Police officer, the FBI suddenly — after 5 years, rolls out a suspect conveniently self‑branded as an “anarchist.” Is anyone buying this? https://t.co/SnDGklTJBu" / X (22) Grok / X (22) Grok / X (22) Grok / X DOJ fails to secure new Letitia James indictment from grand jury Alina Habba resigns after court disqualified her from being New Jersey's top prosecutor (22) Thomas Massie on X: "This week we vote on the National Defense Authorization Act. I offered these amendments to restore freedom, promote peace, cut billions of dollars in foreign aid, and put America First. @SpeakerJohnson and the Rules Committee chose to prevent any amendments from coming to a vote. https://t.co/7rFVBLT1hw" / X (23) Rand Paul on X: "That's not America First. U.S. Congress approves defense bill with USD 800M in aid for Ukraine https://t.co/D7mfi8zBeu" / X Donald Trump Articles of Impeachment Update Announced in Congress %%page%% %%sep%% %%sitename%% Donald Trump articles of impeachment update announced in Congress - Newsweek New Tab Trump says U.S. seized oil tanker off the coast of Venezuela (23) The Last American Vagabond on X: "https://t.co/viqhDK6xJp" / X (23) The Recount on X: "Trump: I'd have “no problem” releasing the video of the second Venezuela boat strike. Trump, 5 days later: I never said that. This is ABC fake news. https://t.co/P2jWCNHfVJ" / X (23) HOT SPOT on X: "

Elite Politics and the First Crack in the Iron Curtain. Matthew Longo details the July 1989 Warsaw Pact meeting where reformer Nemeth faced off against old-guard Ceausescu. Nemeth had received Gorbachev's "green light" to dismantle the Iron Curtain's deadly fencing in Hungary. Gorbachev secretly confirmed the presence of a nuclear arsenal, urging discretion, revealing how delicate his own political position was. Guest: Matthew Longo.

EPISODE 626 - Suzanne Parry - The Soviet Experience Through Historical Fiction, Pentagon Tour, Iron Maiden of StockholmRaised in a quiet rural corner of western New York State, I didn't always want to be a writer. I was, however, always surrounded by books. Bookcases in every room. Entire walls of them. My mother was an avid reader and regular trips to the library were part of my childhood. My stepfather was a creative writing professor and words floated through the rooms and into the nooks and crannies of that pre-Civil War era farmhouse. Books weren't my escape so much as they were part of my daily diet. At twenty I made a list of things I wanted to accomplish and “write a book” was on it. That list included both measurable things like “learn five foreign languages” and “complete a significant athletic achievement” and less quantifiable items like “make the world a better place.” During the Cold War of my high school and college years, I very much wanted to help reduce the possibility of conflict between the US and the USSR.I earned a bachelor's degree at Purdue University, and then continued my Russian studies at the Pushkin Russian Language Institute in Moscow. I studied Public and International Affairs at Princeton University, received a Master's in 1982 and started a career in public service with the US Department of Defense. My work in the Office of the Secretary of Defense focused on European security issues between NATO, Warsaw Pact, and neutral nations. While at the Pentagon I helped negotiate the Conference on Disarmament in Europe, the first security agreement of the Gorbachev era. At the Stockholm talks as we often called the CDE, a number of my European colleagues jokingly called me the “Iron Maiden of Stockholm” in a not altogether flattering reference to British PM Margaret Thatcher, the original tough-as-nails female negotiator. The many months I spent crafting an agreement with diplomats from thirty-five nations, sitting at a table alongside NATO colleagues and opposite Soviet and Warsaw Pact counterparts, was my great honor.After this heady time, I put most of my energy into raising a large family (requiring its own negotiating skills). Funny enough, having a family was not on that list and yet today I would say without hesitation that the most impactful (and most difficult) thing I've ever done is raise four children. I lived in several countries, including the former Soviet Union, Belgium, Sweden, Singapore, and Germany. Throughout adulthood I've been a committed runner. I've completed dozens of marathons in more than twenty countries, including the fifty-six-mile Comrades Marathon in South Africa. I eventually landed in the wonderful and welcoming city of Portland, Oregon as a single parent. There, I coached high school cross country and track at a large public high school before deciding it wasn't too late to dust off that forty-year-old list and write a book.I now divide my time between Portland and Washington, DC, but also travel for fun, for research, and best of all, to visit my children and grandchildren.https://suzanneparrywrites.com/Support the show___https://livingthenextchapter.com/podcast produced by: https://truemediasolutions.ca/Coffee Refills are always appreciated, refill Dave's cup here, and thanks!https://buymeacoffee.com/truemediaca

This week we talk about Article 4, big sticks, and spheres of influence.We also discuss Moldova, super powers, and new fronts.Recommended Book: More Everything Forever by Adam BeckerTranscriptThe North Atlantic Treaty Organization, or NATO, was originally formed in 1949 in the wake of World War 2 and at the beginning of the Cold War.At that moment, the world was beginning to orient toward what we might think of as the modern global order, which at the time was predicated on having two superpowers—the US and the Soviet Union—and the world being carved up into their respective spheres of influence.NATO was formed as the military component of that protection effort, as the Soviets (and other powers who had occupied that land in the past) had a history of turning their neighbors into client states, because their territory provides little in the way of natural borders. Their inclination, then, was to either invade or overthrow neighboring governments so they could function as buffers between the Soviet Union and its potential enemies.The theory behind NATO is collective security: if anyone attacks one of the member nations, the others will come to their aid. Article 5 of the NATO treaty says that an attack against one member is considered an attack against all members, and while this theoretically would be applied against any would-be attacker, it was 100% created so that the Soviets and their Warsaw Pact allies knew that if they attacked, for instance, Norway, the other NATO nations—including, importantly, the United States, which again, was one of just two superpowers in the world at that point, all the other powers, like the UK and France having been devastated by WWII—would join in their defense.NATO, today, is quite a bit bigger than it was originally: it started out with just 12 countries in Europe and North America, and as of 2025, there are 32, alongside a handful of nations that are hoping to join, and are at various points along the way to possibly someday becoming member states.What I'd like to talk about today are recent provocations by the Soviet Union's successor state, Russia, against NATO, and what these provocations might portend for the future of the region.—In early 2014, Russia invaded—in a somewhat deniable way, initially funding local rabble-rousers and using unmarked soldiers and weapons—the eastern portion of Ukraine, and then annexed an important Black Sea region called Crimea. Then in early 2022, Russia launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine, massing hundreds of thousands of military assets on their shared border before plunging toward Ukraine's capitol and other vital strategic areas.Against the odds, as Ukraine is small and poor compared to Russia, and has a far smaller military, as well, Ukrainians managed to hold off the Russian assault, and today, about 3.5 years later, Ukraine continues to hold Russia off, though Russian forces have been making incremental gains in the eastern portion of the country over the past year, and Russian President Putin seems convinced he can hold the Donbas region, in particular, even if peace is eventually declared.At the moment, though, peace seems unlikely, as Russian forces continue to grind against increasingly sophisticated and automated Ukrainian defenses, the invading force, in turn, bolstered by North Korean ammunition and troops. Ukraine's exhausted soldiery is periodically and irregularly bulwarked by resources from regional and far-flung allies, helping them stay in the game, and they're fleshing out their locally grown defense industry, which has specialized in asymmetric weaponry like drones and rockets, but Russia still has the advantage by pretty much any metric we might use to gauge such things.Over the past three weeks, concerns that this conflict might spill over into the rest of Europe have been heightened by Russian provocations along the eastern edge of the NATO alliance.Russia flew drones into Poland and Romania, fighter jets into Estonia, and aggressively flew fighters over a Germany Navy frigate in the Baltic Sea. Article 4 of the NATO treaty was invoked, which is the lead-up invocation to an eventual invocation of Article 5, which would be a full-fledged defense, by the bloc, against someone who attacked a NATO member.And that's on top of Russia's persistent and ongoing efforts to influence politics in Moldova, which held an election over the weekend that could serve as a foot in the door for Russian influence campaigns and Russia-stoked coups within the EU, or could become one more hardened border against such aggressions, depending on how the election pans out. The final results aren't in as of the day I'm recording this episode, but there are fears that if the pro-Russian parties win, they'll turn the country—which is located on Ukraine's borders, opposite Russia—into another Russian puppet state, similar to Belarus, but if the pro-Russian parties don't do well, they'll try to launch a coup, because Russian disinformation in the country has been so thorough, and has indicated, in essence, if they lose, the process was rigged.All of which is occurring at a moment in which NATO's most powerful and spendy member, by far, the US, is near-universally pulling out of international activities, the second Trump administration proving even more antagonistic toward allies than the first one, and even more overt in its disdain for alliances like NATO, as well. It's probably worth noting here, too, that part of why things are so hectic in Moldova is that the US government has stopped pressuring social networks to tamp down on overt misinformation and propaganda from Russia-aligned groups, and that's led to significant fog of war for this most recent election.Considering the US's recent unreliability, and in some cases complete absence regarding NATO and similar alliances and pacts, it's perhaps prudent that NATO member states have recently agreed to up their individual spending on defense, all of these states meeting or exceeding their pre-2025-summit goal of 2% of GDP, that target increasing to 5% by 2035.This is notable in part because it's something Trump demanded, and that demand seems to have worked and probably been a good idea, but this is also notable because of what it represents: a cessation of leadership by the US in this alliance.The US has long been the big stick wielded by its European allies, and this administration basically said, hey, you need to make your own big sticks, you may not have access to our weapons and support anymore. And while it will still take a while to both get their funding up to snuff and to spend those funds appropriately, outfitting their defenses and shoring up their numbers, this would seem to be a step in that direction—though there's simmering concern that it might be too little, too late.That concern is mostly held by Russia-watchers who have noted a big pivot by Russia's leadership, and in the Russian economy.Over the past 3.5 years since it invaded Ukraine, that invasion taking a lot longer than they thought it would, Russia has shifted into a total war stance, its entire economy becoming reliant on its continued invasion of Ukraine.Should that invasion end or ebb, or should it continue to fail to give the Russian government enough successes, so it can brag about how well it's doing to its citizenry and oligarchs, it would probably need another target—another front in the war that it can open to justify the continued churning-out of weapons and soldiers, and the continued spending of a huge chunk of its GDP toward the military. Lacking that churn, it's economy would be in even worse straits than it's in, today, and lacking that cause, it's possible support for the government could collapse.It's also been posited that it could be a disaster Putin's regime if too many Russian veterans, wounded and traumatized from their time on the front lines in Ukraine, were to arrive back in Russia all at once. That's the sort of situation that could lead to an uprising against the government, or bare minimum a lot of turmoil that they don't want to deal with. Having another front, another battle to send them to, would solve that problem; it would be an excuse to keep them fighting external enemies, rather than looking for internal ones.Russia's Foreign Minister, Sergey Lavrov, recently said that NATO and the EU have declared a “real war” against Russia by participating in the conflict; by providing arms and financial support for Ukraine.This is, of course, a silly thing to say, though it is the kind of statement an aggressor makes when they want to make themselves sound like the victim, and want to justify moving on to victimize someone else. You attacked us for no reason! We are thus completely within our rights to defend ourselves by attacking you; we are in the right here, you're the bad guys.This could be just saber-rattling, and it usually is. Lavrov says things like this all the time, and it's almost always state-sanctioned bluster. The drone and jet flyovers, likewise, could be meant to send a signal to the EU and NATO: back off, this is not your fight, but if you continue supporting Ukraine, we'll make it your fight, and we think we can beat you.It's also possible, though, that these actions are meant to test NATO defenses at a moment in which the US is largely absent from the region, China and Russia have never been tighter, including in supporting each other's regional goals and militaries, and in which Russia seemingly has many reasons, mostly internal, to expand the scope of the conflict.Show Noteshttps://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/pistorius-russian-jet-flew-over-142629311.html?guccounter=1https://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/19/world/europe/russian-fighter-jets-estonia-nato.htmlhttps://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/07/business/russia-disinformation-trump.htmlhttps://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/20/world/europe/poland-drones-russia-nato.htmlhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prelude_to_the_Russian_invasion_of_Ukrainehttps://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c5ygjv0r2myohttps://thehill.com/policy/international/5522862-lavrov-nato-eu-russia/https://www.cnn.com/2025/09/27/europe/putin-hybrid-war-europe-risks-intlhttps://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/27/world/europe/russia-europe-poland-drones-moldova-election.htmlhttps://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-poland-drones-sanctions-rafale-429ff46431a916feff629f26a5d0c0dahttps://www.reuters.com/world/europe/denmark-has-no-plans-invoke-natos-article-4-foreign-minister-says-2025-09-26/https://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2025/09/27/More-drones-spotted-Denmark/4031758983759/https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-war-poland-drones-defense-kyiv-ec284922b946737b98a28f179ac0c5a0https://apnews.com/article/poland-airspace-drones-russia-airport-closed-cf7236040d8c7858104a29122aa1bd57https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-war-poland-drones-fa2d5d8981454499fa611a1468a5de8bhttps://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-war-poland-drones-1232774279039f9e5c5b78bd58686cb9https://apnews.com/article/british-intelligence-mi6-russia-war-443df0c37ff2254fcc33d5425e3beaa6https://apnews.com/article/nato-article-4-explainer-russia-poland-estonia-26415920dfb8458725bda517337adb12https://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/nato-article-4-russia/https://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/28/world/europe/moldova-election-russia-eu.htmlhttps://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_49187.htmhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATOhttps://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_52044.htm This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit letsknowthings.substack.com/subscribe

On the 57th anniversary of the Soviet-led Warsaw Pact invasion, Martina Greňová Šimkovičová reflects on the memories of those who were in their twenties at the time, filled with hopes for a better future. Radio broadcasts played a crucial role during those days when tanks rolled through the streets of former Czechoslovakia. The bravery of radio workers is commemorated by a plaque in Bratislava's Primatial Square, installed in 2018. Valuable radio recordings, collected by Boris Koreň, further enrich the narrative.

On the 57th anniversary of the Soviet-led Warsaw Pact invasion, Martina Greňová Šimkovičová reflects on the memories of those who were in their twenties at the time, filled with hopes for a better future. Radio broadcasts played a crucial role during those days when tanks rolled through the streets of former Czechoslovakia. The bravery of radio workers is commemorated by a plaque in Bratislava's Primatial Square, installed in 2018. Valuable radio recordings, collected by Boris Koreň, further enrich the narrative.

On February 20, 1974, while recovering from the effects of sodium pentothal administered for the extraction of an impacted wisdom tooth, Dick received a home delivery of Darvon from a young woman. When he opened the door, he was struck by the dark-haired girl's beauty, and was especially drawn to her golden necklace. He asked her about its curious fish-shaped design. As she was leaving, she replied: "This is a sign used by the early Christians." Dick called the symbol the "vesicle pisces". This name seems to have been based on his conflation of two related symbols, the Christian ichthys symbol (two intersecting arcs delineating a fish in profile), which the woman was wearing, and the vesica piscis.[39] Dick recounted that as the sun glinted off the gold pendant, the reflection caused the generation of a "pink beam" of light that mesmerized him. He came to believe the beam imparted wisdom and clairvoyance, and also believed it to be intelligent. On one occasion, he was startled by a separate recurrence of the pink beam, which imparted the information that his infant son was ill. The Dicks rushed the child to the hospital, where the illness was confirmed by professional diagnosis.[40][verification needed] After the woman's departure, Dick began experiencing strange hallucinations. Although initially attributing them to side effects from medication, he considered this explanation implausible after weeks of continued hallucination. He told Charles Platt: "I experienced an invasion of my mind by a transcendentally rational mind, as if I had been insane all my life and suddenly I had become sane."[41] Throughout February and March 1974, Dick experienced a series of hallucinations which he referred to as "2-3-74",[26][42] shorthand for February–March 1974. Aside from the "pink beam", he described the initial hallucinations as geometric patterns, and, occasionally, brief pictures of Jesus and ancient Rome. As the hallucinations increased in duration and frequency, Dick claimed he began to live two parallel lives—one as himself, "Philip K. Dick", and one as "Thomas",[43] a Christian persecuted by Romans in the first century AD. He referred to the "transcendentally rational mind" as "Zebra", "God" and "VALIS" (an acronym for Vast Active Living Intelligence System). He wrote about the experiences, first in the semi-autobiographical novel Radio Free Albemuth, then in VALIS, The Divine Invasion, The Transmigration of Timothy Archer and the unfinished The Owl in Daylight (the VALIS trilogy).[citation needed] In 1974, Dick wrote a letter to the FBI, accusing various people, including University of California, San Diego professor Fredric Jameson, of being foreign agents of Warsaw Pact powers.[44] He also wrote that Stanisław Lem was probably a false name used by a composite committee operating on orders of the Communist party to gain control over public opinion.[45] At one point, Dick felt he had been taken over by the spirit of the prophet Elijah. He believed that an episode in his novel Flow My Tears, the Policeman Said was a detailed retelling of a biblical story from the Book of Acts, which he had never read.[46] He documented and discussed his experiences and faith in a private journal he called his "exegesis", portions of which were later published as The Exegesis of Philip K. Dick. The last novel he wrote was The Transmigration of Timothy Archer; it was published shortly after his death in 1982.[47]https://amzn.to/3ITbWCTBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-opperman-report--1198501/support.

