september, it's going to be translated into several languages including english, under the about you, but i am ready to book my tickets right now. so let's even see before things are on c, n laska. how many, thanks for joining us there. and i'll see international this not today. we're back with time. see more in about 30 minutes. see you then the what is part of the, the, is it possible to post isn't the deepest you of us and bit in the word part? is it something deeper, more complex might be present there? let's stop without cases. let's go products. of

the, in the year of 1954, the united states of america engaged in warfare against the people of vietnam. the white house supported the corrupt about the governments of southern vietnam. 1965 americans began their invasion following the aim to defeat the forces of vietnamese patriots. defend the gun was confident that the victory would be on the american side, due to its military superiority. however, the vietnamese, during this war into total hail for the occupants. unable to cope with a guerrillas, the american army started blanket bombing alongside using chemical weapons and naples, which burnt all alive. the village of my lay,

where he 1969 american soldiers killed 504 civilians, including 210 children, became a tragic symbol of this war. all and all. during the whole period of this conflict, the usa dropped on vietnam more than $6000000.00 tons of bonds, which is 2 and a half times as much as on germany during the 2nd world war. in 1973, the american army under the pressure of the rebels, withdrew from vietnam, and only 2 years later did the pop and regime. and so i got involved. however, the vietnamese paid a high price for their freedom. more than 1000000 in vietnamese people became the victims of america in the dressers. the

got busy with the task question concerns no tony, those swap for us in here. but tell us citizens as well every day and we hear from the west that they will not stop until the rushes to fit it strategically. every day, these threats become more terrible, small, terrifying. recently the command of these tony and armed forces announced that they were destroyed to russian cities if something were to happen, or if it's the case, economists rejoice over the sides that ukraine had to punch and created a drone. the bomb side b were in cities, johnson and others say that if they did not reach victory on the battlefield, but at any cost, and it won't end wesley gemini, which means that you will be a defeat from the home west. and it's common to you. so all of which resembles in a beat me, i don't know what it's like so experience nuclear weapons or be more. and i pray that i never, well, but what do you think about the prospects of what is going to happen to you stuck other secure? which there, so i think that all list talk about inflicting defeat on russia and focusing on the

existential meaning of this for the future of the west is not so much a sign of their militant attitude, but of agony and hysteria. you quoted johnson who said, if we allow russian to win, it will be the end of our gemini. this can basically be used by the international court of justice as confession of guilt, and a case about violating the u. n's main principles, the solver and the quality of states, and the court has to pay attention to that. and there are many statements made in the same tone. if they lose their influence. russia is going to work with china, iran, north korea or syria, to remodel this world. this is not self confidence. on the contrary, this reflects their understanding. they call it their battle to preserve their gemini. but in fact, we're speaking about the formation of a new multi polar world order. and this term erm is being used very often. so if

somebody is tired, eventually we can use other terms equal just to the democratic world order, where everyone will act based on the principle that i mentioned to be the issue of the un charter talks about the solver and of quality of states. there is that fear of losing a gemini, but there is also the fact that they are very honest. and maybe they do not even notice it. but they make it clear that the us is the master, and they all bands to it. i mean, go on a nato's deputy secretary general. he is from romania and he said it just 10 days ago that the world starts the era of harsh competition between the west on the one hand and russia and china on the other, russia and china and all the rest, take different actions to undermine american power not the power of nato, not the power of the west, but that of america. and that is why,

according to this deputy secretary general from romania, the us needs it's your pin allies. this is the meaning of nato's existence, presented by one of its main spokesman and representatives. there are many such statements, but if we're speaking about confessions, johnson says that they're going to lose their head. gemini burrell says that there is a blooming garden surrounded by a jungle. he recently said something. maybe he was disappointed or maybe nervous, but he said, we are not fighting for ukraine. we're fighting for us. we're fighting against the rush. i mean, not for ukraine, but against russia. there are many such statements. well, estonia is threatening to destroy a leg by calls we to buried under rocks or something like that because it has already been commented on. we cannot seriously talk about this, right? well, my call is very far from us, tony and when you, well, they say they have new drones. this, they keep bragging the store, but the stoney

a lot via and lithuanian power on the forefront of those who threaten us and keeps saying that they will send troops, wage war and so on. sure, this shows that there is an evolution of nato before, and the decisive rule was given to the united states, of course, but also to europe's most important countries. and now states like poland, baltic countries, the check for public from bulgaria under its current government and others set the tone. so the major european countries have to go along shoes. like for instance, president mack krohn nervously talked about sending french troops. but then other people saying that he was not understood correctly. and after that he again says that he was understood correctly, which seems there is information that military instructors are already working. there may be some other representatives of the european military or other security services. we then disregard our track is very simple. you didn't want to negotiate

