tops for never going to change your mind something and never change their minds about the video. they think i was wrong. and that's it. the . the hello and welcome to cross talk were all things are considered on peter level. when biden's masters for an aid package was passed by the us congress, it was met with much fanfare and political bluster. however, even mainstream media cast out on whether this aid will change military realities on the ground illusions it would seem die hard. the cross talking ukraine, i'm joined by my guess,

matthew cross been in washington. he's professor of national security and director of academic transformation of our state university in philadelphia. we have aaron, good. he is a political scientist historian, as well as author of american exception empire in the deep state and interest, and we cross to michael maloof. he is a former pentagon senior security policy analyst, a gentleman cross that rules and effects. that means you can jump anytime you want, and i always appreciate michael, let me go to you 1st here. you've been watching the coverage of the amazing transformation of mike johnson, the us speaker. um, but you know, the, the media received this package for ukraine with great fanfare, as i said in my introduction. but even in main stream media right now, there's a whole lot of questions. i mean, you know, is this i, for 1st the 1st crunch and, and over many, many years. what is the strategy? i mean, this isn't the mainstream that we've been talking about it for 2 years now. it's in the mainstream. so this big divergence between the elite and the media and

everybody else is just getting greater and greater. michael? yeah, i, i think that the work, this is just, uh huh. it's not gonna go anywhere. it's not gonna amount to much. if anything, the money is going to replenish us stocks, they're going to be getting the ukrainians, if anything, will get some older stuff. and the russians have already produced 3 times as much, maybe 5 times as much as what the, the ukrainians would be able to throw at them. it's over there. the war has more, has been over for some time. it's just a question of, of, uh let's, let's pick up and slop and then take care and take them up. and, and zaleski has not seen the, the, the, the need to sit down and, and preserve what's, what's left of the ukrainian people. and i might add that we see about nato leaders such as a mac, chrome, that it remained under ro, an illusion, as is the united states, that this is going to have long term benefits to,

to offset russia under some false narrative, the russia is, is on the march, like, like a hitler was i haven't seen any evidence of any blood streak at all whatsoever. and this is, this is such a vain attempt to, to try and, and recast today in the, in the eyes of that are in the rear mirror history. which just doesn't, uh, uh, this doesn't jive the united states is i think there's going to change the, the desire to have a 10 year iron clad plan that won't be touched by the united states. a or any president is, is folly. if it's true it's, it's hardly even constitutional. okay. i mean it's not, i think these again, this is kind of unicorn thinking, you know, matthew, they, you know, i've, i've said all along open for the last 2 years. is it obviously this has very little to do with ukraine. what it is is like nato is trying to remove russia from the

ranks of great powers. it has not succeeded. as a matter of fact, it's the reverse right now. the whole point is, is not to lose, it's not to win any more. and that's a really sad comment for america's great allies in ukraine. matthew, i, i pretty much agree with, i've written for a long time in that sense that if the american foreign policy objective is to just sort of bogged down and distract russia with the current populate the, allow the conflict to expand and continue with no real end goal inside just to simply make them make brush or weaker on in terms of its global presence on the global stage. i think that's all americans left with trying to do. it isn't trying to recapture territory that's been lost in ukraine. i don't think it can cross up savanski into a bigger type of international statesman. i don't think there's any value in that either. uh, the, the, the only value and this is what's awkward for me is that the united states right

now has a value that it can't really publicly profess, right of value is we just want this more to keep going because it's just going to grind up more people and more power within the russian state because it occupies them on that front. it's not a very good look to the guy in the states for the. yeah, yeah. well they, they have people that they, their profession is double talk. i mean, we've seen it on so many friends, some of the last few months. it's not very convincing. i think you would all agree, aaron they, they. what's also interesting here is that, you know, a cynic would say, and that's my job. and being in broadcast journalism is that this is just the griffith. ok. and they just want to keep it going. and be, you know, we had the asked in griffin went on for 20 years. mike was already proud of, you know, maybe we should try that. a 10 year plan graft. okay. i mean this is, this is a gift for well, it's welfare for the defense contractors. aaron that seems to