For 13 days in October 1962 the world was at the closest point in history to a nuclear war. A confrontation between the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. over nuclear missiles in Cuba brought humankind to the abyss and the unthinkable: World War III.

How did the Potsdam Conference lead to the Marshall Plan, NATO, and The Warsaw Pact? What was The Long Telegram and the US policy of Containment? When did the Big Three of WW2 stop being antifascist allies and start being ideological enemies? Join James Holland, Al Murray, and guest Giles Milton for Part 2 on this exploration of the Potsdam Conference, as they discuss the superpowers at the end of World War Two, and how dictators like Stalin set the stage for the Cold War. BONUS CONTENT IS AVAILABLE FOR MEMBERS - SIGN UP AT patreon.com/wehaveways A Goalhanger Production Produced by James Regan Exec Producer: Tony Pastor Social: @WeHaveWaysPod Email: wehavewayspodcast@gmail.com Join our ‘Independent Company' with an introductory offer to watch exclusive live shows, get presale ticket events, and our weekly newsletter - packed with book and model discounts. Membership Club: patreon.com/wehaveways Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

History is something big that happens in the past that you look back on and wonder about… ofttimes we only know about it from the pages of a book, old video footage, relics in a museum, or something like that, but there are also living resources for history in the memories of older people and indeed in your OWN head. This Quackcast was inspired by me thinking about musicians like Prince, Queen, and David Bowie- many younger people now are looking back on them as if they were musical geniuses, like Beethoven and Mozart, but I can clearly recall when they were just pop-musicians, you were interested to hear their latest stuff on the radio of their latest video but it wasn't ground shaking. They were not considered super dooper massive cultural icons then, in fact they had less regard and hero worship than most modern young celebs do now! Your average popular “influencer” probably gets more regard now than David Bowie did back in the 70s and 80s. As Generation Xers Banes, Tantz, and I were part of a world in the later days old the cold war, when it was at its peak, before the end. This flavoured all of culture in all sorts of direct and indirect ways and if you don't understand that then you can't properly understand those cultural products that came out of that time. All the massive prosperity of the west and ultra-capitalism from the 1950s onwards with the USA solidly driving all western culture was because after WW2 the world was split in 2 and everyone had to unite around the USA because they were the strongest power militarily and economically in opposition to the “communist block”, NATO vs the Warsaw Pact. It's the reason American media from Hollywood stayed as so huge, the reason American influence in music was so primary, and the same with style, design, and technology. But there are plenty of direct influences too, a character like James Bond makes no sense outside of that split world, in fact nor does any spy fiction that came from then. The Klingons in Star Trek were Russians. The action genre in movies solidly had to do with the cold war- Sylvester Stallone and Arnold Schwarzenegger's career's were formed around Cold War influences… What big aspects of history where you “there” for? The fall of the Berlin Wall, Perestroika, 9/11, The assassination of Yitzhak Rabin, the start of myspace, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and the beginnings of social media and influencer culture, the rise of reality TV, the fall of bookshops…? This week Gunwallace was inspired to craft a musical theme to Capricious Infection - A mystical, magical, stargazing sound here, touches of Journey of the Sorcerer by The Eagles. You can imagine you're in a field in darkness, wandering over cold, dew wet grass and staring up at the vast, glittering majesty of the milky way galaxy above. Topics and shownotes Links Featured comic: Wings Of Daera - https://www.theduckwebcomics.com/news/2025/jun/16/featured-comic-wings-of-daera/ Featured music: Capricious Infection - https://www.theduckwebcomics.com/Capricious_Infection/. - by CressidiasComics, rated T Special thanks to: Gunwallace - https://www.theduckwebcomics.com/user/Gunwallace/ Tantz Aerine - https://www.theduckwebcomics.com/user/Tantz_Aerine/ Ozoneocean - https://www.theduckwebcomics.com/user/ozoneocean Banes - https://www.theduckwebcomics.com/user/Banes/ VIDEO exclusive! Become a subscriber on the $5 level and up to see our weekly Patreon video and get our advertising perks! - https://www.patreon.com/DrunkDuck Even at $1 you get your name with a link on the front page and a mention in the weekend newsposts! Join us on Discord - https://discordapp.com/invite/7NpJ8GS

Max Pearson presents a collection of the week's Witness History interviews from the BBC World Service. Our guest is Dr Elizabeth Abbott, writer, historian and author of the book, "Sugar: A Bittersweet History".First, we confront the dark history of sugar. We hear how a researcher in the 1990s uncovered the unethical aspects of Sweden's Vipeholm experiments in the 1940 which led to new recommendations for children to eat sweets just once a week.And, how Mexico, a country which had one of the highest rates of fizzy drink consumption in the world, approved a tax on sugary soft drinks in 2013. Then an event which shaped the second half of the last century - On 14 May 1955, the leader of the Soviet Union and Heads of State from seven European countries met to sign the Warsaw Pact.Plus, the story of how two rival electricity pioneers, Nikola Tesla and Thomas Edison brought electricity to the world. Finally, we hear from Finnish singer Marion Rung on winning the 1980 Intervision Song Contest, the USSR's answer to Eurovision. Contributors: Dr Elin Bommenel - academic Dr Simon Barquera - director of health and nutrition research at The Institute for Public Health of Mexico Dr Elizabeth Abbott - writer and historian Otto Grotewohl - German politician Mark Seifer - biographer of Nikola Tesla William Terbo - relative of Nikola Tesla Marion Rung - Finnish winner of Intervision song contest 1980(Photo: sugar cubes and fizzy drinks, Credit: Anthony Devlin/Press Association)

On 14 May 1955, the leader of the Soviet Union and leaders from seven European countries met to sign the Warsaw Pact. In the years following World War Two, the Soviet Union and the United States started the worldwide Cold War. While Western powers feared the spread of communism, the Soviets worried about US atomic bombs. What resulted was the formation of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) in 1949. The Warsaw Pact was signed six years later in response to West Germany joining NATO. Natasha Fernandes uses archive of East Germany's leader Otto Grotewohl to tell the story.Eye-witness accounts brought to life by archive. Witness History is for those fascinated by the past. We take you to the events that have shaped our world through the eyes of the people who were there. For nine minutes every day, we take you back in time and all over the world, to examine wars, coups, scientific discoveries, cultural moments and much more. Recent episodes explore everything from football in Brazil, the history of the ‘Indian Titanic' and the invention of air fryers, to Public Enemy's Fight The Power, subway art and the political crisis in Georgia. We look at the lives of some of the most famous leaders, artists, scientists and personalities in history, including: visionary architect Antoni Gaudi and the design of the Sagrada Familia; Michael Jordan and his bespoke Nike trainers; Princess Diana at the Taj Mahal; and Görel Hanser, manager of legendary Swedish pop band Abba on the influence they've had on the music industry. You can learn all about fascinating and surprising stories, such as the time an Iraqi journalist hurled his shoes at the President of the United States in protest of America's occupation of Iraq; the creation of the Hollywood commercial that changed advertising forever; and the ascent of the first Aboriginal MP.(Photo: Soviet Premier, Nikolai Bulganin (centre) addresses Soviet leaders at the Warsaw Conference on 14 May 1955. From left to right: Marshal Ivan Koniev, Minister Vyacheslav Molotov, Bulganin and Marshal Gregori Zhukov. Credit: Bettmann via Getty images)

Despite an annulled election and a different candidate, the re-run of the first round of Romania's presidential election has produced the same outcome. The pro-Trump, Eurosceptic candidate George Simion took 40 percent of the vote ahead of the May 18 run-off. Simion – whose party sits in the same voting bloc as Giorgia Meloni's in the European Parliament – skipped the usual victory speech at campaign headquarters to instead air a pre-recorded message where he pledged allegiance to banned pro-Russian candidate Călin Georgescu. Back in November, the latter went from unknown to favourite, thanks to a foreign-backed TikTok campaign. Simion even cast his vote alongside Georgescu.He will now face reformist pro-EU Bucharest mayor Nicușor Dan, whose views are diametrically opposed on Europe, Ukraine and NATO, which is due to boost its presence in Romania to 10,000 troops. What has changed in the EU's newest member? Romania boasts steady growth, but also huge governance and corruption issues.More broadly, how do former Warsaw Pact nations view the closening ties between the Trump administration and the Kremlin? Romania's run-off will be held on the same day as Poland's own presidential election. Where do loyalties and interests lie in today's fast-changing world?

The German Democratic Republic, or East Germany, was the frontline in the Cold War, packed with hundreds of thousands of Soviet and East German troops armed with the latest Warsaw Pact equipment, lined up along the 1,400 km Inner German Border. However, because of the repressive East German police state, little human intelligence about these forces reached the West. Who were they? Where were they located? What were they doing? How were they equipped? What were their intentions? NATO was lined up in West Germany to face these forces and relied on getting up-to-date intelligence to warn of any threat, 'Indicators of Hostility' that could be a precursor to an invasion. BRIXMIS, the British Commanders'-in-Chief Mission to the Soviet Forces in Germany, was on hand to provide that intelligence. Thanks to an obscure 1946 agreement between the British and Soviets that established 'liaison missions' in their respective zones of occupation, the British were able to send highly qualified military 'observers' into East Germany to roam (relatively) freely and keep an eye on what was going on. What started as 'liaison', a point of contact between the British and Soviet occupation forces, developed into a very sophisticated intelligence gathering operation, sending 'tours' out every day of the year, between 1946 and when the Mission closed in 1990. Andrew Long's BRIXMIS and the Secret Cold War: Intelligence Collection Operations Behind Enemy Lines in East Germany (Pen and Sword History, 2024) tells the story about these top-secret liaison tours.  These tours were undertaken in high-performance, highly modified marked vehicles, with personnel in uniform and unarmed, apart from professional photographic equipment and occasionally some top-secret gadgets from the boffins back in the UK. They joined their French and American colleagues in snooping around the opposition, photographing military bases, equipment, and manoeuvres, and trying to evade capture by the secret police and counterintelligence units. They faced danger and violence daily, but thanks to their bravery and professionalism, the West had accurate and up to date information on what was happening in East Germany which help keep the peace all that time. This is the story of this little-known unit and their exploits behind enemy lines. Andrew Long, from Great Britain, is a military history researcher and author. His fascination with the Cold War began with a trip to West Berlin in 1986, traveling through Checkpoint Charlie to visit the East. Andrew's writing comes from a desire to make sense of an extremely complex period in modern history, weaving together inter-relating stories involving politics, ideologies, personalities, technological advances, and geography. There is still much to be told on this fascinating subject. After a successful career in marketing, Andrew relocated to Cornwall and took up writing full time. Stephen Satkiewicz is an independent scholar whose research areas are related to Civilizational Sciences, Social Complexity, Big History, Historical Sociology, military history, War studies, International Relations, Geopolitics, as well as Russian and East European history. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/british-studies

The German Democratic Republic, or East Germany, was the frontline in the Cold War, packed with hundreds of thousands of Soviet and East German troops armed with the latest Warsaw Pact equipment, lined up along the 1,400 km Inner German Border. However, because of the repressive East German police state, little human intelligence about these forces reached the West. Who were they? Where were they located? What were they doing? How were they equipped? What were their intentions? NATO was lined up in West Germany to face these forces and relied on getting up-to-date intelligence to warn of any threat, 'Indicators of Hostility' that could be a precursor to an invasion. BRIXMIS, the British Commanders'-in-Chief Mission to the Soviet Forces in Germany, was on hand to provide that intelligence. Thanks to an obscure 1946 agreement between the British and Soviets that established 'liaison missions' in their respective zones of occupation, the British were able to send highly qualified military 'observers' into East Germany to roam (relatively) freely and keep an eye on what was going on. What started as 'liaison', a point of contact between the British and Soviet occupation forces, developed into a very sophisticated intelligence gathering operation, sending 'tours' out every day of the year, between 1946 and when the Mission closed in 1990. Andrew Long's BRIXMIS and the Secret Cold War: Intelligence Collection Operations Behind Enemy Lines in East Germany (Pen and Sword History, 2024) tells the story about these top-secret liaison tours.  These tours were undertaken in high-performance, highly modified marked vehicles, with personnel in uniform and unarmed, apart from professional photographic equipment and occasionally some top-secret gadgets from the boffins back in the UK. They joined their French and American colleagues in snooping around the opposition, photographing military bases, equipment, and manoeuvres, and trying to evade capture by the secret police and counterintelligence units. They faced danger and violence daily, but thanks to their bravery and professionalism, the West had accurate and up to date information on what was happening in East Germany which help keep the peace all that time. This is the story of this little-known unit and their exploits behind enemy lines. Andrew Long, from Great Britain, is a military history researcher and author. His fascination with the Cold War began with a trip to West Berlin in 1986, traveling through Checkpoint Charlie to visit the East. Andrew's writing comes from a desire to make sense of an extremely complex period in modern history, weaving together inter-relating stories involving politics, ideologies, personalities, technological advances, and geography. There is still much to be told on this fascinating subject. After a successful career in marketing, Andrew relocated to Cornwall and took up writing full time. Stephen Satkiewicz is an independent scholar whose research areas are related to Civilizational Sciences, Social Complexity, Big History, Historical Sociology, military history, War studies, International Relations, Geopolitics, as well as Russian and East European history. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/russian-studies

The German Democratic Republic, or East Germany, was the frontline in the Cold War, packed with hundreds of thousands of Soviet and East German troops armed with the latest Warsaw Pact equipment, lined up along the 1,400 km Inner German Border. However, because of the repressive East German police state, little human intelligence about these forces reached the West. Who were they? Where were they located? What were they doing? How were they equipped? What were their intentions? NATO was lined up in West Germany to face these forces and relied on getting up-to-date intelligence to warn of any threat, 'Indicators of Hostility' that could be a precursor to an invasion. BRIXMIS, the British Commanders'-in-Chief Mission to the Soviet Forces in Germany, was on hand to provide that intelligence. Thanks to an obscure 1946 agreement between the British and Soviets that established 'liaison missions' in their respective zones of occupation, the British were able to send highly qualified military 'observers' into East Germany to roam (relatively) freely and keep an eye on what was going on. What started as 'liaison', a point of contact between the British and Soviet occupation forces, developed into a very sophisticated intelligence gathering operation, sending 'tours' out every day of the year, between 1946 and when the Mission closed in 1990. Andrew Long's BRIXMIS and the Secret Cold War: Intelligence Collection Operations Behind Enemy Lines in East Germany (Pen and Sword History, 2024) tells the story about these top-secret liaison tours.  These tours were undertaken in high-performance, highly modified marked vehicles, with personnel in uniform and unarmed, apart from professional photographic equipment and occasionally some top-secret gadgets from the boffins back in the UK. They joined their French and American colleagues in snooping around the opposition, photographing military bases, equipment, and manoeuvres, and trying to evade capture by the secret police and counterintelligence units. They faced danger and violence daily, but thanks to their bravery and professionalism, the West had accurate and up to date information on what was happening in East Germany which help keep the peace all that time. This is the story of this little-known unit and their exploits behind enemy lines. Andrew Long, from Great Britain, is a military history researcher and author. His fascination with the Cold War began with a trip to West Berlin in 1986, traveling through Checkpoint Charlie to visit the East. Andrew's writing comes from a desire to make sense of an extremely complex period in modern history, weaving together inter-relating stories involving politics, ideologies, personalities, technological advances, and geography. There is still much to be told on this fascinating subject. After a successful career in marketing, Andrew relocated to Cornwall and took up writing full time. Stephen Satkiewicz is an independent scholar whose research areas are related to Civilizational Sciences, Social Complexity, Big History, Historical Sociology, military history, War studies, International Relations, Geopolitics, as well as Russian and East European history. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

