The Libertarian Institute

Trump is turning up the heat on Ukraine and Zelensky, and the timing is impossible to ignore: voters feel foreign policy in their wallets through gas prices and diesel prices. Kyle sits down with Connor Echols of Responsible Statecraft to parse what’s real policy movement versus loud rhetoric, including Trump’s complaints about U.S. aid and the risk of Washington signaling more pressure on Kyiv than on Moscow. We also dig into a concrete headline with big implications: a U.S. purchase of Russian diesel meant to relieve stress on American fuel markets, and what that says about how the war in Iran and the war in Ukraine collide in U.S. decision-making.

From there, we get brutally practical about capabilities. Patriot missiles, THAAD interceptors, and other high-end munitions have been burned down across multiple theaters, and rebuilding them is not just a budget question. We talk timelines, factory expansion, skilled labor, and supply chain vulnerabilities like rare earth minerals and microelectronics. If the U.S. can’t produce fast enough, every security guarantee becomes a harder promise to keep, and diplomacy starts to look different whether leaders admit it or not.

Then we head to the Middle East: Trump’s relationship with Netanyahu, what Israeli elections can and can’t change, and why the “Netanyahu is the whole problem” story misses how wide the Israeli security consensus really is. We close with the scariest acceleration factor of all: AI-assisted targeting and the temptation to treat machine-generated strike lists as truth, even as civilian risk rises. Subscribe for more deep dives, share this with a friend who follows foreign policy, and leave a review with your take: what should U.S. strategy prioritize right now?

The midterms are fast approaching, as is the “fall back” to Standard Time: that blissful-but-all-too-brief 4-month period in which our clocks & schedules align in a healthy way with our natural circadian rhythms, allowing us to flourish for 1/3 of the year until we “spring forward” back into the earthly hell known as “Daylight Savings.”

With the Orwellian-named “Sunshine Protection Act” (which Marco Rubio has been pushing since he was a Senator back in 2018 & which Donald Trump also vehemently supports) dangerously close to passing — the House has passed it, Trump supports it, & only a few Senators are holding it up at the moment — & with the “Fall Back” to Standard/Benevolent time coming in a few weeks, CJ decided to revisit the unhealthy absurdity known as DST.

Join CJ as he discusses:

“SOCJ!” — Save Our CJ (& the DHP!)

Due to events of the past 6 weeks, CJ has not only been slowed down on multiple DHP projects that, back in August, he expected he’d be able to complete in September; but, unfortunately, this has also caused his family to again be in an acute financial emergency!

If you’re not in a financial crisis yourself, & you value the DHP & want to help it continue, (and/or if you care about CJ & want to help him out), please consider sending him a few bucks or quid or doubloons or denarii or whatever!

Click here to Donate via Paypal or Venmo!

Support the DHP via Amazon Affiliate Links (buy ANYTHING from Amazon using any of these links & CJ gets a small commission at no cost to you!)

Or throw CJ a BTC tip here:

bc1qfrz9erz7dqazh9rhz3j7nv696nl52ux8unw79z

CJ’s PO Box Address

(For Sending Him Items of Support, Including, but not Limited to: Wads of Bills, Sacks of Gold Doubloons, Pieces of Eight, Freeze-Dried Flapjacks, etc.)

CJ Killmer

Dangerous Media Productions

704 E Moody Blvd #43

Bunnell, FL 32110

Links

The fastest way to misread a war is to believe one leader can simply declare it over. We dig into President Trump’s claim that the Iran war will end “very soon” and test it against the hard constraints that actually decide timelines: the Strait of Hormuz, shipping attacks in the Persian Gulf, and the kind of leverage that shows up immediately in oil prices and energy costs back home.

We also get into the headline-grabbing idea that the US is considering the MOAB, the so-called mother of all bombs, for Iranian targets. We walk through what that weapon can do, what it cannot do against hardened underground facilities, and why reaching for a psychological shock tactic often signals something deeper: a shortage of viable diplomatic pathways and a messy regional picture that includes Gaza, Lebanon, and Yemen.

From there, we connect the Iran conflict to Ukraine as Zelensky pushes for more Patriot interceptors and ties it to an “energy truce.” We break down the uncomfortable math of missile production versus interceptor stockpiles, why US inventories are already strained, and how tech and leverage questions like Starshield performance can become political pressure points. We close with Yemen’s escalating fight between Saudi Arabia and Ansar Allah, plus a lawsuit seeking to block Jared Kushner’s unofficial envoy role amid concerns about conflicts of interest.