be part of the short term gains for some people and some interest. but this is all money that we're creating out of, you know, out of there at this point and adding to the debt. so there is no reason why they're going to try to stimulate the economy that way or inject money into the economy by spending in deficit. you're adding to the deficit to that has to be military spending. it's, it's tremendously wasteful and stupid and it can't lead to. it's not going to reverse the situation on the ground there. and we're stuck between 2 bad facets of the us system, which is number one, the president's think in terms of very short horizons with their own re, elections, invite and seems really not to want to lose before the election in ukraine. i, i think that does talk of a 10 year plan is purely p r. i think if it is as diluted as they are, they don't really believe that this is going to go on that long. and the other issue is the long term planning of the us,

which is not done by people who are elected or responsible public officials, really. they're done by thank tanks, funded by oligarchs and serving the different constituencies of the us empire. and it's for the decades they've been pursuing a policy of uno polarity and the other people, the us political system, with the assassinations of the sixties and even watergate, they wiped out any sort of progressive internationalism, or even nationalism in the form of being on the side of american manufacturers and stuff, i think getting rid of nixon was the last bit of that. and so you really had 2 constituencies, the corporate, rockefeller types, and the neo cons and the neo cons. so the ones, the one, the uniform world and unchallenged us, the another will fluid stockton, don't allow any country to get strong enough to challenge the us. they prevailed in the us that have been more for decades, especially in the 21st century. they basically took control of us,

foreign policy is a little bit of push back in like a 6 or 7 just to stop a war with iran and more to, to have the obama's, you know, deal with iran. that was another case of a little bit of push back against the neo con foreign policy, but they still manage to prevail and they're very intertwined design, isn't it? and the british are part of that too, because they need the you to fall or us, or their model to serve, to be workable at all. it's just a disaster that's, that's long in the making here. and biden's own short term good career goals to be re elected are also a factor, and it's just a sad spectacle. it's going to, it's already killed hundreds of thousands of people and it will kill more. although i do wonder if the army is going to be the breaking point. well, there's a, there's going to be able to field an army. there's a growing indications is a lot of insubordination. the soldiers are surrendering or simply running away. but michael, you know that there's a bigger issue here,

something you and i've talked about for many, many years and it's humorous. i mean nato cannot. ringback stand the fact that it is on the wrong side of history. it doesn't think in terms of security. it does. it doesn't even think in terms of the military, okay. they just think that they have a right to dictate and this was an opportunity again to, to move russia down a few notches and actually it's done exactly the reverse. i mean, they have such a go on their face. this is television. after all, i have to watch my language, but you know what i mean? yes. well, this, this trumped up more was a godsend for the preservation of nato. nato was looking for a, a new new job. basically, they were looking into space. they were looking to the arctic, they were even looking through the far east. they couldn't hold dive now where they were, they were also looking for to a, with a girl's education in afghanistan. that was a big one to don't forget. yeah, yes, yes, of course. and, and, and so this was

a godsend for them. and so the new account, as, as, as our colleague points out that came along and out with, in the, in the form of tory newland. and, and finding himself, i created this because they wanted to contain russia. now here's, here's, here's what's gonna happen. nato is going to find this as, are the new well founded way to exist. and that if, if you create fails, where do they turn? i predict that they're going to turn to trans nice trio and then moved over area to create more habits that an effort to contain russia. this is, and i think i think of the russian up um, the planners are seeing this already. yeah. and, and if israel is to, let's say, get a base in azerbaijan and, and they use that as, as a stepping point to attack a iran. then then this, this just at the united states won't care in the united states once iran to go away