The German Democratic Republic, or East Germany, was the frontline in the Cold War, packed with hundreds of thousands of Soviet and East German troops armed with the latest Warsaw Pact equipment, lined up along the 1,400 km Inner German Border. However, because of the repressive East German police state, little human intelligence about these forces reached the West. Who were they? Where were they located? What were they doing? How were they equipped? What were their intentions? NATO was lined up in West Germany to face these forces and relied on getting up-to-date intelligence to warn of any threat, 'Indicators of Hostility' that could be a precursor to an invasion. BRIXMIS, the British Commanders'-in-Chief Mission to the Soviet Forces in Germany, was on hand to provide that intelligence. Thanks to an obscure 1946 agreement between the British and Soviets that established 'liaison missions' in their respective zones of occupation, the British were able to send highly qualified military 'observers' into East Germany to roam (relatively) freely and keep an eye on what was going on. What started as 'liaison', a point of contact between the British and Soviet occupation forces, developed into a very sophisticated intelligence gathering operation, sending 'tours' out every day of the year, between 1946 and when the Mission closed in 1990. Andrew Long's BRIXMIS and the Secret Cold War: Intelligence Collection Operations Behind Enemy Lines in East Germany (Pen and Sword History, 2024) tells the story about these top-secret liaison tours.  These tours were undertaken in high-performance, highly modified marked vehicles, with personnel in uniform and unarmed, apart from professional photographic equipment and occasionally some top-secret gadgets from the boffins back in the UK. They joined their French and American colleagues in snooping around the opposition, photographing military bases, equipment, and manoeuvres, and trying to evade capture by the secret police and counterintelligence units. They faced danger and violence daily, but thanks to their bravery and professionalism, the West had accurate and up to date information on what was happening in East Germany which help keep the peace all that time. This is the story of this little-known unit and their exploits behind enemy lines. Andrew Long, from Great Britain, is a military history researcher and author. His fascination with the Cold War began with a trip to West Berlin in 1986, traveling through Checkpoint Charlie to visit the East. Andrew's writing comes from a desire to make sense of an extremely complex period in modern history, weaving together inter-relating stories involving politics, ideologies, personalities, technological advances, and geography. There is still much to be told on this fascinating subject. After a successful career in marketing, Andrew relocated to Cornwall and took up writing full time. Stephen Satkiewicz is an independent scholar whose research areas are related to Civilizational Sciences, Social Complexity, Big History, Historical Sociology, military history, War studies, International Relations, Geopolitics, as well as Russian and East European history. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/military-history

The German Democratic Republic, or East Germany, was the frontline in the Cold War, packed with hundreds of thousands of Soviet and East German troops armed with the latest Warsaw Pact equipment, lined up along the 1,400 km Inner German Border. However, because of the repressive East German police state, little human intelligence about these forces reached the West. Who were they? Where were they located? What were they doing? How were they equipped? What were their intentions? NATO was lined up in West Germany to face these forces and relied on getting up-to-date intelligence to warn of any threat, 'Indicators of Hostility' that could be a precursor to an invasion. BRIXMIS, the British Commanders'-in-Chief Mission to the Soviet Forces in Germany, was on hand to provide that intelligence. Thanks to an obscure 1946 agreement between the British and Soviets that established 'liaison missions' in their respective zones of occupation, the British were able to send highly qualified military 'observers' into East Germany to roam (relatively) freely and keep an eye on what was going on. What started as 'liaison', a point of contact between the British and Soviet occupation forces, developed into a very sophisticated intelligence gathering operation, sending 'tours' out every day of the year, between 1946 and when the Mission closed in 1990. Andrew Long's BRIXMIS and the Secret Cold War: Intelligence Collection Operations Behind Enemy Lines in East Germany (Pen and Sword History, 2024) tells the story about these top-secret liaison tours.  These tours were undertaken in high-performance, highly modified marked vehicles, with personnel in uniform and unarmed, apart from professional photographic equipment and occasionally some top-secret gadgets from the boffins back in the UK. They joined their French and American colleagues in snooping around the opposition, photographing military bases, equipment, and manoeuvres, and trying to evade capture by the secret police and counterintelligence units. They faced danger and violence daily, but thanks to their bravery and professionalism, the West had accurate and up to date information on what was happening in East Germany which help keep the peace all that time. This is the story of this little-known unit and their exploits behind enemy lines. Andrew Long, from Great Britain, is a military history researcher and author. His fascination with the Cold War began with a trip to West Berlin in 1986, traveling through Checkpoint Charlie to visit the East. Andrew's writing comes from a desire to make sense of an extremely complex period in modern history, weaving together inter-relating stories involving politics, ideologies, personalities, technological advances, and geography. There is still much to be told on this fascinating subject. After a successful career in marketing, Andrew relocated to Cornwall and took up writing full time. Stephen Satkiewicz is an independent scholar whose research areas are related to Civilizational Sciences, Social Complexity, Big History, Historical Sociology, military history, War studies, International Relations, Geopolitics, as well as Russian and East European history. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/german-studies

The German Democratic Republic, or East Germany, was the frontline in the Cold War, packed with hundreds of thousands of Soviet and East German troops armed with the latest Warsaw Pact equipment, lined up along the 1,400 km Inner German Border. However, because of the repressive East German police state, little human intelligence about these forces reached the West. Who were they? Where were they located? What were they doing? How were they equipped? What were their intentions? NATO was lined up in West Germany to face these forces and relied on getting up-to-date intelligence to warn of any threat, 'Indicators of Hostility' that could be a precursor to an invasion. BRIXMIS, the British Commanders'-in-Chief Mission to the Soviet Forces in Germany, was on hand to provide that intelligence. Thanks to an obscure 1946 agreement between the British and Soviets that established 'liaison missions' in their respective zones of occupation, the British were able to send highly qualified military 'observers' into East Germany to roam (relatively) freely and keep an eye on what was going on. What started as 'liaison', a point of contact between the British and Soviet occupation forces, developed into a very sophisticated intelligence gathering operation, sending 'tours' out every day of the year, between 1946 and when the Mission closed in 1990. Andrew Long's BRIXMIS and the Secret Cold War: Intelligence Collection Operations Behind Enemy Lines in East Germany (Pen and Sword History, 2024) tells the story about these top-secret liaison tours.  These tours were undertaken in high-performance, highly modified marked vehicles, with personnel in uniform and unarmed, apart from professional photographic equipment and occasionally some top-secret gadgets from the boffins back in the UK. They joined their French and American colleagues in snooping around the opposition, photographing military bases, equipment, and manoeuvres, and trying to evade capture by the secret police and counterintelligence units. They faced danger and violence daily, but thanks to their bravery and professionalism, the West had accurate and up to date information on what was happening in East Germany which help keep the peace all that time. This is the story of this little-known unit and their exploits behind enemy lines. Andrew Long, from Great Britain, is a military history researcher and author. His fascination with the Cold War began with a trip to West Berlin in 1986, traveling through Checkpoint Charlie to visit the East. Andrew's writing comes from a desire to make sense of an extremely complex period in modern history, weaving together inter-relating stories involving politics, ideologies, personalities, technological advances, and geography. There is still much to be told on this fascinating subject. After a successful career in marketing, Andrew relocated to Cornwall and took up writing full time. Stephen Satkiewicz is an independent scholar whose research areas are related to Civilizational Sciences, Social Complexity, Big History, Historical Sociology, military history, War studies, International Relations, Geopolitics, as well as Russian and East European history. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/national-security

The German Democratic Republic, or East Germany, was the frontline in the Cold War, packed with hundreds of thousands of Soviet and East German troops armed with the latest Warsaw Pact equipment, lined up along the 1,400 km Inner German Border. However, because of the repressive East German police state, little human intelligence about these forces reached the West. Who were they? Where were they located? What were they doing? How were they equipped? What were their intentions? NATO was lined up in West Germany to face these forces and relied on getting up-to-date intelligence to warn of any threat, 'Indicators of Hostility' that could be a precursor to an invasion. BRIXMIS, the British Commanders'-in-Chief Mission to the Soviet Forces in Germany, was on hand to provide that intelligence. Thanks to an obscure 1946 agreement between the British and Soviets that established 'liaison missions' in their respective zones of occupation, the British were able to send highly qualified military 'observers' into East Germany to roam (relatively) freely and keep an eye on what was going on. What started as 'liaison', a point of contact between the British and Soviet occupation forces, developed into a very sophisticated intelligence gathering operation, sending 'tours' out every day of the year, between 1946 and when the Mission closed in 1990. Andrew Long's BRIXMIS and the Secret Cold War: Intelligence Collection Operations Behind Enemy Lines in East Germany (Pen and Sword History, 2024) tells the story about these top-secret liaison tours.  These tours were undertaken in high-performance, highly modified marked vehicles, with personnel in uniform and unarmed, apart from professional photographic equipment and occasionally some top-secret gadgets from the boffins back in the UK. They joined their French and American colleagues in snooping around the opposition, photographing military bases, equipment, and manoeuvres, and trying to evade capture by the secret police and counterintelligence units. They faced danger and violence daily, but thanks to their bravery and professionalism, the West had accurate and up to date information on what was happening in East Germany which help keep the peace all that time. This is the story of this little-known unit and their exploits behind enemy lines. Andrew Long, from Great Britain, is a military history researcher and author. His fascination with the Cold War began with a trip to West Berlin in 1986, traveling through Checkpoint Charlie to visit the East. Andrew's writing comes from a desire to make sense of an extremely complex period in modern history, weaving together inter-relating stories involving politics, ideologies, personalities, technological advances, and geography. There is still much to be told on this fascinating subject. After a successful career in marketing, Andrew relocated to Cornwall and took up writing full time. Stephen Satkiewicz is an independent scholar whose research areas are related to Civilizational Sciences, Social Complexity, Big History, Historical Sociology, military history, War studies, International Relations, Geopolitics, as well as Russian and East European history. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/eastern-european-studies

