[000:00:00;00] the hello and welcome to cross stock were all things are considered on peter lavelle when biden's master's horn. a 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 diehard the cross sucking ukraine and joined by my guess, matthew crossed in 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 crossed to michael my loop. he is

a former pentagon senior security policy analyst, a gentleman prospect rolls in effect. that means you can jump any time 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 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 mainstream media right now, there's a whole lot of questions. i mean, you know, is this the 1st, the 1st crunch an over many, many years. what is the strategy? i mean, this isn't the main stream 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, uh we're, this is just, uh huh. it's not going to go anywhere. it's not going to amount to much if anything, the money is going to replenish us stocks, they're going to be getting the ukrainians,

have anything we'll get. some of of are 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 the, the war has more, has been over for some time, is just but a question of, of let's, let's pick up and slap and take care and take them up. and, and zaleski has not seen of 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 the nato leader such as a chrome, that remains under ro, an illusion. s is 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 of history, which just doesn't, uh, uh, this doesn't jive the united states is i think this got 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 you have trouble, we and it's, it's hardly even constitutional. okay. i mean i, it's not, i think these again, this is kind of unicorn thinking, you know, matthew, the, you know, i've, i've said all along open for the last 2 years. is that obviously this has very little to do with ukraine. what it is like nato is trying to remove russia from the ranks of great powers that has not succeeded. as 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 a lot, i pretty much agree with. i've written for a long time on the sense that if the american foreign policy objective is to just sort of bog down and distract russia with the current populate the, allow the conflict to extend and continue with no real end goal inside. just to simply make them make rush or weaker, or 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 they 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 initially, 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 luck to the united states the 1st. oh yeah, yeah. well they, they have people that they, their profession is double talk. i mean, we've seen it on so many fronts, some of the last few months. it's not very convincing. i think you would all agree, aaron 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. a mike was already proud of, you know, maybe we should try the a 10 year plan drift. ok. 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 thin air 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 reelections 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 think 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 ones, the unit polar world and unchallenged us, the another wolfowitz doctrine 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 factor and it's just a sad spectacle. it's going to cuz 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 is a growing indications is a lot of in subordination. 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 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 that for 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 to the far east. they couldn't hold dive now where they were, they were also looking for 2 uh a with a girls education and 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. it's up in the 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 a 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 did they turn? i predict that they're going to turn to trans nice trio and then modal area to create more havoc as an effort to contain russia. this is, and i think i think of the russian up, 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, wants 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 the economy. and they're not into that. they, they, they ended with 2 years and years, and then 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, a quadruple what they were paying before. so even germany,

which was the richest of all the nato countries, and the e u countries is finding it difficult to continue this not. and you're seeing countries such as hungry, one or bon beginning to talk about it. we need to regain our sovereignty. we need to get out. know what is a, do you have to surrender your sovereignty to nato? that means to washington, that's within the plan. all along, gentleman, 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 what is part of the blog

post that isn't the defense you of us and in the word part, is it something deeper, more complex might be present. let's stop without pages. let's go part of the as i said, when i 1st moved to rush, one of the most amazing things i found was to moscow metro. in fact, at the very 1st phrase that i ever learned and nothing was careful. so what makes this place so specially what secrets is of hiding to find out deep under the city with alexander pop up to the store and who studies the wonders of the moscow metro. the welcome ex. across stock were all things are considered. i'm peter lavelle to to around you were discussing you create

the okay. it's going to matthew back to matthew in washington dc. one of the managers that we have heard here and, and it's been part of this. administration's dna is the, um, uh, 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 in care? no. 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 ukraine should be holding free and fair like. well, i mean, the united states ukraine would not be in the state. that is,

is without the support of the united states, the united states could have 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 students, right, like united states is not supporting polanski 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 for assessing. we want them to be and what an actuality is happening on the ground in terms of what our support is. meaning to him on the ground and what he does with that support in ukraine, factual, this is not this, this is not popping up a ukrainian democracy long term, short term medium term. and we will allow, this is where the united states off and will get itself into trouble in foreign

affairs. it will say it stands for democracy. it says it stands for civil rights and human rights and, and to 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 elections have been cancelled. the opposition parties have been dispatched and there is only one media outlet that outlet. it's the state of the attack. 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 is no buttons. this was a group of a generally far right kind of ukrainian nationalism that characterized this resumed since the us installed it in 20, a 14 and war time. a total war only kind of amplifies fast

cystic trends and politics. i mean, 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 the state anyway? are the ones that are legal, 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, to criticize or to diminish his legitimacy internationally. if you're out of a fellow of the ukraine resume, but i don't know how much impact is going to have in terms of the way things operate is going to be a dictatorship. but before the, um, the election, the that, you know, with that deadline passes or afterwards, and they're going to continue to try to mobilize as many people to throw it as me grinders possible until, until the money stops. 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 um,