. honestly, we presented a treaty on european security in 2008, 2009. when we proposed one simple thing, for instance, and assemble in 1999. you stated that security is indivisible and countries are free to choose their alliances, but they cannot do it if they strengthen their own security at the expense of others. and it was stated directly and all the participants, like o i, c e presidents and prime ministers, signed the documents at the top level because she agreeing that no country or alliance and the always see was going to dominate. that was 1999. since then, nato has continued with its dominance track, and we said that it was a political declaration with political commitments signed by president, not some 3rd secretaries from embassies. and we said that if you cannot fulfill your commitments, maybe we could codify if codified this declaration with the same provisions. so we

would have a treaty on european security and that would be legally binding. but they said no c, i legally binding security guarantees can be obtained only in the you know, the most. but what about the o s. c e o you signed it? and so you said that no one is going to dominate, and they answered that. it was just a political statement. and then they said that nato was non expansion, was just an oral statements. the same with the nato, russia founding act. yes, it was done in writing, they said to me, but it's not a legally binding documents. we were very patients, the president said many times not for a long time. he forced himself to preserve some kind of trust, hoping that something would happen if the west comes to its sense. it is the truth and starts acting in a reasonable and polite way. but none of that has happened in 2008, 2009. they withdrew from the treating, refused to discuss it with us. there was one treated with nato and another one and

a context of the o. c. it was a legal agreements and in 2021 to the end of the year. after a meeting at the foreign ministry see, president fulton proposed to prepare a treaty. that would be a modern and treaty based on modern realities. but they refused to even discuss x to i was one of those 2 parts. in that process, there was a delegation that consisted of deputies from different agencies. and then i met with blinking in january 10th or 11th and geneva. he said there can be no obligations as far as nato's non expansion is concerned. so well, the americans withdrew from the i n f treaty. we were disappointed even though we withdrew because you had already violated it. i reminded him that when they withdrew, we said okay, if you think that this is the only way out for you, go ahead. but we introduced a moratorium and we propose that the americans introduced their own and more tory

and president putin's initiative told the us explicitly, if you suspect this now risk unders deployed in the region of color in grad still carry the mid range missiles that are prohibited by this treaty, you are welcome to come and see and verify, but in return we also want to be able to visit your air defense basis in poland and romania, equipped with the systems whose manufacturer issue lockheed martin clearly says that they can be used both for conventional and mid range grounds to air ballistic missiles that were benz wide history. while these air defense spaces, with this equipment were deployed there while the treaty was still in force. and the us said no, so we made an honest proposal. please come and check if you suspect us of anything and we will go and see whether what lockheed martin says is true, but they refused to do that. i approached mister blinking with our comprehensive proposal. i said,

you're concerned with the critical situation around ukraine. that is essentially created by your efforts. but he said no, nato was not up for discussion. regarding that proposal of yours you made before about the mid range missiles. maybe we could look into it and agree that these missiles, since they're not prohibited by the treaty anymore, so they could be placed, for instance, in ukraine. and we will be willing to limit the number of such missiles in ukraine or cube. well, i don't even know what else i need to explain on the subject of why the special military operation became inevitable. ukraine had a hard core, new nazi regime and power the band. all things russians in the west was pumping it with weapons. we considered it a direct and threatened to our security, our traditions, and our legitimate interests as well. i couldn't make my answer any shorter than that, but you will not actually right well on the subject of ukraine, the surely

a top priority topics. and here's what i would like to ask, so they keep saying quite openly that they want to destroy us. they cannot accept our country the way it is. i have to hand it to them so that they don't try to hide it. they've taken all those steps that you've just mentioned, whereas russia and this is what i find hard to understand. we keep saying that we are ready to negotiate. who are we going to negotiate with? again, even if hypothetically, we weren't going to have negotiations, they are going to just lie to us the very next day. so one question is why negotiate with people that do not keep their word? and another question, speaking about ukraine, what is our goal there? when we speak about negotiations, we think we keep saying that we will achieve all our goals. those mentioned at the very beginning did not certification demilitarization for as long as the same authority stay in power or some other authorities of the same type. we will not be able to reach those objectives. your mark has been included in the top 100 list, the most prominent politicians, well, zaleski has not a well, it doesn't make much of a difference. so i'm say you're in