This Day in Legal History: Warsaw Pact States Join NATOOn March 12, 1999, the Czech Republic, Hungary, and Poland became the first former Warsaw Pact countries to join the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). This historic moment marked a significant shift in the post-Cold War security landscape, as these nations formally aligned with the Western military alliance nearly a decade after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Their accession symbolized a decisive break from their communist past and reinforced their commitment to democratic governance, rule of law, and collective defense.The expansion was not without controversy. Russia viewed NATO's eastward growth as a threat to its sphere of influence, deepening tensions that would continue into the 21st century. However, for the newly admitted countries, NATO membership provided critical security assurances against potential aggression, particularly given their historical experiences with Soviet domination. The accession process required extensive military and political reforms, ensuring that these nations met NATO's standards for democracy, civilian control of the military, and defense readiness.The inclusion of the Czech Republic, Hungary, and Poland set the stage for further NATO enlargement, with additional Eastern European countries joining in subsequent years. It also reinforced NATO's role as a stabilizing force in Europe during a period of geopolitical uncertainty. The decision underscored the alliance's post-Cold War mission of promoting security and democracy beyond its original Western European membership. Today, this expansion remains a key milestone in the ongoing debate over NATO's role in global security and its relationship with Russia.The removal of Special Counsel Hampton Dellinger has raised concerns about the politicization of the Office of Special Counsel (OSC), an independent agency that protects federal whistleblowers. Dellinger, who was dismissed by President Trump without explanation, initially challenged his firing but later withdrew his case after a federal appellate court sided with the administration. His removal highlights the administration's broader efforts to exert control over independent agencies, a move that legal experts warn could undermine their impartiality.During his tenure, Dellinger was an advocate for federal workers, helping reinstate over 5,000 Department of Agriculture employees who were improperly fired. His dismissal is expected to weaken the OSC's role in protecting workers from political retaliation. Legal scholars suggest that unless the Supreme Court intervenes, the precedent set by his firing could give future presidents greater authority over independent agencies.The case also ties into a broader legal battle over presidential power, as courts are reviewing Trump's terminations of other agency officials, including members of the National Labor Relations Board and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. While Dellinger had legal grounds to challenge his firing, he strategically chose not to pursue the case, allowing stronger challenges—such as that of NLRB member Gwynne Wilcox—to take precedence.The legal debate is moving toward a potential Supreme Court review of Humphrey's Executor v. United States, a 1935 decision that limits the president's power to remove independent agency officials. If overturned, the ruling could significantly expand presidential authority over such agencies.Dellinger Exit Deepens OSC Politicization as Workers Lose AllyA U.S. judge will hold a hearing on Columbia University student Mahmoud Khalil's challenge to his arrest by immigration authorities, a case that has sparked protests and political debate. Khalil, a Palestinian student and U.S. permanent resident, was arrested outside his university residence by Homeland Security agents. The Trump administration has accused him—without providing any evidence—of supporting Hamas, though Khalil has not been charged with any crime.Judge Jesse Furman has temporarily blocked Khalil's deportation and may order his release if his rights were violated. However, an immigration court—not Furman—would ultimately decide whether Khalil can be deported, a process that could take years. Khalil's lawyers argue that his arrest is political retaliation for his pro-Palestinian activism and violates his First Amendment rights. His detention in Louisiana has limited his legal access, and his wife, who is eight months pregnant, has spoken out against his treatment.The case raises broader legal questions about the intersection of free speech and immigration law, particularly as Trump has vowed to deport foreign students involved in pro-Palestinian protests. Khalil's arrest has triggered demonstrations and condemnation from Democratic lawmakers, who view it as political repression.Judge to hold hearing over Columbia student protester's challenge to arrest | ReutersA major real estate brokerage, Howard Hanna Real Estate Services, has asked a U.S. judge in Missouri to recuse himself from an antitrust lawsuit due to political donations made to his wife's campaign by the plaintiffs' lawyers. The lawsuit accuses brokerages of conspiring to inflate real estate commissions, and plaintiffs have already won significant settlements in related cases.Howard Hanna argues that the donations create an appearance of impropriety, requiring Judge Stephen Bough's recusal under ethics rules. Bough had previously disclosed the donations and offered to step down in an earlier case, but no party requested his removal at the time. Plaintiffs' lawyer Michael Ketchmark dismissed the recusal request as meritless and a delay tactic after Howard Hanna had lost key motions.Bough's courtroom previously hosted a landmark jury verdict in a related antitrust case, leading to over a billion dollars in settlements with brokerages and the National Association of Realtors. The judge's decision on whether to step aside could impact the trajectory of ongoing real estate antitrust litigation.US judge in brokerage antitrust case faces recusal bid over political donations | ReutersNew Jersey is poised to increase its angel investor tax credit (AITC) from 20% to 35% of investment costs, with a $35 million annual cap. Given the limited funds, ensuring the credit is effectively allocated is essential. However, the proposed bill includes “carbon footprint reduction technology” as an eligible category, which could allow carbon capture projects to qualify. Critics argue that carbon capture is neither emerging nor effective—it is costly, inefficient, and largely benefits fossil fuel companies by prolonging their operations rather than reducing emissions.Instead of funding speculative or ineffective technologies, the state should prioritize investments in proven decarbonization strategies like renewable energy, battery storage, and energy efficiency improvements. These sectors have demonstrated cost savings, emissions reductions, and job creation without the need for indefinite subsidies. Tightening the AITC eligibility criteria would prevent resources from being diverted to projects with questionable climate benefits.By refining its definition of eligible technologies, New Jersey can maximize the impact of its tax credit, ensuring funds support tangible climate and economic progress. States that design smart, targeted incentives will attract startups and clean energy investments, while those that fund vague or ineffective projects risk falling behind. As federal climate incentives remain uncertain, state policies will play a crucial role in shaping the future of clean energy investment.New Jersey Should Tighten Its Angel Investor Credit Eligibility This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Dr. Heather Wilson, a 1982 Air Force Academy graduate, formerly the 24th Secretary of the Air Force, and first USAFA graduate to hold the position, discusses her unexpected journey to the role, emphasizing the importance of integrity, service, and leadership. ----more---- SUMMARY Dr. Wilson shares her unexpected journey into leadership, the importance of integrity, and the lessons learned from both successes and failures. She reflects on her family legacy, the influence of mentors, and how her military background shaped her leadership style. Dr. Wilson emphasizes the value of collecting tools for leadership and adapting to different environments while maintaining core values. In this conversation, she discusses the importance of finding purpose in one's mission and the value of relationships, particularly family support. She reflects on her journey as a woman in leadership, the significance of legacy in public service, and her unexpected path to serving in Congress. Dr. Wilson emphasizes the lessons learned in collaboration and the importance of humor in leadership, ultimately encouraging future leaders to uphold high standards and not to shame their families.   SHARE THIS EPISODE LINKEDIN | FACEBOOK   TAKEAWAYS Dr. Wilson's journey to becoming Secretary of the Air Force was unexpected and transformative. Leadership often requires owning failures and focusing on solutions. Integrity is foundational to effective leadership and builds trust. Adapting leadership styles to different cultures is essential for success. Mentorship and influences from family play a significant role in shaping leaders. Collecting tools and knowledge is crucial for effective leadership. Quality management principles can be applied to various fields, including education and social services. Leadership is not linear; it involves navigating different paths and chapters. Building strong teams and hiring the right people is vital for organizational success. Direct communication and honesty are key components of effective leadership. Doing things that matter with people you like is essential. The most important decision in life can be personal, like choosing a partner. Family support enriches life and provides joy. Women in leadership often face unique challenges but can pave the way for others. Legacy is about making lasting changes in systems and strategies. Unexpected opportunities can lead to significant career changes. Collaboration and giving credit to others is key in leadership roles. Humor can help create a relaxed atmosphere in serious environments. Education is crucial for transforming lives and communities. Leadership is not always a straight path; adaptability is important.   EPISODE CHAPTERS 00:00  Introduction to Long Blue Leadership 01:25  Unexpected Call to Leadership 03:16  Lessons from Leadership Challenges 08:28  The Importance of Integrity 10:07  Adapting Leadership Styles 12:23  Influences and Mentorship 15:25  Family Legacy and Influence 17:41  Learning from Team Members 21:29  Applying Quality Management Principles 24:07  Navigating Non-Linear Leadership Paths 24:20  Finding Purpose in Mission and Relationships 28:06  The Importance of Family Support 30:08  Navigating Leadership as a Woman 34:30  Legacy and Impact in Public Service 36:29  Unexpected Paths: Serving in Congress 41:03  Lessons in Collaboration and Leadership   ABOUT DR. WILSON - IMAGES AND BIO COURTESY OF UTEP BIO Dr. Heather Wilson became the 11th President of The University of Texas at El Paso in 2019 after serving as Secretary of the United States Air Force. She is the former president of the South Dakota School of Mines & Technology, and she represented New Mexico in the United States Congress for 10 years.  Active in community and national affairs, she is a member of the National Science Board, which oversees the National Science Foundation, and serves as a board member of the Texas Space Commission. She was the inaugural Chair of the Alliance of Hispanic Serving Research Universities, and is a member of the board of directors of Lockheed Martin Corporation. Dr. Wilson is the granddaughter of immigrants and was the first person in her family to go to college. She graduated from the U.S. Air Force Academy in the third class to admit women and earned her master's and doctoral degrees from Oxford University in England as a Rhodes Scholar. UTEP is located on the U.S.-Mexico border – in the fifth largest manufacturing region in North America – and serves over 24,000 students with 170 bachelor's, master's and doctoral degree programs in nine colleges and schools. In the top 5% of public universities in the United States for research and designated a community-engaged university by the Carnegie Foundation, UTEP is America's leading Hispanic-serving university. It is the fourth largest research university in Texas and serves a student body that is 84% Hispanic. President Wilson is an instrument rated private pilot. She and her husband, Jay Hone, have two adult children and two granddaughters. Dr. Heather Wilson served as the 24th Secretary of the Air Force and was responsible for the affairs of the Department of the Air Force, including the organizing, training and equipping and providing for the welfare of 660,000 Active-Duty, Guard, Reserve and civilian forces their families. She provided oversight of the Air Force's annual budget of more than $132 billion and directs strategy and policy development, risk management, weapons acquisition, technology investments and human resource management across a global enterprise. Dr. Wilson has more than 35 years of professional experience in a range of leadership and management roles in the military, higher education, government and private industry. Before assuming her current position, Dr. Wilson was president of the South Dakota School of Mines & Technology, an engineering and science research university. From 1998 to 2009, Dr. Wilson was a member of the U.S. House of Representatives, where she served on the House Armed Services Committee, the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the House Energy and Commerce Committee. Before being elected to Congress, Dr. Wilson was a cabinet secretary in New Mexico's state government responsible for foster care, adoption, juvenile delinquency, children's mental health and early childhood education. From 1989 to 1991 Wilson served on the National Security Council staff as director for defense policy and arms control for President George H.W. Bush during the fall of the Berlin Wall and the collapse of the Warsaw Pact. From 1991 to1995 and again from 2009 to 2013 Wilson was in the private sector. In 1991, she founded Keystone International, Inc., a company that did business development and program planning work for defense and scientific industry. She served as a senior advisor to several national laboratories on matters related to nuclear weapons, non-proliferation, arms control verification, intelligence and the defense industrial base. Wilson also served on the boards of two publicly traded corporations as well as numerous advisory and non-profit boards.   CONNECT WITH DR. WILSON LINKEDIN  |  UTEP     ALL PAST LBL EPISODES  |  ALL LBLPN PRODUCTIONS AVAILABLE ON ALL MAJOR PODCAST PLATFORMS     FULL TRANSCRIPT SPEAKERS Guest:  Dr. Heather Wilson '82  |  Hosts:  Lt. Col. (Ret.) Naviere Walkewicz '99   Naviere Walkewicz  00:00 Welcome to Long Blue Leadership, the podcast where we share insights on leadership through the lives and experiences of Air Force Academy graduates. I'm Naviere Walkowicz, Class of '99. Our story is about a leader who reached heights fellow Air Force Academy graduates had not reached before her, and this was at a time when opportunities to do so were still new. My guest is Dr. Heather Wilson, Class of '82. As you heard, she served as the 24th secretary of the Air Force, but there is a unique distinction attached to that. Dr Wilson, welcome to Long Blue Leadership; we have much to discuss. Let's start with you becoming the secretary of the Air Force, our 24th.   Dr. Heather Wilson  00:37 Yeah, that wasn't part of my life's plan. Secretary Designate Mattis did call me. I was in South Dakota as the president of the South Dakota School of Mines and my cell phone rang and he said, “This is Jim Mattis, and I want to talk to you about becoming secretary of the Air Force.” And honest to goodness, my initial answer was, “Sir, you do know that being a college president is like the best job in America, right?” And he said, “Yeah, I know. I just came from Stanford.” And I said, “I didn't apply for any job. I mean, I like it out... I'm a gal of the West. I like the mountains. I like hiking and biking and fly fishing.” And he said, “Yeah, I know. I grew up on the Columbia River in Washington.” And I thought, “This isn't working,” but we talked several more times, and it was pretty clear that I was being called to serve in a way that I didn't anticipate, but that was what I was supposed to do.   Naviere Walkewicz  01:35 What a transformative moment in your life, I'm sure.   Dr. Heather Wilson  01:38 Well, it was. Again, my entire life, I think, is a diversion from its planned course. But I turned out — I didn't anticipate that, and it meant — my husband doesn't really much like big East Coast cities that rain a lot and have a lot of traffic, and so from a family point of view, it wasn't what we personally wanted to do, but you're called to serve. And we've been called to serve in different ways in our lives and sometimes, even if it feels inconvenient, you're still called to serve. It turned out to be wonderful and I really enjoyed the experience, both of working with Sec. Mattis, but also getting back to spending time with airmen. And so it turned out to be wonderful, but it wasn't what I expected.   Naviere Walkewicz  02:25 Well, you said it, ma'am. As we know, service and leadership aren't linear, and so we're really excited to dive into some of those experiences today. Maybe share, as secretary of the Air Force, some of those moments in leadership that stuck with you. Let's just kind of start there.   Dr. Heather Wilson  02:42 Certainly. There were good days and not so good days. I think one of the things that I really benefited from was that I had a partner in the chief of staff, Dave Goldfein, who was absolutely fantastic. And we've remained very close friends. We started at the Academy the same day and he would joke and tell people that we didn't graduate on the same day because he went stop-out for a year. But we didn't know each other well as cadets, but we were formed by some of the same experiences and I think that helped tremendously. I didn't really understand that in our system of government, the civilian secretary has almost all the authority, but the chief of staff has almost all of the influence. And if you can figure out how to work together, you can get a heck of a lot done. And Dave and I both had that same approach, and it turned out to be a great partnership.   Naviere Walkewicz  03:42 That's pretty incredible. In fact, the time of your service in that role, I was actually working under your umbrella at U.S. STRATCOM. I was at Strategic Command there as a government civilian and as a reservist. And so, I can certainly speak to, I think, some of the amazing things that you did. Can you share a little — you talked about some ups and downs. What was maybe one of the failures as secretary of the Air Force that you learned from that helped you throughout your life?   Dr. Heather Wilson  04:11 Well, I know the day. I think it was Nov. 5, 2017, and it was a Sunday, late morning or early afternoon, and my phone rang. I was upstairs in the study in my row house in Virginia and it was the inspector general, Gen. Syed. And that morning, a young man had walked into a church in Sutherland Springs, Texas, and opened fire and killed a lot of people, and it turned out he had been an airman, and the general said, “You know, we're not sure yet, but he may have been convicted of a crime that would have required us to tell the FBI and the national criminal records check system that he had committed a crime that would not allow him to purchase a weapon, but we may have failed to notify.” We didn't know, we wouldn't know that afternoon but I talked to the chief and we all got together on Monday morning at 9 a.m. and Gen. Syed confirmed that he was an airman, he had been convicted of a domestic violence-related crime, and we had not properly notified the FBI, and as a result, he had been able to buy a weapon. Um, that was not a good day. And we talked about what we should do next, and our general counsel wasn't there — he was traveling that morning, but a more junior lawyer was there, who suggested kind of — and, you know, other people said, well — it actually got worse because there was an IG investigation, an internal audit from several years before, that showed that all of the services were not properly reporting to the national criminal records system. So we hadn't fixed the problem. We knew; we had been informed there was a problem and hadn't fixed it. And some people said, “Well, you weren't here at the time.” That doesn't matter. You wear the uniform, or you wear the cloak of office, and you have to take responsibility for the institution. And of course, the lawyers would say, “Well, you know, maybe you want to fuzz this and not take — you know, there's investigation going on,” or something. But we knew enough of the facts that morning, Monday morning, and Dave Goldfein and I decided to own it, to own the failure and focus on fixing the problem. And we did. And in the short term that was very uncomfortable. We sat in front of the Pentagon press corps and took their questions, and we went to Capitol Hill and informed the members of Congress on what had been done and not been done and why. But in the long term, by owning failure, we were able to focus on fixing the problem rather than just trying to manage responsibility and accountability, and it turned out to be a much better approach. So, sometimes the most important lesson is to own failure.   Naviere Walkewicz 07:09 I'm so glad you shared that, ma'am, because I think some people have a fear of failure, but there are many times when failure is inevitable, and to your point, owning it is the right approach. Something you said when you're sharing that, it made me think about us as cadets and our core values: integrity first. And that really resonated with how your approach was. Would you say that was born for you at the Academy and kind of through your career that's where it stayed, or has that always been part of your fabric?   Dr. Heather Wilson  07:36 I think the Academy was absolutely formative in that way, in the Honor Code. And, you know, integrity first, service before self, and excellence in all we do, now replaces what was there when I was a cadet, over the archway there. But I think that's woven into the fabric for airmen, and it's part of our culture, and it drives you. And I think — you know now we look at, how do we evaluate officers? It's the same way I now evaluate leaders — any leaders that work with me — and it's the way I evaluate myself: accomplish the mission, lead people, manage resources and make your unit better, all on a foundation of values. But it's that last part of it: all on a foundation of values. If you don't have that, the rest of it almost doesn't matter. You can try to make your unit better, but if you're lying about it, nobody's going to trust you. If you're leading people and managing resources, but you don't have integrity, it doesn't matter. So, integrity first, and that commitment to trying to be honest and direct with people builds those relationships of trust, which lasts for decades throughout a career.   Naviere Walkewicz  08:53 Absolutely. And the key word, I think, that foundation you talked about — how has that foundation served you in leadership as you've explored other areas outside of the military, amazing roles leading UTEP, also at the South Dakota School of Mines, in higher education? I'm sure that there's a translation of what that looks like. Can you share maybe an example of how that came into play?   Dr. Heather Wilson  09:15 Sure, it happens all the time. I think in any leadership position, whether you're in corporate life, in community life and a nonprofit, or in higher education, leading with a foundation of values, being honest, complying with the law, following the rules or changing the rules. It doesn't mean — that's one of the things that I think is probably important for leaders. You get to a point as a leader where your job is not just to follow the rules, but to look at the systems and identify the rules that need to be changed, but to be direct and honest about that too. Where it's not “Well, I think this rule doesn't make any sense, so I'm going to skirt it,” or “I'm not going to tell people that I've complied with something and I haven't.” In fact, you know that happened to me this morning. I got a disclosure that I was supposed to sign for a report that was published yesterday to the director of National Intelligence on a committee that I serve on, and they sent this kind of notification on what you can talk about publicly, and all of those things, and I hadn't given up my right to speak publicly about unclassified matters, and I responded, “I understand what you've said. I want to let you know that this is how I interpret this, and this is the way I'm going to act.” I was very direct about it. “I didn't give up my First Amendment rights as a citizen because I worked on your task force.” So, very direct. And I think that directness is something that — not all cultures are that way, including higher education culture. I have to be a little bit careful about that sometimes — the airman's tendency to have a frank debrief isn't always the way other cultures and work cultures are. They're just not always like that, so, I have to be a little bit careful sometimes that I don't crush people's will to live or something.   Naviere Walkewicz  11:13 I was actually thinking about that as you were speaking how, if you have the foundation, especially from the military, we kind of understand that directive approach and certainly those core values that we know of. And I'm curious, how do you adapt as a leader to those who maybe don't have that foundation? How do you bring them up to speed and kind of help them establish that?   Dr. Heather Wilson  11:32 Well, it's a two-way street. It means that I have to understand the culture that I'm in and the way in which I talk with senior faculty may be slightly different than the way I might talk to somebody who just got off a flight line and was too low and slow on final or something, you know? But at the same time with both a sense of humor and a little bit of grace… It was really funny when I was at South Dakota Mines, my provost was a long-time academic. And of course, I had served in Congress for 10 years as well. And he once said something to me that just made me crack up. He said, “You know, you are the least political president I've ever worked with. And the funny thing is, you're the only one that was really a politician.” And he said, “You remind me more of a military officer.” And I thought, “Yeah, that's probably true.” But I was fairly direct as a member of Congress as well. And so, I've just found that that works better for me in life, I guess.   