Welcome back to Now I Get It. In this episode, I break down a term we hear all the time in national security conversations but rarely slow down to understand: harm’s way. I explore how this concept is traditionally defined in U.S. military policy, why it matters, and how it’s being challenged by the current use of remote warfare. Using the recent drone-led attacks in the Caribbean as a backdrop, I look at what happens when technology distances human operators from physical danger—yet still places the country itself in profound geopolitical risk.

I also dig into the overlooked consequences of attacking vessels on the open sea, why the flag a boat flies carries legal and military implications, and how these actions can provoke entirely justified responses from nation-states. From asymmetric warfare to murky acts of sabotage and drone incursions, I explore how conflicts escalate without ever being formally declared—and how decisions made far from the battlefield ripple out to place the entire U.S. military, and even the country, in harm’s way.

In this episode, you will learn:

(00:00) Why “harm’s way” matters in today’s military decisions

(00:23) How drone warfare challenges the War Powers Act

(01:03) Why attacking a flagged vessel is an act of war

(01:45) How asymmetric warfare enables covert retaliation

(02:28) Why murky attacks blur responsibility in global conflict

(03:14) How U.S. drone strikes put the entire military at risk

Let’s connect!

linktr.ee/drprandy

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this episode, I break down what really happened during the recent government shutdown—and why it matters far beyond the headlines. I walk you through how the standoff between Republicans and Democrats over healthcare funding put millions at risk, and how the political maneuvering behind closed doors quietly determined the fate of those lives. From the targeted removal of Obamacare subsidies to deep cuts in Medicaid, I unpack how these policy choices translate into real-world consequences, including tens of thousands of preventable deaths.

I also shed light on the lesser-known tactics lawmakers use to avoid accountability—like strategically assigning votes to retiring politicians or those far from reelection. And I grapple with the moral dilemma at the heart of this crisis: When one side is willing to let children go hungry or deny medical care to exert political pressure, how does a functioning democracy respond? It’s a conversation about power, ethics, and the cost of political gamesmanship on human lives.

In this episode, you will learn:

(00:34) How the shutdown exposed the realities of U.S. healthcare politics

(01:10) Why cutting Obamacare subsidies put millions at risk

(02:00) How both parties pushed competing plans to reopen the government

(02:55) Why eight Democrats crossed party lines at the decisive moment

(03:40) How lawmakers hide behind “just enough votes”

(04:05) How political timing shields certain legislators from backlash

(05:15) The moral dilemma behind letting 50,000 people die vs. starving children

(06:30) Why negotiating with political extremism mirrors dealing with a psychopath

(07:45) How this same dynamic shows up in war and global conflict

(08:20) What the end of the shutdown really means for public health

Let’s connect!

linktr.ee/drprandy

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this episode of Now I Get It, I take you into the subtle—but dangerous—world of paltry: the art of lying by telling nothing but the truth. Through stories pulled from literature, current events, and political reporting, I show how selective truth-telling can create powerful false impressions without ever crossing the line into an outright lie. It’s a communication tactic hiding in plain sight, and once you see it, you start noticing it everywhere.

I share examples from Pride and Prejudice, the Ghislaine Maxwell/Jeffrey Epstein media coverage, and recent reporting on healthcare legislation and government shutdowns. Together, we unpack how missing context can distort public understanding, why accountability in storytelling matters, and how we as consumers of information can learn to recognize when we're being told “the truth”—but not the whole truth.

In this episode, you will learn:

(00:30) How “paltry” allows someone to lie while saying only true things

(01:05) How Wickham misleads Elizabeth in Pride and Prejudice

(02:30) How media reporting on Epstein and Maxwell omitted essential context

(03:45) Why “repeal and replace Obamacare” was always a misleading claim

(05:30) How government shutdown coverage distorted both parties’ roles

(07:20) How to spot selective truth-telling in everyday news

Let’s connect!

linktr.ee/drprandy

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.