a mock is still in charge of all these processes. but with these people in power, we cannot accomplish our objectives. who do we want to see there? what should it be like? well, i kind of give a short answer to that either. first of all, what are the objectives and why and on what conditions are we ready to have negotiations? firstly, as our president keeps saying, we always prefer negotiations to fighting a war. and yes, we have had this experience when the premiums realized they went too far. bombing done basses and using direct methods of genocide against the russians on their own, as they call its territory. and proposed to have negotiations, 2 or 3 weeks after the beginning of the special military operation, we agreed to right away. there were several rounds of negotiations which is well known in bell arose then online. after that, we went to assembled where the ukrainians presented their initial proposals. after

a discussion these proposals were accepted. they included a commitment to cancel the laws that discriminated ethnic minorities. first of all, russians and to cancel their support for the movements of glorifying and promoting the nazi ideology that were condemned to by the nuremberg trials. as for the territorial aspects of a couple of days ago, for an affairs magazine published the piece about that negotiation, that is clearly an attempt to try and justify what the west did. let me explain for an affairs said the us and u. k. really told zalinski not to sign the deal, but they did it allegedly not because they wanted to continue their privacy were in ukraine and put a strain on the russian federation and to eliminate innocent russian civilians. but because they were concerned for that once they saw that the proposal was included and the creation of a guarantor group for ukraine security that included russia, china, and the west. and the reason for their concern is truly amazing. they said,

well, we can sign it, but what of disagreement does not stand for somebody attacks, ukraine? maybe russia attacks ukraine. and in this case, as guarantors for ukraine, we would have to fight a war with russia. but this isn't something we want to and you see this is a very sophisticated logic to figure it out. first of all, the suggestion was to have the 5 nations, as well as germany and turkey, a act as guarantors of disagreements. if you happen to be a guarantor, a state or you're invited to be one, and you're thinking, if another guarantee or a state violates that agreements, then i would have to engage in a war against that guarantor nation. it means they think everyone's this just like them violating agreements or something they do easily and they take it for granted that such agreements can be violated by some other party. just like the agreement of february 2014 was violated. the very next morning, after signs and let us guarantee by france,

germany and poland. and they did the same with the men's agreements as was proud legal knowledge by chancellor merkel, president alons and for a strangle himself. and this is an interesting observation. whenever they calculate well scheming against us and try to anticipate our potential response, they try to think of how we would react while applying their own mentality and logic. but speaking of their mentality, recently a famous us political scientist, a pissed co boss voice some serious criticism of the west, in terms of pragmatism and some practical aspects mentioning sanctions for one sanctions are normally imposed in order to change someone's behavior. and if you really understand how that party will respond, the west however, applies more and more sanctions in a totally mindless manner without giving a thought as to what the outcome might be and the outcome was obvious from day one, even before the beginning of the special military operation after crimea related

sanctions were introduced and a number of other sanctions, the outcome was obvious. we pulled ourselves together and i hope we can do an even better job. there is more we can do as our president mentioned on multiple occasions. so we pulled ourselves together things and decided that we will not depend on the west in any area where they can try to restrict our development skills. and i hope in all other areas as well. now they probably claim they got rid of the russian gas, but in fact, exports has been growing to many countries, including france and literally was literally recently happily reported, so that they planned to reduce the share of russian gas and their consumption from 90 percent to 0 within 3 years german chancellor schoultz did the same, presenting good as a victory to his voters, saying germany has dramatically reduced independence on russian energy resources and will soon be completely independent. but nobody mentions the price they're

paying for this, or how much their expenses have grown to provide for the population of the population. however, it sees the effects that i showed it was a great mistake as the episcopal success. and so to miscalculate the russian responsive is they failed to realize that sanctions can only be efficiency if the sanction party is ready to change his behavior in order for these sanctions to be lifted. and if the sanction party declares outright that is not going to change his behavior, there is no point to proceed with the policy, but that is exactly the policy pursued by our counterparts of youth. now returning to the question about negotiations, i want to emphasize a very interesting points and they failed to realize that if we're place in a situation where we can be strategically defeated, norfolk destroyed, in fact, as a global stakeholder. and they've failed to realize that this isn't something we wouldn't be scared by. they would have been scared if somebody antagonize them with the same fury, a band and,