as in his present configuration because it now has this next effort to keep nato alive. but if truck for to come in, i think we i'm hoping that maybe natal needs to go away, but you're going to see macro and coming on board. try advocating for a european defense system. and i don't, i don't think that's going over title. i don't know why so, i mean, is there anybody in the e b u that actually supports that? i mean that's gonna cost them a lot of money i'm. i was thinking, oh, i said, let's remember all we just forgot. there is no cheap energy in europe. right now, how are they going to re industrialize without cheap energy? keep going. well, that's the problem. that's the problem because their, their, their industry is down. if they want it to really a crack down and, and, and help ukraine, they'd have to switch from a manufacturing economy to a service economy. and i'm sorry, some switch from a service economy to a manufacturing economy. and they're not into that. they, they,

they ended with 2 years and years. and as you just pointed out, they don't have, they've cut off their own energy supplies for the most part. and what they're getting is, is, you know, quite drupal what they were paying before. so even germany, which was the richest of all the nato countries, and the e u countries is finding that difficult to continue this not. and you're seeing countries such as hungry with or bunk, beginning to talk about it, we need to regain our sovereignty. we need to get out of the do you have to surrender your sovereignty to nato? that means to washington. that's within the plan. all along gentlemen, i'm going to jump in here. we're going to go to a short break. and after that short break, we'll continue our discussion on ukraine. stay with our team, the, [000:00:00;00]

the, i'm not sure come on this as maybe a little showing that this thing is let me ask him that way. see me is the non smoker in your mind restored enough to monday. so stuff with interesting and show, erica, by a demo print that issue and you're still or do i have to wait a moment? but that's not i was me for example, of catch the trailer span that way people are. so i, this is a good you're, you're poor. 2 the was what i want to know about the notion, particularly that group didn't come around chloe and slapped them over on this crazy nice old crest. is it? absolutely. i'd rather solution an issue with the much just isn't good that

this is the key. we will send you the wrong, i'm not very good. feel understood where so when you, when you why am i still got shipment with us with the light speed so you're still going use sort of the welcome ex. across stock. were all things are considered? i'm peter lavelle to around you were discussing you create the okay, is go to matthew, back to matthew in washington dc. one of the managers that we have heard here and when, and it's been part of this administration's dna is the, a,

a talk receive versus democracy world, world based order. all of these sites, laws based order. but we have this kind of inconvenience coming up is lensky and his term comes to an end. on may 20th. there were no elections. so what about the political legitimacy of the entire regime and cab? soon none of them will have been legally elected to power. go ahead, matthew, to be honest, i think that's the one area right now. as long as there's an active war going on, it's hard to try and profess that you're going to be holding free and fair like. well, i mean, the united states ukraine would not be in the state that it is without the support of the united states. the united states going to said have elections. they had elections in afghanistan. the united states had elections in 1864. so, i'm sorry, i'm not, i'm not into excuses. there's this, but i agree on the sense that that's not really the goal of the purpose and supporting lives right, like united states is not supporting the landscape to make this lensky,

this archetype of, of eastern european democracy. i think they are. i think they are. i think they, the time they say it all the tests as well you, there's a difference between what we're professing, we want them to be and what an actuality is happening on the ground in terms of what our support is needing to him on the ground. and what he does with that support in ukraine, factual, this is not this, this is not probably not the ukrainian democracy, long term, short term, medium term. and we will allow, this is where the united states often will get itself into trouble in foreign affairs. is it will say it stands for democracy, it says it stands for civil rights and human rights and, and to the democratic freedoms. but then as soon as some of that runs a file with its actual foreign policy interests, we focus on the foreign policy interest and the principal, the debates, the principal commentary, sort of take a backseat. well yeah, i, aaron,

because 1st of all the electrons have been canceled. the opposition parties have been dispatched and there is only one media outlet, outlet. it's the state of the tack. the orthodox church descent is frowned upon if not imprisonment on the agenda. i don't, i can't see how they can talk about democracy very much. i, you know, but this was a group of a generally far right kind of ukrainian nationalism that, that characterize this resumed since the us installed in 20 a 14 and war time on a total war only kind of amplifies fast cystic trends in politics. levine to put it mildly so i don't know that they're going to rise up and demand democracy. i think they're mostly trying the people that are a, would they be able to stand up to the state anyway? are the ones that are a new military age. males and they're running out of them. i don't know that the,