Naviere Walkewicz  12:37 You were sharing how, you know, I think it was the provost that said that you really didn't remind him as someone that was very political, even though you're the only politician he's known. And so what was your time like serving in Congress? I mean, that's 10 years you did, I think, correct?   Dr. Heather Wilson  12:52 I did. And again, I didn't expect to serve in Congress. My predecessor became very seriously ill shortly before the filing deadline for the election that happened in 1998, and my phone rang. It was a Thursday night. This happens to me. I don't know why, but it was a Thursday night, and my phone rang. I was working in Santa Fe, cabinet secretary for Child Welfare, and it was Sen. Pete Domenici, the senior senator for the state of New Mexico. And he said, “You don't know anything about this, but I'm coming to New Mexico this weekend, and I want to talk to you about running for Congress.” Well, that's a quiz; that's not a question. Because a quiz has a right answer, which is, “Sir, I'd be happy to talk to you about whatever you want to talk about.” He's a United States senator. So, we talked about all kinds of things, and he called me from the airport when he was heading back to Washington that Sunday night, and he said, “Look, if you will run, I will help you.” And I decided to run. It was eight days before the filing deadline. I talked to my predecessor — he was fighting skin cancer — and said, “Look, why don't you just focus on fighting cancer? Two years from now, if you want to run again, you can have this seat back. I'll try to do my best for the next two years.” And then 30 days later, he died. I mean, you're not supposed to die of skin cancer. And so, I ended up serving for 10 years in the Congress in a very difficult swing district that I probably shouldn't have won in the first place. But I enjoyed the service part of it. I enjoyed the policy work part of it — intellectually challenging. Some of the partisan silliness I didn't like very much. And then when I left the Congress, ran on successfully for the Senate and became a university president. One of the great things — I tell people now that I was released from Congress early for good behavior. But it was nice to be in a town where people were waving at me with all five fingers. I mean, it was wonderful. So, I enjoyed the service, and I enjoyed a lot helping people — doing casework and things. But it was also a little bit less of a partisan time where you could try to listen and learn and serve well and try to serve your constituents without just being under attack mercilessly and in social media, or something. It was maybe perhaps a different age.   Naviere Walkewicz  15:25 Well, I chuckled when you said waving with all five fingers. That got a good one out of me. I thought about when you're in that, because that wasn't something you were looking to do, and this seems to be a bit of a theme in your leadership trajectory as well. You've kind of been tapped on the shoulder, and you know, for the ones that you didn't apply for or run for, plan for, have been such transformative positions in your life.   Dr. Heather Wilson  15:50 Yeah, and I think maybe that happens to people more than we might acknowledge, because when we're planning our lives, we think we know what's going to happen, but in reality, we adapt to situations that develop and opportunities open that you didn't know were there or someone asked you to take on a special project and that leads you in a direction that you didn't anticipate. So while mine seem particularly unusual in these very different chapters of my life, I don't think it's all that unusual. We just look forward and project in straight lines, and when we look backward, we tell a story in a narrative and it's not always a straight line. But I've been blessed to be asked to do some things. And perhaps in our relationship, my husband and I, he doesn't like change. I love it, and so in our relationship, he's kind of the keel and I'm kind of the sail, and together, we go places.   Naviere Walkewicz  16:56 That's awesome. And I think that particular time and journey in your career serving in Congress was probably one that you established new tools in your leadership toolbox. Were there any that particularly stood out — moments, either when you were having to, you know, forge new policy or achieve things that you hadn't prior? Because Congress is a kind of different machine.   Dr. Heather Wilson  17:21 Yeah, it's a very big committee, and it's not executive leadership. And so I'm probably more predisposed to executive leadership than just being on committees. It takes a very long time to get anything done in Congress, and our government is intentionally designed that way to protect us from tyranny. So you have to take that philosophical approach to it, even if you're frustrated day to day. I did learn how to get things done by giving other people credit. And there were several times — the changes to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act is probably one example — where I had sponsored legislation in the House. It had taken quite a bit of time — changing Congress. There were continued problems, and I went to others and tried to put them in positions of leadership and support them. And ultimately, it was a Senate bill that passed, but which had been shaped in the background by multiple people, including me, and I was OK with that. And the same thing happened on pieces of legislation about public lands in New Mexico. I remember I came out in favor of doing something in northern New Mexico with respect to some public lands, and I got out ahead of Pete Domenici and he was not happy about that. He was very clear about not being happy about getting a little bit ahead of him on it. But in the end, the piece of legislation there that was signed, and another one on Zia Pueblo were Senate bills. They weren't House bills. But I had moved things forward on the House side, and it didn't matter to me that that it said “S” rather than “H” in front of the name of the bill. So as long as you don't really care about who gets the credit, you can get a lot done in the Congress.   Naviere Walkewicz  19:11 That is a powerful lesson. And somewhere in the back of my mind, I think there's a Contrails quote, and I can't remember all of it, but I remember the end of it is, “…if you don't care who gets the credit.”   Dr. Heather Wilson  19:11 Yeah, that was probably one of the short ones. Schofield's quote was — we all did pushups for those.   Naviere Walkewicz  19:30 Yes, I had a starting moment. I was about to get down…   Dr. Heather Wilson  19:35 … and start to sweat…   Naviere Walkewicz  19:37 … and take my punishment. That was wonderful, ma'am. I'm glad we actually went back and did that journey.   Dr. Heather Wilson  19:42 When I think about my service in the Congress, where I made the most difference, it was in committee work, and particularly on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, where I served for a significant amount of time, including post-9/11. And I think that work, because the Intelligence Committee, most of it is in private, it's dealing with really hard, really important issues, and you don't bring your staff there. You have to do the work. And I think probably that's where I did some of my most important work as a member of Congress, was in Intelligence.   Naviere Walkewicz  20:18 Thank you for sharing that. Who are some other influencers, some key influencers in your life, that have maybe walked alongside you or helped you in these different roles that you've carried in your amazing career.   Dr. Heather Wilson  20:31 Oh, they're different people at different times, but certainly as a young person, my grandfather was very important to me. My grandfather had been one of the first flyers in the RAF in World War I, and then came to America in 1922 and flew in the Second World War for what became the Civil Air Patrol. So he did sub search off the Atlantic coast, and varied parts, around to bases, in New England. So, he was important to me as a child. My dad died when I was young. My dad also had been enlisted in the Air Force. He was a crew chief and also a pilot, commercial pilot, after he got out of the service. So I grew up around airplanes and my grandfather was very important to me, and there were other people along the way. When I was a cadet, there was a group commander, Lieutenant Colonel — it's funny, you still remember… anyone who remembers my middle initial, I know it's like, “Oh, this may not be good,” but Robert L. Rame, Lt. Col. Robert L. Rame was the 4th Group commander and my first Air Officer Commanding. General — sorry, Maj. William S. Reeder. He was an Army officer and had been a prisoner of war in Vietnam. Really, I was terrified of disappointing him. It's funny, I just got a Christmas card from him. Life's long, right?   Naviere Walkewicz  21:53 Wow. What connections. I'd like to kind of go back a little bit to your grandfather. You said he was really important to you in your life. Can you share maybe some of the ways he influenced you? Obviously, you're third-generation aviator in your family. Is that how you knew you're going to go into service?   Dr. Heather Wilson  22:08 Well, the Academy wasn't an option until I was a junior in high school, and so I knew I was going to college, but I didn't really think about where. And then they opened the Air Force Academy to women when I was a junior in high school. So, my grandfather had two sons, and he had five grandsons, and me. But he was pretty — I would say — the way he might say it is he was pretty sweet on me; he and I were very close. We used to play chess after school when I was in high school, and I remember once we just finished playing chess, and I was a senior in high school — so, my grandfather was an aviator; he was also a mechanic. He could use any tool, I mean, he was just amazing with his hands. And I had learned a new tool in school, and I took out a piece of graph paper and I drew a drew a curve, and I said, “Grandpa, do you think you could find the area under this curve?” And he said, “Well, I'd probably count up the squares and estimate from there on the graph paper.” And I then I showed him something new and it was called calculus, and it was the first time in my life that I realized I had a tool that my grandfather didn't have. He had a high school education and had gone into the RAF during the First World War, and he was a great mechanic and a really good man, but I realized that there were opportunities for me that maybe my grandfather never had.   Naviere Walkewicz  23:56 I actually got chill bumps when you shared that. Pretty powerful. Thank you so much. Can you talk about, throughout your career — you said if people remember your middle initial, and I'm sure that many on the military side would, because you're amazing… Have you learned from anyone maybe that is not a mentor of you, but someone that has kind of come under your wing? Can you share some leadership lessons that you've learned from those serving alongside and under you?   Dr. Heather Wilson  24:24 Oh my gosh, I learn stuff every day from the people whom I'm privileged to work with. And one of the things that I learned over time was, and as you get more senior, the most important thing you do as a senior leader is hire good people who know things that you don't know, because it's not possible to know everything you need to know to lead a large organization. So, you have to organize yourself well and then get great people and let them do their job. So, I learn things every day. I was interviewing somebody yesterday that we're trying to attract to come to the university who is on the communication side of things — marketing and communication and branding. And you know that creative, visual side of my brain, if you did a brain scan, it would be like a dark hole. That's not a strength of mine. And so those kinds of things are — you have to realize what your strengths are, and then to fill in the team and put together a team, which together can accomplish the mission.   Naviere Walkewicz  25:34 I'd say your grandfather is still kind of, you know, influencing that. It's almost like you're filling your toolbox with all those areas.   Dr. Heather Wilson  25:43 That's funny you use that word. I've told this story before, but my father was both a pilot and a mechanic, and he built an experimental aircraft in our house, and we lived on this, kind of the last house that they would plow to on the end of the road in the winter, right? So, in a very small town, and at that time, there were still traveling salesmen, and the Snap-on tools guy would come probably every six weeks or so, and he had this, like red truck with an accordion thing on the back that looked just like the toolbox in the corner of the garage, right? And we knew that when the Snap-on tools guy came, do not go out. I mean, it was like Christmas for my dad. Do not interfere when the Snap-on tools guy is there. And so he'd go out and lean against the truck, and we could see him laughing and stuff. And eventually my dad would reach in his pocket and pull out his billfold and give the guy a bill, and he'd go back, and he'd lift up the back of the accordion thing and reach in there and give my dad a tool. And my dad would — then the truck would back out, and go on to his next stop. But my dad would take that tool and we'd scramble into the garage to see what he got and stuff. And my dad would usually put that tool in the box in the corner and then go back to what he was doing that day, working on his car or whatever he was doing. And it occurred to me that my dad didn't need that tool that day, but he collected tools, and someday he'd need that tool. And I think great leaders collect tools even when they don't need them today, because they're going to be times when you bring everybody to — you know, there's that great scene in Apollo 13, but it happens around the staff and Cabinet table, and it'll happen in your planning room as a pilot where you've got a new problem, and everybody brings in their tools and says, “OK, how can we make a carbon monoxide filter, or carbon dioxide filter, out of what we've got here on the table?” So, collect tools. And I think that's one of the things I learned from my dad.     Naviere Walkewicz  28:00 Oh, that is an amazing story. Can you share maybe a tool that you've had in your toolbox, that you learned way back when, maybe at the Academy, or as a young girl, that you've recently pulled out and used?   Dr. Heather Wilson 28:12 Well, one of them — I'm not so sure it's recent, but when I was a small business owner, there was a group in New Mexico called Quality New Mexico, and they taught small business owners the Baldrige Principles for quality management. And then I ended up being the Cabinet secretary for child welfare in New Mexico. So, I took over a foster care system, which was under a federal consent decree for not getting kids forever homes and an overly crowded juvenile justice system. I mean, every intractable social problem was — I realized after a while why I became Cabinet secretary for child welfare, because nobody else wanted that job. I mean it was a really difficult job, but I had these tools on quality management. I thought, “I think we can apply these same principles to improving foster care, to improving the juvenile justice system.” And so we did, and there's some things I was proud of there, but one of my last acts as Cabinet secretary before I ended up leaving and running for Congress was to sign the end of the federal consent decree that had been in place for 18 years that said that the state was not getting foster kids forever homes. We changed the system, but we did it using those quality management principles, which I had learned as a small business owner almost as a lark. So, there's one example. But, you know, we just went through a global pandemic. It was very much a pickup game. Nobody had ever been through that. So, we all got together and figured out how we could use the tools we had, including the research capability on my campus to be able to sequence DNA so that we could do testing on campus and get the results, ultimately, within six hours and then feed that back so we could detect disease before someone was symptomatic, so you could suppress disease on campus for those who had to be on campus. There's some things you can't do remotely. And so, we had our own testing system on campus, which was remarkable. Well, why'd we have that? Because we had some tools in the box.   Naviere Walkewicz  30:37 Well, you've used those tools amazingly as you've navigated your career. How would you say that — because yours is… we talked about not being linear. It's kind of been multiple paths and…   Dr. Heather Wilson 30:50 Different chapters.   Naviere Walkewicz 30:51 Yes, I love that. Different chapters. How would you say that you've navigated leadership through that? And has there been a thread that's been common through all those different chapters that you've…   Dr. Heather Wilson  31:04 Yeah, we talked a little about integrity, and that certainly is there. But I when, when people say things like, you know, “Why are you at UTEP?” Or, “Why did you shift to higher ed?” Or, “Why did…” The mission matters so developing people matters. Defending the country matters. So, a mission that matters with people I like. And I realized that when you get down to it, you should do things that matter with people you like and if that's your filter, as long as you can put food on the table, there's a lot of different things you can do, but it should be something that matters with people you like. Otherwise, that time between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. can seem forever unless you're doing something you like.   Naviere Walkewicz  31:49 That is a powerful thread. Mission matters with people you like. How has your family supported you through this?   Dr. Heather Wilson  31:56 I live a blessed life. I tell this to students, and probably, as a younger woman, I wouldn't have said these things because I was so focused on being taken seriously, I suppose. But, I lightened up after time and realized, OK, I'm probably too serious. But the most important decision I've made in my life is not to go to the Academy or to run for Congress or to become a college president — none of those things are the most important decision I've made in my life. The most important decision I made in my life was to marry the guy I married. I married a guy who's actually retired Air Force now, but he was a lawyer. Despite that, he's a nice guy and sometimes, I think, particularly for women, there's always that fear that you're going to sit down when you're in a getting into a serious relationship, and it's going to be one of those conversations that says, “OK, we're thinking about making this permanent. Who's going to give up her career?” And it's not really a conversation, or at least maybe it wasn't in my era, but Jay never had that conversation with me. It was always we could do more together than either of us could do alone, and he has been so supportive of me. And, yeah, vice versa. But I had to go back east for something last week, and I knew that even in this big reception that I was in with all these people, that he wasn't going to be there, and if he was, he'd still be the most interesting guy in the room. So, I married well, and my family always — we're a very close family. And I think while my obligations to my family didn't end at the front porch, my family gave richness and dimension to my life that I never really anticipated as a young woman, and it's given me joy. Success seemed possible to achieve; joy always seemed like a gift from God, and I have had joy because of my family.   Naviere Walkewicz  34:18 Thank you for sharing that. You talk about when you're hiring, you choose people that kind of fill gaps, but it sounds like, also on your personal team, you want to make sure that you're choosing it, you know...   Dr. Heather Wilson  34:30 Yeah, you're going to be roommates for a long time. That matters. And there's the things that you just kind of have to get over. You know, I'm not going to clean around his sink, and he's not going to be bothered about the fact that my closet's color coordinated. I mean, we just live with that, right?   Naviere Walkewicz  34:49 I appreciate that about you so much. You talked a minute ago about some things you learned about yourself as a leader. You know, “Not take myself too seriously.” Can you share a little bit more about that journey on your own, like that personal leadership journey that you've made?   Dr. Heather Wilson  35:07 Yeah, and I think it's easier as you go on. And honestly, very early on, I was very often the only woman in the room, and so I wanted to be taken seriously. I was also very often the youngest person in the room. And so those two things made me want to be taken seriously. As I went on and got more responsibility, I realized that the truth is I am a very serious and successful woman. My husband would say that I was raised in the home for the humor impaired, and that I've been in therapy with him for over 30 years. So, I gradually learned to see the humor in life. I still am not one that stands up and tells jokes or something, but I see the humor in life and I don't take myself too seriously. The person that I watched who used self-deprecating humor better than any leader I've ever seen was actually Dave Goldfein. Everyone knew when he walked into a room, or if he stood up on a stage at a town hall meeting with a bunch of airmen or something — everybody knew that they were gonna laugh. At some point in that meeting we're gonna laugh, and not at someone else's expense, but at his. And it made people relax around him. He was very, very good at it. But I also knew that his self-deprecating humor was really a cover for exceptional competence, and I never underestimated that, but it made people relax and brought a little bit of joy to whatever intractable problem we were looking at.   Naviere Walkewicz  36:51 Well, you shared about sometimes when you're coming up through your leadership, you were often the only woman in the room and sometimes the youngest in the room. What would you like to share on your thoughts of what has that impact been, and what do you see as your legacy?   Dr. Heather Wilson  37:07 Well, there were some times, particularly early on, when women flying or women in positions of command was new, where you just had to do the job and realize that you were probably changing attitudes as you went and that it would be easier for those who came after you, and that's OK. I don't see that as much anymore. Although, when I was elected to Congress, I think probably 10% to 15% of the House was women. Now it's more than that, and once it gets to be more than 30% in any room, it doesn't sound — it's almost like you walk into a restaurant where it's all guys or all women, and you notice the difference in the room, the tones of the voices and things. Once you get to about a third, it feels like it's comfortable, but early on, I always was very conscious of it and conscious of the obligation to do well, because I was being judged not only for myself, but for an entire group of people. And so, I was sensitive to that, and wanted to make sure that I didn't, like — “Don't shame the family,” right? So make sure that you keep the doors open. As far as legacy is concerned, and I think back in my time as Air Force secretary, I would say there's two things that I hope linger, and they have so far. One is a change to the promotion system to make sure that we have the right kind of talent to choose from at all levels in the organization, and so that, I think, has continued to persist. And the other one that will be changed over time and has to be changed over time, had to do with the science and technology strategy of the Air Force and the need to stay ahead of adversaries. I think this is a completely separate conversation, but I actually think that that we are at greater risk of scientific and technical surprise today than at any time since the end of the Second World War. And if you go back and read books about engineers of victory, or there's a whole lot of books about how science and technology was brought to bear in prevailing in the Second World War. I think we're at risk now in a way that we've kind of become complacent about. So, science and technology strategy is something that I hope is a legacy.   Naviere Walkewicz  39:36 That's amazing, ma'am. And I think not only for our military, but you're able to influence that in the spaces that you are now.   Dr. Heather Wilson  39:43 Yeah, engaging the next generation, which is a heck of a lot of fun. You know, the University of Texas at El Paso is a wonderful institution — 25,000 students, half of them are the first in their families to go to college. About 70% or so come from families making less than about $45,000 a year. So, this is a university that transforms lives, and it's a university that — of my 25,000 students, over 5,000 are studying engineering. Another couple thousand are studying science, College of Nursing, College of Education. This has a tremendous impact on the region and on the lives of those who choose to educate themselves. And so it's a wonderful mission to be part of, and I think it's important for the nation. I think regions of the world who choose to educate their people in the 21st century will thrive, and those that don't are going to be left behind, and that's why I do what I do.   Naviere Walkewicz  40:44 Well, it clearly aligns with your foundation and your mission, ma'am, and I think that's outstanding. We're going to ask for Dr. Wilson's final thoughts next, but before we do, I'd like to take a moment and thank you for listening to Long Blue Leadership. The podcast publishes Tuesdays in both video and audio and is available on all your favorite podcast platforms. Be sure to watch, listen and subscribe to all episodes of Long Blue Leadership at longblueleadership.org. So, Dr. Wilson, I would love to take a moment to gather some of your final thoughts, what you'd like to share today.   Dr. Heather Wilson  41:21 Well, assuming that most of the folks who listen to this are either cadets or young officers or grads, I leave them with one thought, and that is, don't shame the family. Don't shame the family. People will look up to you because you are an Air Force Academy graduate, or you are an Air Force cadet. The standard is higher, so live up to the standard.   Naviere Walkewicz  41:50 Ma'am, we started with you being direct. You ended direct. I think that is amazing. Thank you very much. Thanks for being on Long Blue Leadership.   Dr. Heather Wilson  41:58 My pleasure.     KEYWORDS leadership, Air Force Academy, integrity, mentorship, quality management, Dr. Heather Wilson, military service, personal growth, career journey, unexpected opportunities, leadership, integrity, family support, women in leadership, public service, legacy, mission-driven, personal growth, collaboration, Congress     The Long Blue Line Podcast Network is presented by the U.S. Air Force Academy Association and Foundation    