Subscribe for more independent foreign policy analysis, share the episode with a friend, and leave a review. Which part of this web of conflicts do you think is most likely to escalate next?

I went fishing, and many of y’all had suggested I livestream while fishing. During the stream I discuss Sandra Birchmore.

The fastest way a “regional conflict” becomes a global problem is through chokepoints, and we spend this conversation mapping the ones that matter. Dave DeCamp joins me to explain why a US move toward direct intervention in Yemen could trigger the exact kind of escalation Washington says it wants to avoid, including threats to US commercial shipping through the Bab el Mandeb Strait. We also dig into the part most headlines skip: Yemen is not just a proxy story. It has its own timelines, its own internal power balance, and actors making decisions for local advantage, not simply on command.

From there we turn to the Strait of Hormuz and the sharp rise in attacks on commercial shipping. If the US is trying to avoid an energy shock ahead of elections, what does Iran gain by pushing the pressure now, and what does Washington’s muted response tell us about escalation risk? We talk through the signals, the “tanker for a tanker” talk that didn’t fully materialize, and why market psychology and politics often steer military choices more than officials admit.

We also get into the ugly reality of negotiation under fire. When leaders are targeted and senior officials are killed, it does not just make talks “harder” in theory, it wrecks trust and reshapes what any side is willing to sign. Finally, we pivot to Ukraine, where mixed messages about intelligence sharing, energy ceasefires, Starlink issues, and headline-grabbing “deals” raise a familiar question: is this coherent policy, election-cycle positioning, or improvised crisis control?

If you found this useful, subscribe, share the episode with a friend, and leave a review. What part of this puzzle do you think is most likely to explode next?

<span data-mce-type="bookmark" style="display: inline-block; width: 0px; overflow: hidden; line-height: 0;" class="mce_SELRES_start"></span>

Download Audio.

Scott interviews Larry Johnson about the status of Washington’s campaign to weaken the current Russian regime.

Discussed on the show:

Larry C. Johnson is a former CIA officer and intelligence analyst, and a former planner and advisor at the US State Department’s Office of Counter Terrorism. Follow his analysis at Sonar21  

Sign up for the Scott Horton Academy of Foreign Policy and Freedom at scotthortonacademy.com

For more on Scott’s work:

Check out The Libertarian Institute: https://www.libertarianinstitute.org

Check out Scott’s other show, Provoked, with Darryl Cooper https://youtube.com/@Provoked_Show

Read Scott’s books:

Provoked: How Washington Started the New Cold War with Russia and the Catastrophe in Ukraine https://amzn.to/43D82oY (The audiobook of Provoked is being published in sections at https://scotthortonshow.com)

Enough Already: Time to End the War on Terrorism: https://amzn.to/4eMQblu

Fool’s Errand: Time to End the War in Afghanistan https://amzn.to/4a5fKvx

Follow Scott on X @scotthortonshow

And check out Scott’s full interview archives: https://scotthorton.org/all-interviews

This episode of the Scott Horton Show is sponsored by: Tax Attorney Matt Sercely https://agoristtaxadvice.com; Moon Does Artisan Coffee https://scotthorton.org/coffee; Tom Woods’ Liberty Classroom https://www.libertyclassroom.com/dap/a/?a=1616 and Dissident Media https://dissidentmedia.com; and Crowdhealth https://www.joincrowdhealth.com/ (use promocode Horton)

You can also support Scott’s work by making a one-time or recurring donation at https://scotthorton.org/donate/ or https://patreon.com/scotthortonshow

Audio cleaned up with the Podsworth app: https://podsworth.com

Use code HORTON50 for 50% off your first order at Podsworth.com to clean up your voice recordings, sound like a pro, and also support the Scott Horton Show!

If you feel like the headlines about Ukraine, Russia, and “energy deals” never add up, you’re not imagining it. We sit down with Larry Johnson to separate political theater from the underlying mechanics that actually move wars and markets and to ask why so many public claims collapse the moment you put real numbers next to them.

We start with Trump’s escalating pressure on Zelensky and the idea that Ukraine should swap leaders to “make a deal.” From there, we interrogate the energy angle: global diesel consumption, how much diesel really moves by export, and why Russia’s share is smaller than most people assume. Larry lays out the bigger drivers behind the global diesel shortage, including Persian Gulf disruptions, strategic petroleum reserve drawdowns, and a shipping crunch as tankers get stuck, damaged, or removed from service. The practical takeaway is simple and uncomfortable: even dramatic announcements may not bring meaningful relief at the pump, and supply shocks can linger for years.