i think the election could be used as a way to but to criticize or diminish his legitimacy internationally. if you're out of a fellow of the ukraine regime. but i don't know how much the impact is going to have in terms of the way things operate is going to be a dictatorship. but before the, the election, the that, you know, that deadline passes or afterwards. and they're going to continue to try to mobilize as many people to throw that as me grinders possible until until the money stuff. you know, michael, one of the things that i really worry about as the ukrainian lines begin to waiver in break. and like i said earlier, there's a ample information available that there are a lot of strips that are surrendering well obeyed orders simply running away. i'm more i'm worried about a symmetrical stuff, terrorism. and another word we'd seen in the ukraine, backed by the united states. they wouldn't do it if the westgate know engaging in

these practices here. when panic sets in that kind of behavior will only increase. go ahead, michael. you know, i think that this is all that they can resort to. uh, they have lost the war or they've lost the battle space. and they, they can't even mount a defense any longer because they're running away from the ink from the at vance as by, by, by russia, internally, a but i don't see rush of holding on. going, going beyond that, what i'm going to be seeing however, is a country such as poland, lithuania, and all these other countries trying to ship away it west to crate. it take back some share of from ancient treaties and, and, and republics that they used to dominate centuries and centuries ago. and this, the and, and, and the nation state of ukraine will no longer exist as a, as an entity, a viable entity. but this, this country has where, under,

i'm under no illusion that the so lensky has never been a democrat in thinking. the fact that they didn't hold elections under cut the narrative that were supported in the democracy. it's all, it's all delusional. it's not, it was, you know, it's delusional. and nato is in the same way because many of the nato countries are acting very, very acting in the same way very, at the democratic and, and, and they don't, they no longer hold the, the principles for which they were established in the 1st place. i mean, it is that they're, they're running a month and they're looking for a new order to retain that aid order that they, that's a quickly losing. and we're seeing the emergence of a multi polar world order. and that's my friend, alexander, duke. and once a talked about when we were together about the creation of a multi paula world order, we're now seeing this happen. we're seeing some 40 nations that want to join

a bricks they want to get out from under the dollar. they've had enough of this rules based ordered that is dictated by the us and what and i and those rules are dictated by what the us says. they are all one day. they may not agree. they may not follow them the next day, but it's all based on what the us the sides and the world is sick of it. you know, matthew, i'm going to do a couple of programs over the next few weeks on the following topic. it's going that a data and from different trajectories, are we in the middle of the 3rd world war i've actually written, written a lot about this, where i, i try to give argumentation to at least try to stay somewhat on the optimistic side . what, what is it? oh no, but i mean, it's already been brought up in this program, which i think is kind of interesting. what happens if, you know, is real sets up a base analysis or vice on, you know, rush, he's going to have to react to that you ran. i mean, you, your quote, everybody's getting slowly but surely pulled in to this matrix here. that's why i

think it's kind of interesting and we see different sides of developing. okay. the and very few people get allowed in the middle. that's a very toxic mix. go ahead, matthew. no, it completely is. and that unfortunately world war 3 and actual like being a gen x are growing up in an error when i was a small child, we were truly worried about nuclear holocaust. and we used to do the elementary school alarm drill. ready and things high them the well, like when i are a lot older, we went through the same thing, don't worry. okay. but because of the i boss will probably grown up with the idea of that. but in the end that button didn't get pushed. so there's probably psychologically, in my own mind, the sense that you probably know, nation or group of nations today would allow themselves to push that button. we could, we could create the framework and create a structure globally that puts us right on the precipice of it. but i still actually want to believe despite my cynical national security heart that no one would be back on to mentally and say, well that's, that's a, that's

a really interesting questionnaire. and because i think the, the threshold of being on the threshold, the fear of nuclear weapons has actually been lowered. i mean we, i, i think the policy makers are a lot more cavalier then let's say when michael and i were growing up, you know, during a, we'd be a mutual mutual destruction. and i think that, you know, there's a people are more of a cavalier about it. what do you think, eric? it's hard to say what really is going on at the top of the american state because we all have a sense that we, everyone knows by them is the head of state that everyone has a sense that biden is not in charge. and everyone has a sense that the pronouncements of these people like sullivan and kirby and blinking are that they can't be what they really think. and so we're left to wonder really, how much stability our sense there is at the very top. and the best evidence for