ample information available. that there are a lot of troops that are surrendering well obeyed orders simply running away. i'm worried about a symmetrical stuff, terrorism, and in other words, we've seen the ukraine backed by the united states, so they wouldn't do it if the us bit 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. they have lost the war or they've lost the, 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 but by russia, internally. but i don't see russia of holding on going going beyond that. but i'm going to be seeing, however, it is a country such as poland, lithuania, and all these other countries trying to ship away at west ukraine and take back

some share of from ancient treaties in and out. and republics that they used to dominate centuries and centuries ago, and this and, and, and the nation state of ukraine will no longer exist as an, 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 democrat and 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 illusion, 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 principles for which they were established in the 1st place . i mean, it is they're, they're running a month and they're looking for a new order to retain that aid order that they,

that they're 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 the, when we were together about the, the creation of a multi polar 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 on 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. yeah. oh matthew, i'm going to do a couple of programs over the next few weeks on the following topic. i'm going to add 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 say something 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, israel sets up a base and now is there by john. you no 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 a loud in the middle. that's a very toxic mix. go ahead, matthew, you know, it completely is. and that unfortunately world war 3, an actual like being a gen x or 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 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 that fundamentally in saying, 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 think the policy makers are a lot more cavalier then let's say when michael and i were growing up to, you know, during, uh, 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, karin? it's hard to say what really is going on at the top of the american state because we all have a sense that, well, we,

everyone knows by it and is the head of state and everyone has, it says 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 a and it this, it gets to the heart of what the us has been doing and how insane that is to begin with, which is they want, as a 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 block crashing the price of oil, getting them and broiled in a worn f ganna. 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. and 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 unipolar 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, the new train anyway 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 historically within you and michael, it historically heads your minds and never give up willingly. and this is what this is all about. they, there, there are a vectors around the world challenging, had gemini, and the u. s. will not back down. that's why we're, i've 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 west uprooting has pointed out. then then it was, i think that's something that's 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 realized the impact and the force of a nuclear weapon, they would calm down and quit lively. talking about this as if it was the dropping of some 500 town 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 and p at $200.00, a 300 miles up exploded uh a nuclear weapon up there with us from a satellite. and at the slow death would occur when all of your electronics and, and, and your and your other critical infrastructures that rely on these, these. why would that help these weapons exist? but at so that it'd be and because they exist, they can be used. gentleman, we're going to end on that note. i want to thank my guess in washington, rest and, and in philadelphia. and of course, i want to thank our viewers for watching us c, r t c. and next time, remember across samples the

the in 1943 at the height of world war 2, bengal was hit by famine. a year before jeff and his troops drove the rate is out of neighboring vermont and came close to the indian possessions of the british empire. london's response to the threat was completely inadequate. the british actively used the scorched earth policy. while retreating, they turned everything around them into an uncouth deserts, having no mercy on other people's territory. food in large amounts was exported to great britain from the starving provinces. boats used for fishing and transporting food along the river system more confiscated from the local population. the barbaric actions of the colonial administration led to a month various consequences can a year up to $3800000.00 people die from starvation and disease caused by mail nutrition. though great britain itself had enough resources to overcome the

disaster. at the same time, 170000 tons of australian wheat made its way fast starving in the debris. it is aisles. i hate indians. they are a beasley. people live up display religion. the famine was their own fault for breeding like rabbits, british prime minister, winston churchill commented on the reports of the tragedy. the famine of 1943 became the climax in the british policy of genocide against the indian population. according to historians, from 12 to 29000000 people overall died from starvation alone during the reign of the british in india. the

the video of alleged abuse by an officer to day. the sheriff's deputy in columbia, south carolina, forcibly removed his student from a classroom at spring valley high school. i saw him just talking to her was playing her and initially, you know, i didn't think is a problem because i knew that she was just this quiet student in the class. someone looks the police officer and says, here is law enforcement that is worse. clearly attacking, abusing power and it ended the other as we said, this is what's wrong with those probably be on discipline. black church, he was there, enforcing a lot to meet a crime, to quote, disturb schools in any way. that means any disturbance that any kids causes and

school is huge and forces never predict but necessary. a tops people were never gonna change them out. and so people will never change their minds about video. they think i was wrong, and that's it. the benjamin netanyahu announces a round invasion into ross, so we'll go ahead with or without a peace deal with him. us that says form dr. share stories of children and gaza being deliberately targeted by is really snipers. we have seen 2 children who had a direct injury to the are and brain due to the sniper shots, and they had brain damage to do that. the new york police bridge colombia university with pro palestine protesters barricaded inside as