and capacity still exists in the global economy. however, this only solidified, as i suggest, that they draw conclusions from this lesson of history. and if the past 250 years were insufficient for them as for the talks and we haven't discussed it yet. but i hope i will not be criticized for this. sure. what were the guarantees and stipulated in the symbol agreements and the guarantees were very simple. so we were ready to appease the wishing of the ukrainian delegation to make these guarantees of our most serious. and the benchmark of seriousness was particle, 5 of the washington treating that established the north atlantic treaty organization. and it was not reproduced word for word. the wording was different, but very serious security guarantees were outlined. and it was specifically noted that the security guarantees did not cover crimea and don't bass, which effectively meant that they were not to be touched. otherwise, no guarantees would apply. it was also stipulated in this,

you mentioned that ukraine would not host any for and military faces. that is as far as the militarization is concerned. so if, if there were also provisions as let them or pretend mentioned during his meeting with african and delegations last summer in st. petersburg regarding the number of weapons and personnel deployed. and it was also said that ukraine would not conduct the military drills involving the armed forces of 3rd countries. except for cases when all the guarantor of states agree, including russia and china. that was it. and we were prepared to commit to that. but it was said, of course, that the negotiations will continue on other aspects. but the hostility is what stop pushing into this security guarantees would apply to racism. neo nazi and discriminatory laws would be a ball lifting ukraine. and then when all of these aspects word read applause, suddenly, negotiators from care approached as the say, the wish to make some minor amendments. for instance,

as for the band to hold military exercises with 3rd forces. except for the cases, when all the guarantor states, the great, i mean, they said let us replace this part with ation quotes here. when the majority of guarantors agree to this, that was the 1st warning call indicating that either they had been banned from doing this overnight. or they decided to mess with us russians a little bit longer. that was just to give you one example. and at the present stage, we have always maintained the restroom presidents and being able to and spokes person to meet your pest golf conditioning. when ask if russia was ready for negotiations, that the president of you praying with band himself, from having talks with us. and clinton said once, when asked this question that he needs to at least abolish that decree as the 1st step. and then we simply don't have any trust in them. this is an important points to emphasize. we try to make ourselves trust them for a long time, but it was all in vain. and we said, unlike the assembled process,

we would not possibilities for the period of the talks. the process must continue. and secondly, the reality is on the ground have changed and drastically fundamentally. and they are to be taken into account by realities on the ground. i mean, not only the position of troops and the line of contacts of light also mean amendments to russia's constitution in view of adding for new, but also old regions for of russia's original territory. so this is what everyone needs to understand, and it is crystal clear that they are not only failing to recognize this fact. they're not even ready to look for potential compromises. that is the lensky formula. useful to meet him with no alternatives and the list goes on and on. the

screen on the bus can do either just keep them in the system with key at the washington state. the bruce to complete the rest of the us has to phone us in 2 professional men, city and to you for the list of all but huge. but they use the,

the, the, the, because they already got a cps because they kept the store for, i'd be as a to and then use their email. you're just going to send them to the urals. the non c theory of racial superiority finish styles for years of creating an ssl all the place and 14 concentration comes. so the full prisoner of war labor comes 10 prisons daily. well, you know, simple jewels go level. she's the media venue. so i'm assuming if i need even the

chest really to get ahold of that credit left against the beatles going to be approximately 25000 people went through the occupied of go finish camps according to official figures. these move stuff, dudley level. it's a shift you too it in like you do monday. i'm not sure it's just the size of the stuff. so the youngest, i me, i'm not sure what the fan in disease forced labor to achieve by the world. so formulas, what was the last it also need you to do that? the city available? if you're off with those who put in these 9, push the 6 up the give you what feeling do you think it could be? it does include those thousands of customers of crimes and the impunity of criminals. when you look on here, you know, wanted to do to speed line the majority of yeah, for the good i see it or released upon me. they decided to do discuss with him, please don't just do it, but tell us then yet that was put in the word along the

of the question. i mean you love seeing those words isn't like i do live most schools do. if you look for the initial do, while of course, significant dealer post on zillow, while it be almost getting used to put value when you do oil change. but you also services done the newest government buildings systems to build a new do what i see these the buses. the little cute little dyson says this tutorial on both of the

location we deal lowest points of view the the, the worst the with you let your vehicle so the motion store, the, the for the money isn't done life. it is william, interested in the stay on the the,

the, the the, the

the g 7 release is a new plan and to help you frame vide subbing rushes energy revenues. but if it gets so high, your opinion dependence on russian l. n g times has been long as us troops leave and ad facing the country. that for the less to find the applicant, nations as cheap. it becomes the 2nd nation in the saw how we tend to give the boot the u. s. military on felicia. the same, i just want to give you a sneak peak of the seems to be taking place here in moscow. the just give me one of the main talks of the movie correspondent gets a closer look at indians. filmmaking in central most starts with a movie set to hit the big screen and that.