their being any sense at all is that they haven't blown up the world yet, but that is really, damming them with faint praise. i think we'd have to say and it, this, it gets to the heart of what the us has been doing and how and saying that is to begin with, which is they want us to rule the world. they realized in the, you know, or around the reagan there, so the neo cons decided that they would really try to take down the soviet union. and then they were successful with financial more and supported civil society in eastern europe, crashing putting countries in debt and the eastern blog crashing the price of oil, getting the new royal dinner war enough, ghana, stan, all these things brought down the soviet union with some people even george w bush was saying, we might not want to do this. but dick cheney was even arguing with him publicly at the time when he was the secretary of defense. because cheney represented a more powerful faction, apparently than the president and the neo cons prevailed,

and they wanted to go for this unit polar world order. we would challenge anyone and it, ultimately they're running into this nuclear issue. and it's very foreseeable that this is what they're running into. it's what they should have realized would have happened a new train anyway. yeah, in 2014. and they shouldn't have attempted it. it, but here we are. and why if they play breaks midship up to now with this, we should be worried was leisurely, very, very worried because it started doing with a new, into michael. it. historically, hedge funds never give up willingly. and this is what this is all about. they, there, there are a vector is around the world challenging his gemini, and the us will not back down. that's why we're, i've a talked about, are we in the middle of the 3rd world war. we don't call us out yet, but we might be in it, michael. yeah, takes on many forms. we're building up to it. and i think that way, if we continue acting the way we are, don't listen to the warnings. a red lines such as the risk of putting those pointed

out, then, then it what they think that something is a catastrophic is going to happen. i agree with you this talk of this blog, today's talk of what we might use nuclear weapons. if they only realize the impact and the force of a nuclear weapon, they would calm down at quick, lively talking about this as if it was the dropping of some $500.00 pound bomb someplace. it's not this, it's much more devastating and it kills tens of thousands of people and it, and you could, you, we could, we could see a slow death from it in the what, whatever form, world war 3 takes. it could be the use of an e. m p a 20300 miles up, exploding to a nuclear weapon up there with us from a satellite. and at the slow depth would occur when all of your, uh, electronics and, and, and your and your other critical infrastructures that rely on these, these. why would that help these weapons exist?

so that they'll be and because they exist, they can be used gentlemen, we're going to end on that note. i want to thank my guess in washington rested and in philadelphia, and of course, i want to thank our viewers for watching us here at ortiz. see you next time, remember across samples, the the

look forward to talking to you all that technology should work for people. a robot must obey the orders given by human beings accept. we're such orders at conflict with the 1st law show alignment of the patient. we should be very careful about personal intelligence at the point, obviously is to trace a trust, rather than to the various things with artificial intelligence. we have somebody with him and the robot must protect this phone. existence was alexis the, when i 1st moved to rush, one of the most amazing things i found was to moscow metro. in fact,

the very 1st phrase that i ever learned and nothing was closing. so what makes this place so specially what secrets is of hiding to find out the fund to the city with alexander pop up to the store and who studies the wonders of the moscow metro the we are out on the ocean. the, remember after the 1st 2nd navigation, none of us planned to sail in the world again. the corner of the ocean is strong. we both saw the ocean around us.

the, i'm not sure come on this effect as will show it, but this thing is from us can always see me is, can you up on the vanity of that sandy mean experiencing produce tape one of the most threatening evidence to pause there. i see at the time, but as though i mean, i wasn't able to download at the bottom line here of what you mentioned, the strongest insurance, just me. and i'm not quite sure what you want say if i'm not sure, nichols came by machining summerstone. when you mm hm. a glass of what's going to do is that you're interested protectionist, and you're gonna see the issue at your new level. what's the shift you've said