The Communist Bloc shaped the Cold War and global politics for decades—but what was it really?

Several times during the Cold War, the World came dangerously close to a nuclear disaster. In 1961 and 1968, B52 Bombers carrying nuclear bombs met with accidents nearly leading to a nuclear catastrophe. In 1983, one Soviet Lt. Col. single handedly saved the world from WWIII when he categorized an alarm about 5 missiles being launched at the Soviet Union, a false alarm. NATO conducted a WWIII simulation in 1983, which the Soviets assumed, was cover for an actual nuclear strike from the West. 

News, Foreign Minister Lipavský receives seal and stamp symbolizing the termination of the Warsaw Pact, the original Rapid Arrows comics on display, interview with actress Roza Andelova  

During the Cold War years the Royal Navy faced some of its greatest challenges, both at sea confronting the increasingly capable and impressive Soviet Navy, and on shore when it faced policy crises that threatened the survival of much of the fleet. During this period the Navy had rarely been so focused on a single theatre of war - the Eastern Atlantic - but also rarely so politically vulnerable. To find out more Dr Sam Willis spoked with Ed Hampshire, author of the fabulous new book – The Royal Navy in the Cold War Years, 1966-1990: Retreat and Revival. They discuss operations and confrontations at sea with Soviet ships and submarines; the Navy's role in the enormous NATO and Warsaw Pact naval exercises that acted out potential war scenarios; the development of advanced naval technologies to counter Soviet capabilities; policy-making controversies as the three British armed services fought for resources, including the controversial 1981 Nott Defense Review; and what life was like in the Cold War navy for ratings and officers. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In the late 1960s European club football competitions were thriving However unexpected events in 1968 threatened its survival. I delve into the fascinating world of European football during the Cold War era with Craig McCracken, a self-described peddler and purveyor of quasi obscure retro football nostalgia via the 'Beyond The Last Man' blog. We explore the political tensions that influenced European football in the 1960s, and the dramatic events of 1968 when the Prague Spring was crushed by Soviet and Warsaw Pact forces. Discover how these geopolitical events impacted clubs like Celtic, the Milan clubs, and Real Madrid, and the unprecedented decisions UEFA had to make. This episode is a gripping tale of football, politics, and the power struggles that shaped the beautiful game. Episode extras https://coldwarconversations.com/episode370 Craig's excellent blog https://beyondthelastman.com/ All our Cold War Sport episodes in one convenient playlist https://open.spotify.com/playlist/2OoAtLN7sHYdCgCNhms1Kl?si=da05732a422a41f8   The fight to preserve Cold War history continues and via a simple monthly donation, you will give me the ammunition to continue to preserve Cold War history. You'll become part of our community, get ad-free episodes, and get a sought-after CWC coaster as a thank you and you'll bask in the warm glow of knowing you are helping to preserve Cold War history. Just go to https://coldwarconversations.com/donate/ If a monthly contribution is not your cup of tea, We also welcome one-off donations via the same link. Find the ideal gift for the Cold War enthusiast in your life! Just go to https://coldwarconversations.com/store/ Support the project! https://coldwarconversations.com/donate/ Follow us on Twitter https://twitter.com/ColdWarPod Facebook https://www.facebook.com/groups/coldwarpod/ Instagram https://www.instagram.com/coldwarconversations/ Youtube https://youtube.com/@ColdWarConversations Love history? Join Intohistory https://intohistory.com/coldwarpod   Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

About the Lecture: The National Security Archive, based at George Washington University, has pioneered the use of the Freedom of Information Act to open classified U.S. files, and then to match those American primary sources with newly opened (and often now closed) archives in the former Soviet Union and countries of the Warsaw Pact. This presentation will draw on materials from the Archive to shed light on major events of recent history, such as the last “superpower summits” (between Gorbachev and Reagan, and later Gorbachev and George H.W. Bush), the miraculous revolutions of 1989 in Eastern Europe, Yeltsin's turn to authoritarianism in Russia in the 1990s together with the “market bolshevism” (Peter Reddaway's phrase) of economic reform, what Gorbachev and Yeltsin heard from Americans and Europeans about NATO expansion, nuclear follies from Semipalatinsk to Pervomaysk, and the existential threats to humanity (nuclear and climate) that make the U.S. and Russia “doomed to cooperate” (in Sig Hecker's phrase). About the Speakers: Tom Blanton is the director since 1992 of the independent non-governmental National Security Archive at George Washington University (www.nsarchive.org). His books have been awarded the 2011 Link-Kuehl Prize from the Society for Historians of American Foreign Relations, selection by Choice magazine as “Outstanding Academic Title 2017,” and the American Library Association's James Madison Award Citation in 1996, among other honors. The National Freedom of Information Act Hall of Fame elected him a member in 2006, and Tufts University presented him the Dr. Jean Mayer Global Citizenship Award in 2011 for “decades of demystifying and exposing the underworld of global diplomacy.” His articles have appeared in Diplomatic History, Foreign Policy, The New York Times, and the Washington Post, among many other journals; and he is series co-editor for the National Security Archive's online and book publications of more than a million pages of declassified U.S. government documents obtained through the Archive's more than 60,000 Freedom of Information Act requests. Dr. Svetlana Savranskaya is director of Russia programs (since 2001) at the National Security Archive, George Washington University. She earned her Ph.D. in political science and international affairs in 1998 from Emory University. She is the author, with Thomas Blanton, of the book The Last Superpower Summits: Gorbachev, Reagan and Bush, (Budapest: Central European University Press, 2016), and editor of the book by the late Sergo Mikoyan, The Soviet Cuban Missile Crisis: Castro, Mikoyan, Kennedy, Khrushchev and the Missiles of November (Stanford: Stanford University Press/Woodrow Wilson Center Press, 2012). Dr. Savranskaya won the Link-Kuehl Prize in 2011 from the Society for Historians of American Foreign Relations, recognizing the best documentary publication over the previous two years, for her book (with Thomas Blanton and Vladislav Zubok) “Masterpieces of History”: The Peaceful End of the Cold War in Europe 1989 (Budapest/New York: Central European University Press, 2010). She is author and co-author of several publications on Gorbachev's foreign policy and nuclear learning and the end of the Cold War, and numerous electronic briefing books on these subjects. She serves as an adjunct professor teaching U.S.-Russian relations at the American University School of International Service in Washington D.C. (since 2001).

Every year as school began, it seemed that each of my primary school teachers would have us write a paragraph or an essay about our summer's activities. As August finishes and school in most of the US has reconvened, this seemed a good time to reflect on my adventures the last few months.Historical markers include astronomy, Bulgaria and Hungary, Warsaw Pact nations squelching an uprising and Charles Darwin's theory of evolution.Support the Show.Thanks for listening. Please share the pod with your mates, and feel free to comment right here! Write to Bob on his email -- bobmendo@AOL.comLink to https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100078996765315 on Facebook. Bobs Your Uncle features the opinions of Bob Mendelsohn and any of his guests.To financially support the podcast, go to the Patreon site and choose Gold, Silver or Bronze levels. Thanks for that! https://www.patreon.com/BobsYourUncle To read Bob's 1999 autobiography, click this link https://bit.ly/StoryBob To see photos of any of Bob's guests, they are all on an album on his Flickr site click here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/bobmendo/albums/72177720296857670

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit andrewsullivan.substack.comJeffrey Toobin is a lawyer, author, and the chief legal analyst at CNN, after a long run at The New Yorker. He has written many bestselling books, including True Crimes and Misdemeanors, The Oath, The Nine, and Too Close to Call, and two others — The Run of His Life and A Vast Conspiracy — were adapted for television as seasons of “American Crime Story” on the FX channel.You can listen right away in the audio player above (or on the right side of the player, click “Listen On” to add the Dishcast feed to your favorite podcast app). For two clips of our convo — why the Bragg conviction helped Trump, and the origins of lawfare with Bill Clinton — pop over to our YouTube page.Other topics: growing up in NYC as the only child of two journos; his mom was a pioneering TV correspondent; his dad was one of founding fathers of public television; Jeffrey at the Harvard Crimson and then Harvard Law; how Marty Peretz mentored us both; the conservative backlash after Nixon and rebuilding executive power; Ford's pardon; Jeffrey on the team investigating Oliver North; the Boland Amendment and the limits of law; Cheney's role during Iran-Contra; how Congress hasn't declared war since WWII; Whitewater to Lewinsky; Ken Starr and zealous prosecutors; Trump extorting Ukraine over the Bidens; Russiagate; the Mueller Report and Barr's dithering; how such investigations can help presidents; the Bragg indictment; the media environment of Trump compared to Nixon; Fox News coverage of Covid; Trump's pardons; hiding Biden; the immunity case; SEAL Team Six and other hypotheticals; Jack Smith and fake electors; the documents case; the check of impeachment; the state of SCOTUS and ethics scandals; Thomas and the appearance of corruption; the wives of Thomas and Alito; the Chevron doctrine; reproductive rights; the Southern border and asylum; Jeffrey's main worry about a second Trump term; and his upcoming book on presidential pardons.Browse the Dishcast archive for an episode you might enjoy (the first 102 are free in their entirety — subscribe to get everything else). Coming up: Eric Kaufmann on liberal extremism, and Bill Wasik and Monica Murphy on animal cruelty. (Van Jones' PR team canceled his planned appearance.) Please send any guest recs, dissents, and other comments to dish@andrewsullivan.com.Here's a fan of last week's episode with Anne Applebaum:I loved your freewheeling interview with Applebaum. Just like the last time she was on, each of you gave as good as you got.I tend to agree more with her, because I fear that sometimes you come off as what Jeane Kirkpatrick called the “blame America first crowd” — not that we haven't committed our sins. But if we didn't exist, Putin would still be evil and want to recreate the Warsaw Pact, and the mullahs in Iran would still be fanatics despite our CIA involvement. It's complicated.Another on foreign policy:I despise Putin, my sympathies are totally with the Ukrainians, and I get angry when people like Rod Dreher and Tucker Carlson imply that the Russians were forced by the West to invade Ukraine. But, so what! You hit the nail on the head with the Obama quote — that Ukraine is never going to mean as much to us as it does to them (the Russians). You also made another very good point that the Russians can't even conquer Ukraine, but we're supposed to fear they will march West? How they going to do that?!Another took issue with several things from Anne:You raised the immigration issue, and Applebaum completely dismissed it: Hungary doesn't have a migrant crisis. … Because it's a useful symbol [to] create fear and anxiety. … This is the oldest political trick in the book, and the creation of an imaginary culture war is one of the ways in which you build support among a more fearful part of the population.WTF? Are Hungarians not allowed to see what is happening in every other European country that has allowed mass migration and see the problems it has caused and proactively decide to prevent this?! Are they not allowed to be concerned until Budapest has the banlieues of Paris, the car bombing gangs of Sweden, and the grooming gangs of England?! And in Germany, it has been recently reported that almost half of people receiving social payments are migrants.Applebaum followed that up with an even bigger gobsmacker about Biden's cognitive decline: “This is another road I don't want to go down, but I know people who met with Joe Biden a couple months ago, and he was fine” (meaning I just want to make my statement but will not allow you a rebuttal). And then:I've met [Harris] a few times, mostly in the context of conversations about foreign policy and about Russia and Ukraine and other things. And she's an intelligent conversationalist. … I was impressed with her. And these are way off-the-record conversations... And I was always more impressed with how she was off the record. And then I would sometimes see her in public. And I thought, she seems very stiff and nervous. … You'd like her if you met her in real life.Translation of both of these excerpts: “You plebes who aren't insiders just don't understand, but trust me — the connected insider — instead of your lying eyes.”Another adds:I think for the next few months, you're going to have to push people like Anne Applebaum to be more open to criticizing the Biden-Harris record. She's a smart person with important things to say, but she clearly dared not criticize the current administration, lest she be seen as helping Trump. And another:She says, unironically, that autocrats rig court systems with exotic new lawfare to attack their political enemies to seize or cling to power. I wonder what that makes Alvin Bragg and Merrick Garland.This Dishhead listened to the episode with his teenage son:The notion that Trump supporters want a dictator is beyond ridiculous. They are among the most individualistic and freedom-loving people in America. They are the Jacksonians, the Scots-Irish heart of this country. They are ornery as hell, and if Trump tried to force them into anything, he'd have another thing coming.  Just look how he tried to get them to take “his” vaccine. That didn't work out so well, did it? The truth is, they view people like Anne as the ones who are taking away their rights and freedoms through their absolute dominance of the media and all cultural institutions. Now maybe Trump will deliver them from that and maybe he won't, but that is what they are seeking — not a dictator, but someone who will break the hideous grip that the liberal elite has on the culture.My son is 18 years old and was also listening to the episode. He is highly engaged in national and world affairs, and he also thought Anne was way off track. He's already announced to his mother (much to her chagrin) that he will be casting his first vote for Trump. And get this: he's going to Oberlin College this fall. I can assure you he's not looking for a dictator. He's looking to say “eff you” to a system that has no use for upper-class, normal white boys like him. The elites hate him and his friends.But I'm glad you have a diversity of views on the Dishcast. It really is the best. I look forward to listening to it every week.I can't back Trump, but I do think your son is onto something. On a few other episodes:Lionel Shriver — I love her! I wished you'd talked more about her novel, Mania. It's not perfect, but it's good.On the Stephen Fry pod, I was resistant! He's irritated me at times. But I loved it when you two started doing Larkin! I shouldn't admit this, but “Aubade” could be my autobiography. I think one or both of you misinterpret “Church Going.” Larkin doesn't wish he had faith. I don't think that's relevant to him. Fry talked about how he liked everything about Anglicanism except for the detail about God (and I always suspect that for Anglicans, God is a somewhat troubling detail). I'm probably just guessing, but I don't think that's Larkin. Larkin didn't wish he had faith. He was elegiac about the past in which there was faith. I think you'll see this sensibility in “An Arundel Tomb.”Agreed. Another on Shriver:She seems to think that “liberals” are mistaken in believing that everyone can be equal, but I think she is mistaken in thinking that is what they believe — at least those I know. Liberals do think that 1) expectations play a role in what people achieve; and 2) given the right circumstances, many people find they can achieve more than was expected. Low expectations do lead to low outcomes (and yes, there is research to support that statement). Does that mean everyone can do anything they wish? No. Neither you nor I will ever be a concert pianist, but let us not condemn everyone to the garbage heap based on false expectations.Thanks as always for your provocative discussions.Here's a guest rec:Musa Al Gharbi, a sociologist at Stony Brook, has written for Compact, American Affairs, and The Liberal Patriot. His forthcoming book, We Have Never Been Woke: The Cultural Contradictions of a New Elite, draws on Pierre Bourdieu's notions of cultural capital to analyze the ascendant symbolic capitalists — those who work in law, technology, nonprofits, academia, journalism and media, finance, civil service and the like — and how the ideology known as “wokeness” exists to entrench economic inequality and preserve the hegemony of this class. I have preordered the book, and it should be a timely read for an election in which class (education), not race, has become the preeminent dividing line in our politics.Here's a guest rec with pecs:I have a recommendation that may sound bonkers, but hear me out: Alan Ritchson, the actor whose career has taken off thanks to playing Jack Reacher on Reacher.The fact that he's really, really, really ridiculously good-looking is the least interesting thing about him. I'd love to hear a conversation between you and him for a few reasons. First, he's bipolar and speaks openly about it. Second, he started taking testosterone supplements after his body broke down from working out for Reacher, and he speaks openly about that too. Third, he's a devout evangelical Christian who speaks openly about his faith — and about his disgust with Christian nationalism and the hijacking of Christianity by many Trump supporters. Fourth, he posted what read to me as a thoughtful, sane critique of bad cops, thereby angering certain denizens of the Very Online Right. Thus, he could speak to a number of major Dishcast themes: mental illness, masculinity, and Christianity. To me, he manages to come across as a guy's guy whose comments on political matters sound like the result of actual reflection, rather than reflexively following a progressive script, which is how most celebrities come across. He's articulate, and the way he's navigating this cultural and political moment is fascinating. And if you do snag him, you should supplement the audio with video.Haha. But seriously, we're trying to keep the podcast fresh and this is a great out-of-the-box recommendation. Next up, the dissents over my views on Harris continue from the main page. A reader writes:I have no particular attachment to Kamala Harris, and share some of your concerns, but your latest column reads more like a Fox News hit piece than a real assessment. The main problem is that you seem to be judging Harris almost exclusively on the basis of statements she made in 2020, at the height of the Democrats' woke mania because of George Floyd. Do you not remember that she was destroyed in the primary because she was a prosecutor, and was to the right of almost everyone else in the primary, except for Biden and Sanders? That's why she lost: she wasn't woke enough. So as VP, of course she pivoted to shore up her appeal to the base, like any good politician would. It's terribly unfortunate that she had to tack hard left precisely as the country was moving back to the center and rejecting wokism, but that doesn't mean she's the “wokest candidate,” as you say. It just means she's a politician.My criticism also extended to her management and campaigning skills in the past. And look: I don't think it's fair to compare my attempt to review the evidence of her record with a Fox News hit-piece. It's important to understand her vulnerabilities as well as he core ideas, if she has any. This next reader thinks she is off to a good, non-woke start:I agree with your criticisms of Harris, at least some of them. We need to have stronger border enforcement, we can't have riots in cities, and racism is real but DEI excesses are also bad. And it's troubling that she has a history of being a bad boss. I can only hope that she has learned from her mistakes. But I take heart from her campaign speech in Wisconsin: she said not a word about DEI, nothing about “vote for me to show that you're not sexist/racist, because I'm a woman of color,” and not much about “Trump is a threat to democracy.” It was all, “I have experience dealing with sleazy crooks and sex offenders like Trump, and I want to help middle-class Americans and protect health care and a woman's right to choose.” Sounds like a popular message!You also say, “She is not a serious person.” Bro, have you *seen* the other party's candidate?