Next we turn to leverage and credibility. We talk through the contradiction of maintaining Russia sanctions while still exploring purchases that fund Moscow, and why “ceasefire” messaging can ring hollow when strikes continue. We also dig into the dangers of escalation, the way drone warfare gets reported, and how geography and air defenses change what “massive attacks” really mean on the ground.

Finally, we confront two stories that raise stark moral and strategic questions: a proposed live stream execution in the United States, and the widening conflict involving the Houthis, Saudi Arabia, and potential US action in Yemen. If this conversation challenged your assumptions, subscribe, share the episode, and leave a review. What part do you think the public most misunderstands right now?

A single debate clip can reveal an entire foreign policy reality: we demand ritual condemnation of October 7, then treat any mention of Gaza’s devastation as taboo. Kyle is joined by Nolan Denaro to unpack a heated Michigan campaign exchange and the bigger story behind it, including how U.S. politicians lean on inflated or debunked claims when they need moral cover for ongoing violence. We keep the focus on what listeners actually need: how to separate real empathy from narrative enforcement, and why accuracy matters most when leaders are steering public consent for war.

From there, the conversation takes a darker turn with the push to livestream a firing squad execution tied to the Fort Hood attacker. We talk about the death penalty versus death-as-spectacle, the propaganda value of public brutality, and the blowback risk when America broadcasts violence to the world. We also react to JD Vance’s comments and what it signals about internal unease, even among allies who still want to sound “tough.”

The second half widens the lens to hard consequences: an Associated Press report on U.S. troops killed by an Iranian drone strike after warnings about inadequate defenses, the politics of accountability in the Iran war, and how foreign policy hits your wallet through energy prices. We close with Trump’s announced diesel deal with Putin, rising gas costs heading into winter, and Zelensky’s anger as Ukraine support stalls. If you care about Gaza, Iran, Ukraine, U.S. military decisions, and the real-world costs of empire, this one connects the dots. Subscribe, share the show with a friend, and leave a review with your biggest takeaway.

A promise not to attack Iran before the US midterm elections sounds calming until you ask the uncomfortable question: who benefits from the world believing it? We sit down with Lt. Col. Karen Kwiatkowski to sort through the noise, the incentives, and the real risk of escalation hiding behind confident social media posts and campaign season talking points.

We dig into the political crosswinds that make this moment so volatile: Republicans staring down tough midterms, voters feeling war through gas prices, and Israel heading into its own elections with Benjamin Netanyahu facing intense scrutiny. We also talk about what it looks like when a president treats Congress with contempt, leans on executive orders, and keeps widening conflict in the Middle East without meaningful democratic buy in.

Then we go to the heart of the fear: nuclear proliferation and nuclear first use. If Iran gets hit while negotiations are still on the table, why wouldn’t leaders conclude that the only reliable deterrent is a nuclear weapon? We unpack the Non-Proliferation Treaty, the talk of Iran exiting the NPT, and the grim “deterrence lesson” the world may be absorbing from recent history. We also address the rhetoric about missiles hitting US cities and the growing backlash over how service members and families are treated when wars drag on.

If you care about US foreign policy, Middle East security, and how nuclear incentives get created in real time, this conversation is for you. Subscribe, share the episode with a friend, and leave a review with your take: what would actually reduce the risk of a wider US Iran war?

Something big hides inside a simple question: if the US and Israel are thinking about striking Iran, why would the timing cluster around elections? We pull apart a Reuters-style headline and treat it like a map, tracing how US midterm politics and Israel’s vote can shape escalation decisions just as much as military “readiness” can. I walk through the incentives for President Donald Trump to keep the conflict looking quiet and contained, and why Benjamin Netanyahu may benefit from the opposite, especially when political survival and legal exposure are part of the background.

From there, we move from politics to pressure points that hit everyone: the Strait of Hormuz and global oil shipping. As attacks rise and transits drop, the story shifts from abstract strategy to real-world consequences like higher crude prices, higher insurance, and crews refusing the route when the danger gets too high. That breakdown also feeds Iran’s own strategy, not just seeking a military edge, but trying to cement a lesson in American politics that war with Iran carries a direct domestic cost.

The most dangerous thread is nuclear escalation. We talk through analysis arguing Iran’s internal debate is changing, including among people who once supported the JCPOA limits and opposed a bomb. I explain the two forks in the road around the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty: withdrawing as a warning, or breaking out first and dealing with the aftermath later, plus how Russia and China might view that choice in today’s world.

If this helped you think clearer about Iran strikes, Hormuz, nuclear proliferation, and the Yemen war, subscribe, share the episode, and leave a review so more people can find the show.