Due to personal circumstances, I've been unable to produce a new episode this week, however, you will be aware of the many gems in the back catalogue and I have chosen one of my favourites today which is a rip-roaring story of service in the USAF with Rick Shreve an F111 pilot which I know you will enjoy. Normal service should be resumed next week. Rick Shreve was a US Air Force F 111 pilot based at RAF Lakenheath in the UK. He was trained to carry out nuclear as well as conventional missions against the Warsaw Pact forces in Europe. Rick describes his low-level training missions to attack targets in the Soviet Union and East Germany, where he recalls a near-fatal incident amongst the Scottish lochs. Rick was also part of one of the crews that flew on Operation El Dorado Canyon, the operation to bomb Libya in April 1986 in retaliation for the West Berlin discotheque bombing ten days earlier. Rick gives you a very frank and honest view of his role in the US Air Force and his approach to the huge responsibilities he carried. Episode extras https://coldwarconversations.com/episode358/ The fight to preserve Cold War history continues and via a simple monthly donation, you will give me the ammunition to continue to preserve Cold War history. You'll become part of our community, get ad-free episodes, and get a sought-after CWC coaster as a thank you and you'll bask in the warm glow of knowing you are helping to preserve Cold War history. Just go to https://coldwarconversations.com/donate/ If a monthly contribution is not your cup of tea, We also welcome one-off donations via the same link. Find the ideal gift for the Cold War enthusiast in your life! Just go to https://coldwarconversations.com/store/ Support the project! https://coldwarconversations.com/donate/ Follow us on Twitter https://twitter.com/ColdWarPod Facebook https://www.facebook.com/groups/coldwarpod/ Instagram https://www.instagram.com/coldwarconversations/ Youtube https://youtube.com/@ColdWarConversations Love history? Join Intohistory https://intohistory.com/coldwarpod Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Download the Volley.FM app for more short daily shows!

Original Air Date: January 6, 1998Episode 1289Website: thefacthunter.comEmail: thefacthunter@mail.comSnail Mail: George Hobbs PO Box109 Goldsboro, MD  21636

Content warning for discussion of genocide. Hey, Hi, Hello, this is the History Wizard and welcome back for Day 7 of Have a Day w/ The History Wizard. Thank you to everyone who tuned in for Day 6 last week, and especially thank you to everyone who rated and/or reviewed the podcast. I hope you all learned something last week and I hope the same for this week. Speaking of weeks, we've finally hit our first week! Get it? This is episode 7, the episodes are called Days. There are 7 Days in a Week… I'm funny dammit! I've got something special for you starting at the end of Week 1. It's a new segment I'm going to call the Alchemist's Table. Every Day I'm going to be sharing with you a cocktail recipe that I have invented. If you enjoy a nice cocktail and you aren't driving to work feel free to make yourself one before sitting down for the rest of the episode. For Day 7 we're going to be enjoying the first cocktail I ever created. It's called A Taste of Spring. It starts with 2 oz of Gin, I prefer gunpowder gin, but a London Dry will work just fine. Followed by 1 oz of elderflower liquor, 1 oz of lavender syrup, stir for about 30 seconds in ice before straining into a rocks glass over ice. And that, my friends, is a Taste of Spring. Enjoy. Anyway, it's time to head back to the West, and for this episode we have to travel back in time to the 5th century BCE for the Siege of Melos during the Peloponnesian War. IN a modern historical context we look at the Peloponnesian War as being between Sparta and Athens, and while this isn't technically wrong, it's also not as right as it could be. The Peloponnesian War was fought between the Delian League, which was a confederacy of various Greek city-states with Atens in supreme control. The Delian League was created as a defensive alliance against the Persian Empire following the Second Persian Invasion of Greece (this is the invasion that included the famed Battle of Thermopylae). And the Peloponnesian League which was less a league and more an ancient world version of the Warsaw Pact, with Sparta (then called Lacadeamon) at the head with its various allied city states. See, around 550 BCE SParta got tired of having to conquer everyone and instead offered to NOT conquer them if they joined the League. The Delian League got its name from the island of Delos where they would meet and where their treasury was held before being moved to Athens in 454 BCE. The Peloponnesian League got IT'S name from the peninsula at the southern tip of Greece, which is known as the Peloponnese Peninsula. The Peloponnesian League is something of a misnomer as its membership was not limited to that area of Greece. But, I ramble, and so let us return to the Peloponnesian War. Why did Sparta and Athens, erstwhile allies against Xerxes I and the Persian Empire decide to go to war with each other? The period between the Second Persian Invasion of Greece and the Peloponnesian War is sometimes known as the Pentecontaetia, a term which means “a period of 50 years” which refers to the 48 year period between 479 and 431 BCE. The Pentecontaetia saw the rise of Athens as one of the most prominent Greek City States, it saw the rise of Athenian democracy, and it saw the rise of tensions between Sparta and Athens. You can look at this period as somewhat similar to the rising tensions between Rome and Carthage. Sparta HAD been the most powerful Greek city-state, and now suddenly they had a rival and didn't like that. Sparta was the Sasuke to Athens Naruto, the Vegeta to Athen's Goku. Following the flight of the Persian armies from Greece Athens began to rebuild the great walls around their city that had been lost to the Persian armies. Sparta, upon learning about this construction, asked them not to do that. But Athens rebuffed them, not wanting to put Athens effectively under the control of Sparta's massive army. Another way we can view Athens and Sparta through the lens of Carthage and Rome is that Athens was vastly superior at sea, and Sparta was vastly superior on land, just as Carthage and Rome were, respectively. I'm taking bets now on who is going to win this war, assuming you don't already know. These tensions, which were further exacerbated by a helot revolt within Sparta would explode, though not terribly violently, during a 15 year conflict known as the First Peloponnesian War. This first war would end with the signing of the Thirty Years Peace treaty. This treaty, which would only last for 15 years, would solidify the Athenian and Spartan Empires and would cement Athens as a true powerhouse in the Aegean Sea. Conflict between Athens and Corinth, a member of the Peloponnesian League, is what ultimately led to war. Athens and Corinth effectively fought a brief proxy war over control of the Corinthian colony of Potidea. Corinth, outraged that Athens had encouraged one of its colonies to rebel against their authority, urged Sparta to call a conclave to try and arbitrate peace as was stipulated under the Thirty Years Peace.  The Spartan King Archidamus II urged the Spartan magistrates (known as ephor) and the citizen assembly known as the ecclesia not to go to war, but in the end the assembly determined that Athens, in urging Potidea to rebel against one of their allies and then aiding them in the fight for the city had broken the Peace and war was officially declared in 431 BCE. The Second Peloponnesian War had begun. The Second Peloponnesian War, often known as just the Peloponnesian War, can be broken up into three distinct segments. The Archidamian War, The Sicilian Expedition, and the Decelean War. The first 10 years of the war are sometimes also called the Ten Years War. Sparta was, almost entirely, a land based empire. The Spartan Army was the most feared and one of the best trained armies of the ancient world. Their hoplites and their phalanxes were nearly invincible. Meanwhile Athens had the same prestige on the waves. The Battle of Salamis in 480 BCE, though discussed far less frequently than the concurrent Battle of Thermopylae, is no less impressive a feat of military genius. So the Spartan strategy during the beginning of the war was to march its armies to the land around the city state of Athens and seize them. This caused many Athenian farmers to abandon their farms and retreat behind Athens famous Long Walls. The Long Walls were fortified walls that connected Athens' main city to its ports at Piraeus and Phaleron. So despite the loss of farmland around Athens itself, this siege did basically nothing. Sparta was also only able to keep troops on the field for a few weeks at a time, as the hoplites were still needed to harvest their own fields and troops were always needed to keep the helots in line. The longest siege of the Ten Years War was only 40 days. Meanwhile Athens stayed in the Aegean Sea with their fleet, avoiding any open warfare with the Spartans who were unable to breach their walls anyway. The Athenians had great successes in their early naval battles, including the Battle of Naucaptus where 20 Athenian ships went up  against 77 Peloponnesian ships and emerged victorious. Of course, all of Athen's momentum would come to a screeching and screaming halt when th plague hit in 430 BCE. The Plague of Athens was an interesting facet of the war. While some Athenians believed that the Spartans were the cause of the plague, evidenced they said by the fact that the Spartans were unaffected by it, but Thucydides, author the the famous History of the Peloponnesian War was in the city when the plague hit. He even contracted it and survived his illness. Thucydides says that the plague came from Ethiopia as it appeared to have entered Athens along the Long Wall from the port of Piraeus. There's not much in the way of evidence regarding WHAT exactly the plague was, although Thucydides listed out a large number of symptoms that victims experienced including: Fever, Redness and inflammation in the eyes, Sore throats leading to bleeding and bad breath, Sneezing, Loss of voice, Coughing, Vomiting, Pustules and ulcers on the body, Extreme thirst, Insomnia, Diarrhea, Convulsions, and Gangrene. Modern epidemiologists and paleopathologists believe, based on extensive examination of all the available evidence that the plague was likely either smallpox or typhus, although it's unlikely that we'll ever know for certain. The plague had a massive impact on the course of the war. For one, it killed Pericles, the Athenian statesman and strategos of the Athenian military. It also killed over 30,000 people, made foreign mercenaries unwilling to aid Athens, no matter how much they were offered as they did not want to risk getting sick, the plague even halted any Spartan military action in Attica until it was finished as the Spartans also feared the disease. Even with the loss of Pericles Athens continued to have success on sea as well as on land through the efforts of their commanders Demosthenes and Cleon. They started to put cracks in the Spartan armies image of invincibility until the Spartans captured Amphipolis, a silver mine that supplied much of the Athenian war chest in 424 BCE. In 422 a great battle was fought at Amphipolis which saw both Cleon, and the Spartan general Brasidas killed. The loss of these military commanders would see Athens and Sparta sit down to try and negotiate peace.  The Peace of Nicias would be a failure from the very start. Despite it, nominally, declaring peace between Sparta and Athens, despite PoWs being exchanged and control over territories ceded back to those who originally owned them, the Peace of Nicias was something of a joke. Sparta and Athens entered something of a Cold War. They didn't fight against each other specifically, but Athens spent a LOT of time trying to stir up helot revolts and encourage Spartan allies to revolt against them in order to gain greater autonomy under Athenian democracy.  Something that is interesting to note, is that despite the single largest land battle of the Peloponnesian War taking place in 418 BCE, the Peace wasn't formally abandoned, and war declared again between Athens and Sparta until 214 BCE. The Battle of Mantinea was fought between Sparta and some of its Arcadian allies on one side, and the combined might of Argos, Athens, Mantinea and various Arcadian allies of Argos. The battle, which involved nearly 20,000 troops combined, ended with a Spartan victory and saw a reversal of previous trends. After the Spartan loss at the Battle of Pylos in 425 BCE many began to think of the Spartans as weak and cowardly, but Mantinea reversed that thinking very quickly. The Siege of Melos, the true subject of this episode, also took place during the Peace of Nicias. Athenian aggression against Melos began about 10 years before the Siege. Melos was a small island about 68 miles off the Eastern coast of Greece. Small islands, due to their reliance on navies, were generally allies of Athens who had uncontested control of the seas. Melos though, decided to remain neutral. They were ethnically Dorian, same as the Spartans (the Athenians were ethnically Ionian). In 425 Athens demanded that Melos pay them a 15 talents (about 390 kgs) of silver. Melos refused. They were determined to remain neutral (although there is pretty good evidence that they donated 20 minas (about 12.5 kgs) of silver to the Spartan war effort. In 216 BCE Athens once again went to Melos and demanded that Melos join the Delian League and pay tribute. Melos again refused. Thucydides wrote a dramatization of conversation between Athenian embassies and the leaders of Melos in his Histories (Book 5, Chapters 84–116). The Melian Dialogue is one of the earliest events I learned about during undergrad when I took a class on the History of Just War. I need to go off on a slight tangent here. When I took this class there was this one guy, whose name I never learned. He was jacked as hell and always showed up to class double fisting iced coffees from Starbucks. Now this class was built around a questionL “Is there such a thing as a Just War?”, but apparently this dude never read the syllabus because about 3 weeks into class he asks “When are we gonna get to the battles?” See, he thought it was History of Just War, just meaning only. He thought it was a military history class, not a class on moral philosophy seen through the context of war. I'm pretty sure he got an A though… Anyway, back to Melos. It's unlikely that the conversation Thucydides wrote out is how it played out in real life, though given the Athenian love of oration and speeches, he's probably not TOO far off the mark. I'm going to read you a part of the Melian Dialogue: Athenians. For ourselves, we shall not trouble you with specious pretences- either of how we have a right to our empire because we overthrew the Mede, or are now attacking you because of wrong that you have done us- and make a long speech which would not be believed; and in return we hope that you, instead of thinking to influence us by saying that you did not join the Lacedaemonians, although their colonists, or that you have done us no wrong, will aim at what is feasible, holding in view the real sentiments of us both; since you know as well as we do that right, as the world goes, is only in question between equals in power, while the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must. Melians. As we think, at any rate, it is expedient- we speak as we are obliged, since you enjoin us to let right alone and talk only of interest- that you should not destroy what is our common protection, the privilege of being allowed in danger to invoke what is fair and right, and even to profit by arguments not strictly valid if they can be got to pass current. And you are as much interested in this as any, as your fall would be a signal for the heaviest vengeance and an example for the world to meditate upon. Athenians. The end of our empire, if end it should, does not frighten us: a rival empire like Lacedaemon, even if Lacedaemon was our real antagonist, is not so terrible to the vanquished as subjects who by themselves attack and overpower their rulers. This, however, is a risk that we are content to take. We will now proceed to show you that we are come here in the interest of our empire, and that we shall say what we are now going to say, for the preservation of your country; as we would fain exercise that empire over you without trouble, and see you preserved for the good of us both. Melians. And how, pray, could it turn out as good for us to serve as for you to rule? Athenians. Because you would have the advantage of submitting before suffering the worst, and we should gain by not destroying you. Melians. So that you would not consent to our being neutral, friends instead of enemies, but allies of neither side. Athenians. No; for your hostility cannot so much hurt us as your friendship will be an argument to our subjects of our weakness, and your enmity of our power. Melians. Is that your subjects' idea of equity, to put those who have nothing to do with you in the same category with peoples that are most of them your own colonists, and some conquered rebels? Athenians. As far as right goes they think one has as much of it as the other, and that if any maintain their independence it is because they are strong, and that if we do not molest them it is because we are afraid; so that besides extending our empire we should gain in security by your subjection; the fact that you are islanders and weaker than others rendering it all the more important that you should not succeed in baffling the masters of the sea. See, Athens refused to allow Melos to remain neutral because they believed that, if they allowed this small, weak nation to live independent of their might that they would soon find themselves overrun with rebellion as all others would see Athens let Melos go free and see Athens as weak, as if they somehow feared fighting Melos. So, pragmatically, it would be better for them to kill all the Melians to maintain their image as strong than it would be for them to simply leave Melos be. Despite their claim to democracy, Athens was very much of the opinion that might made right. The strong take what they can and the weak suffer as they must. This was, more or less the beginning of Just War theory, as it was one of the first time that justice, fairness, and rightness was discusses in the context of war. Just War Theory, by the way, is generally made up of three elements. Jus ad bellum, do you have just reasons for going to war? Jus in bello, is your conduct during war just? And a more modern addition, jus post bellum, is your conduct after the war is over also just? Melos, ultimately, refused to surrender to Athens and, indeed, tried to fight against their armies and ultimately failed. The siege lasted from summer of 416 until the winter and ended with Melos surrendering. Athens, in a very Genghis Khan esque move decided to kill every adult man on Melos and sell all of the women and children into slavery. This form of genocide where one particular gender is targeted is common in old world genocides. Very often it is the men, those who could join opposing militaries who would be targeted for the slaughter although Shaka Zulu was infamous for killing all the women and folding the men into his armed forces during his conquests. The genocide of Melos wasn't an attempt to wipe out an ethnicity, Melians being Dorian just like the Spartans. It WAS, however, intended to destroy the people of Melos, and it succeeded. The Peloponnesian War would continue until 404 BCE and would end with a Spartan victory, partially through aid gained from the Achaemenid Dynasty from Persia and some from Alcibiades of Athens, but the war isn't the important part and so we will ignore the final 12 years of it. That's it for this week. No new reviews, so let's jump right into the outro. Have a Day! w/ The History Wizard is brought to you by me, The History Wizard. If you want to see/hear more of me you can find me on Tiktok @thehistorywizard or on Instagram @the_history_wizard. Please remember to rate, review, and subscribe to Have a Day! On your pod catcher of choice. The more you do, the more people will be able to listen and learn along with you. Thank you  for sticking around until the end and, as always, Have a Day.    

Though the Biden Administration has said there will be no US troops on the ground in Israel's war on Gaza, The Intercept reports yesterday on a US Air Force memo informing personnel to be “on standby to forward deploy to support troops in the case of on ground US involvement in the Israel Hamas war.” Our war? Also today: Nuland says NEVER to getting out of Syria and the EU goes Warsaw Pact on Hungary.

During the 1970s, the US and Soviet Union were engaged in the Cold War. The US, along with other Western countries, was a member of Nato, while the Soviet Union joined forces with central and eastern European countries in the Warsaw Pact. After becoming frustrated with the way the Soviets controlled his country, Ryszard Kukliński, a Polish colonel, wrote to the US Embassy in Bonn, West Germany. For the next 10 years, he would feed the CIA tens of thousands of pages of classified military secrets.Aris Pappas, a CIA agent who analysed Ryszard's intel, speaks to George Crafer about his memories of this forgotten hero. (Photo: Jack Strong aka Ryszard Kukliński. Credit: AP)

Dan served as a lieutenant and captain in a US Army air defence artillery battalion in West Germany from 1980 until 1985. He describes details of Soviet overflights deep into West Germany and we discuss how the Warsaw Pact attempted to track their units. Now who knew that the US Army experimented with geese for perimeter security?! Dan reveals details of this little-known specialist unit. Dan worked with the improved Hawk anti-aircraft missile system. We talk about its capabilities, the challenges of working with 1980s electronics, its deployment and exercises. He describes a live firing exercise where an errant missile almost wiped out a group of VIPS. Don't miss part 2 in a couple of weeks where Dan describes his experiences in the war plans office of the general staff. Do make sure you check out the episode extras at https://coldwarconversations.com/episode328/ The fight to preserve Cold War history continues and via a simple monthly donation, you will give me the ammunition to continue to preserve Cold War history. You'll become part of our community, get ad-free episodes, and get a sought-after CWC coaster as a thank you and you'll bask in the warm glow of knowing you are helping to preserve Cold War history. Just go to https://coldwarconversations.com/donate/ If a monthly contribution is not your cup of tea, We also welcome one-off donations via the same link. Find the ideal gift for the Cold War enthusiast in your life! Just go to https://coldwarconversations.com/store/ Follow us on Twitter https://twitter.com/ColdWarPod Instagram https://www.instagram.com/coldwarconversations/ Facebook https://www.facebook.com/groups/coldwarpod/ Youtube https://youtube.com/@ColdWarConversations Love history? Check out Into History at this link https://intohistory.com/coldwarpod 0:00 Introduction and background of Dan 1:32 The Improved Hawk missile system and its capabilities 10:29 Deployment to field locations and the challenges faced 18:13 Encounters with Soviet aircraft and military liaison missions 24:33 The innovative use of intruder geese for security 33:21 Live firing exercises and the dangers involved 42:20 The deactivation of an air defence unit and its implications 58:41 Reflections on service 1:13:38 Podcast extras, appreciation for financial supporters, and closing remarks Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

In the mid-1980s Dag was a T72 tank commander in the NVA, the East German Army and is now a volunteer at the Tank Museum at Bovington in the UK.   He describes his initial tank commander training, the battle readiness of the NVA, and the challenges of a conscript army as well as a startling revelation about a significant change in doctrine in 1987. We also dig deep into the technical details of the T72, including the autoloader, deep water wading, radio communication and its advantages and disadvantages versus NATO tanks. Dag also talks about how Soviet WW2 learnings were applied into the NVA, and his regiment's role and deployment area in the event of war. Dag shares a frank view and great insight into life in the NVA as a tank commander and the challenges of life beyond the NVA as the Wall opens and all he has known disappears.   Make sure you check out the videos here https://coldwarconversations.com/episode326/ The fight to preserve Cold War history continues and via a simple monthly donation, you will give me the ammunition to continue to preserve Cold War history. You'll become part of our community, get ad-free episodes, and get a sought-after CWC coaster as a thank you and you'll bask in the warm glow of knowing you are helping to preserve Cold War history. Just go to https://coldwarconversations.com/donate/ If a monthly contribution is not your cup of tea, We also welcome one-off donations via the same link. Find the ideal gift for the Cold War enthusiast in your life! Just go to https://coldwarconversations.com/store/ Follow us on Twitter https://twitter.com/ColdWarPod Instagram https://www.instagram.com/coldwarconversations/ Facebook https://www.facebook.com/groups/coldwarpod/ Youtube https://youtube.com/@ColdWarConversations Love history? Check out Into History at this link https://intohistory.com/coldwarpod 0:00 Introduction 10:29 Briefing on NATO armour and perception of NATO as the enemy 18:13 Planning for potential conflict and readiness in the NVA 24:33 Understanding the roles and challenges in a conscript army 33:21 Performance and operational details of the T72 tank 42:20 Training, battlefield strategies and preparations 58:41 East German-Soviet relations and Warsaw Pact exercises 1:13:38 Reflections on service in the NVA and potential conflict with NATO 1:23:59 Reaction to the opening of the Berlin Wall and post-service encounters 1:27:34 Life post-unification: Expectations, reality and personal growth 1:31:28 Podcast extras, appreciation for financial supporters and closing remarks Chapters powered by PodcastAI✨ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

During the height of the Cold War, a group of small-town young men would lead their underdog hockey team from the little country of Czechoslovakia against the mighty Soviet Union, the juggernaut in their sport and the superpower in their neighborhood. As they battled on the ice, the young players would keep their people's quest for freedom alive, and forge a way to fight back against the authoritarian forces that sought to crush them. Join us as University of California, Davis, political science professor Ethan Scheiner, whose research focused on the intersection of politics and sports, discusses what he found out while researching and writing his new book Freedom to Win: A Cold War Story of the Courageous Hockey Team That Fought the Soviets for the Soul of Its People—and Olympic Gold.  From the sudden invasion of Czechoslovakia by an armada of tanks and 500,000 Warsaw Pact soldiers, to a hockey victory over the Soviets that inspired half a million furious citizens to take to the streets in an attempt to destroy all representations that they could find of their occupiers, Scheiner tells a story that ranges from iconic moments in history to courageous individual stories. At the heart of the tale is the Holíks, a Czechoslovak family whose resistance to the Communists embodied the deepest desires of the people of their country. Faced with life under the cruel and arbitrary regime that had stolen their family butcher shop, the Holík boys became national hockey icons and inspirations to their people. This program is part of our Good Lit series, underwritten by the Bernard Osher Foundation. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Michael W. Doyle's book Cold Peace: Avoiding the New Cold War (Liveright, 2023) offers an urgent examination of the world barreling toward a new Cold War. By 1990, the first Cold War was ending. The Berlin Wall had fallen and the Warsaw Pact was crumbling; following Russia's lead, cries for democracy were being embraced by a young Chinese populace. The post–Cold War years were a time of immense hope and possibility. They heralded an opportunity for creative cooperation among nations, an end to ideological strife, perhaps even the beginning of a stable international order of liberal peace. But the days of optimism are over. As renowned international relations expert Michael Doyle makes hauntingly clear, we now face the devastating specter of a new Cold War, this time orbiting the trilateral axes of Russia, the United States, and China, and exacerbated by new weapons of cyber warfare and more insidious forms of propaganda. Such a conflict at this phase in our global history would have catastrophic repercussions, Doyle argues, stymieing global collaboration efforts that are key to reversing climate change, preventing the next pandemic, and securing nuclear nonproliferation. The recent, devastating invasion of Ukraine is both an example and an augur of the costs that lay in wait. However, there is hope. Putin is not Stalin, Xi is not Mao, and no autocrat is a modern Hitler. There is also an unprecedented level of shared global interest in prosperity and protecting the planet from environmental disaster. While it is unlikely that the United States, Russia, and China will ever establish a “warm peace,” there are significant, reasonable compromises between nations that can lead to a détente. While the future remains very much in doubt, the elegant set of accords and non-subversion pacts Doyle proposes in this book may very well save the world. Andrew O. Pace is a historian of moral dilemmas of US foreign relations and an adjunct professor of history at Salt Lake Community College. He is a co-host of the Diplomatic History Channel on the New Books Network and is currently working on a book about the reversal in US foreign policy from victory at all costs in World War II to peace at any price in the Vietnam War. He can be reached at apace24@slcc.edu or via andrewopace.com. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

In 1966 most of Bridget's friends, in their early twenties, were settling down with jobs and/or husbands… She, on the other hand, set off alone to travel across Poland relying on the kindness of strangers. Fascinated by what she experienced she continued to wander the highways and byways of, Hungary Czechoslovakia, Romania, Bulgaria and Yugoslavia for the next couple of years seeking out remote rural communities almost untouched by the passage of time... Bridget travelled with virtually no money, however, this was not a problem but an opportunity: it enabled a rare and deep insight into the lives and experiences of ‘ordinary' people in these Warsaw Pact countries. We hear how she stumbles across remote German minorities, gets arrested by border guards and finds love in a youth hostel in Munich. Buy the book here https://uk.bookshop.org/a/1549/9781915603326 Extra Photos and videos here https://coldwarconversations.com/episode352/ The fight to preserve Cold War history continues and via a simple monthly donation, you will give me the ammunition to continue to preserve Cold War history. You'll become part of our community, get ad-free episodes, and get a sought-after CWC coaster as a thank you and you'll bask in the warm glow of knowing you are helping to preserve Cold War history. Just go to https://coldwarconversations.com/donate/ If a monthly contribution is not your cup of tea, We also welcome one-off donations via the same link. Find the ideal gift for the Cold War enthusiast in your life! Just go to https://coldwarconversations.com/store/ Follow us on Twitter https://twitter.com/ColdWarPod Instagram https://www.instagram.com/coldwarconversations/ Facebook https://www.facebook.com/groups/coldwarpod/ Youtube https://youtube.com/@ColdWarConversations Love history? Check out Into History at this link https://intohistory.com/coldwarpod 0:00 Introduction to the episode 3:06 Bridget's journey and adventures in Poland 12:18 Bridget's job in Germany and exploration of the iron curtain 15:56 Bridget's smuggling adventure in Slovakia and visit to Hungary 26:02 Bridget's journey to Yugoslavia and her experiences there 32:04 Socio-economic situation and life experiences in Slovakia 34:36 Encounter with West German border guards 37:16 Meeting Bill in Munich and travelling to Romania 43:30 Journey to Bulgaria and experiences there 48:34 Using travel diaries to write "Cold War, Warm Hearts" 53:01 Acknowledging financial supporters and engaging with listeners on Facebook Chapters powered by PodcastAI✨ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Denmark joined NATO as a founding member in 1949. However, it originally laid down limitations to NATO membership, effectively excluding the country from full military integration. The conditions were threefold: no non-Danish bases, no nuclear warheads, and no Allied military activity on Danish territory. Bo Hermansen served in a conscript reconnaissance platoon of the Danish Jutland Dragoon Regiment during the 1980s. His squadron was part of the divisional reconnaissance for the Danish Jutland division which was tasked to move into the north of West Germany and link up with West German units to stop a Warsaw Pact advance into Jutland. Bo describes Denmark's political stance during this period where the election of President Reagan in the US and his policies regarding defence caused some concern in Denmark and elsewhere in Europe. We hear of his unit's tactics against the Warsaw Pact, the exercises he participated in, the rivalry between units, and why a Danish tank was painted pink! It's a fascinating view into the organisation and tactics of one of the lesser-known members of NATO. Extra episode information here https://coldwarconversations.com/episode315 The fight to preserve Cold War history continues and via a simple monthly donation, you will give me the ammunition to continue to preserve Cold War history. You'll become part of our community, get ad-free episodes, and get a sought-after CWC coaster as a thank you and you'll bask in the warm glow of knowing you are helping to preserve Cold War history. Just go to https://coldwarconversations.com/donate/ If a monthly contribution is not your cup of tea, We also welcome one-off donations via the same link. Find the ideal gift for the Cold War enthusiast in your life! Just go to https://coldwarconversations.com/store/ Follow us on Twitter https://twitter.com/ColdWarPod Facebook https://www.facebook.com/groups/coldwarpod/ Instagram https://www.instagram.com/coldwarconversations/ Youtube https://youtube.com/@ColdWarConversations Love history? Check out Into History at this link https://intohistory.com/coldwarpod 0:00 Introduction to the episode and guest Bo Hermansen 7:31 Bo's decision to join the military and family reactions 12:33 Training, challenges, and transition to a professional soldier 19:46 Role and composition of the 5th Battalion of the Jutland Dragoon Regiment 28:42 Preparations for war: Major exercises and deployment practice 35:16 Relations with the Germans and other international troops during the Cold War 43:45 Importance of history and ethos in the Jutland Dragoons 51:32 Transition to green and black paint for Danish vehicles: Controversies and anecdotes 1:00:09 Escape and survival training in the Danish Army 1:08:06 Dedication to Bo's platoon and episode extras 1:08:33 Closing remarks Table of contents powered by PodcastAI✨ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

SynopsisOn today's date in 1950, Karel Ančerl was named the artistic director of the Czech Philharmonic, a position he would hold for the next 18 years.Ančerl had first conducted the orchestra in 1930, when, upon graduation from the Prague Conservatory, he led that ensemble in one of his compositions. For a time, Ančerl debated whether to be a composer or a conductor. He opted for the latter, demonstrating a mastery of classical and contemporary scores with other orchestras in Czechoslovakia.With all that in mind, it might not seem all that surprising that in 1950, he was eventually tapped to lead the Czech Philharmonic — but that would be ignoring the miracle that Ančerl was even alive in 1950.In 1942, Ančerl and his family were imprisoned in the Nazis' notorious Theresienstadt concentration camp, and, in 1944, they were transported to Auschwitz, where his wife and young son were killed. He alone survived.In 1968, when Czechoslovakia was invaded by Soviet and Warsaw Pact troops, Ančerl emigrated to Canada in protest and served as music director of the Toronto Symphony until his death in 1973.Music Played in Today's ProgramBohuslav Martinu (1890 - 1959) Symphony No. 5 - Czech Philharmonic; Karel Ancerl, cond. Supraphon SU-3694-2

You are listening to part 2 of my chat with Joe who joined the USAF in 1981 and was trained to fly the A10 Warthog a single-seat, twin-engine jet aircraft designed to provide close air support to ground forces by attacking tanks, armoured vehicles, and other ground targets. Part 1 is here https://coldwarconversations.com/episode305/ In 1985 Joe is sent to 92nd Tactical Fighter Squadron at RAF Bentwaters in the UK, just over 50 miles from where his father served in World War 2. His role was to fly the A10 over West Germany and attack Warsaw Pact ground forces should the Cold War turn hot. We hear about the perils of flying the A10 at only 100 feet in mist and rain, whilst navigating with a map on your knee in the days before GPS was available.  Joe also recounts visiting the Inner German border and driving to his wartime target sectors to see what they looked like from the ground. He describes how they trained for landing on West German autobahns as well as their tactics against enemy aircraft. Joe also flew the Royal Air Force's VTOL fighter, the Harrier, and tells of the challenge of managing the controls and his respect for the Royal Air Force. Visit the RAF Bentwaters Museum here https://www.bcwm.org.uk/ Extra episode information https://coldwarconversations.com/episode306 The fight to preserve Cold War history continues and via a simple monthly donation, you will give me the ammunition to continue to preserve Cold War history. You'll become part of our community, get ad-free episodes, and get a sought-after CWC coaster as a thank you and you'll bask in the warm glow of knowing you are helping to preserve Cold War history. Just go to https://coldwarconversations.com/donate/ If a monthly contribution is not your cup of tea, We also welcome one-off donations via the same link. Find the ideal gift for the Cold War enthusiast in your life! Just go to https://coldwarconversations.com/store/ Support the project! https://coldwarconversations.com/donate/ Follow us on Twitter https://twitter.com/ColdWarPod Facebook https://www.facebook.com/groups/coldwarpod/ Instagram https://www.instagram.com/coldwarconversations/ Youtube https://youtube.com/@ColdWarConversations Love history? Join Intohistory on this link https://intohistory.com/coldwarpod Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Political scientist Ethan Scheiner appeared on Chatter in early 2022, right before the Olympics in Beijing, to talk about the fascinating intersection of politics, security, and Olympic events. This week, he returns to talk about the compelling connections between hockey and international relations--with a special focus on Czechoslovakia before, during, and after the Cold War. His new book, Freedom To Win, uses the stories of a range of larger-than-life characters across several decades to describe the importance of international hockey play to the Czech and Slovak national experience and to increase awareness of a too-little-known quest for freedom from oppression.David Priess and Scheiner discussed the broad intersection of hockey and politics, the intensity of the Swedish-Finnish rivalry on the ice, the origins of the game in Europe, how Czechoslovakian hockey players used their sport to fight back against Soviet domination, the 1969 Ice Hockey World Championships in Stockholm, prominent sports figures' defections from the Warsaw Pact countries during the Cold War, the internationalization of the US National Hockey League, hockey in the former Czechoslovakia after the end of Communist rule in Eastern Europe, and more.Among the works mentioned in this episode:The Chatter episode The Olympics, Politics, and SecurityThe book Freedom to Win: A Cold War Story of the Courageous Hockey Team that Fought the Soviets for the Soul of its People--and Olympic Gold, by Ethan ScheinerChatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced and edited by Cara Shillenn of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.