the the the hello and welcome to cross stock were all things are considered. i'm peter lavelle, outgoing natal general secretary stilton burg claims. a russian victory in the ukraine. conflict is the biggest risk to the us led military blocks. this is all the more reason russia will achieve its goals and this proxy war, the cross fucking nato and joined by my guest ray mcgovern in raleigh. he is a former c. i a analyst in washington. we have wumer, liam. he is

a political scientist, author and radio talk show host, and in salt lake city, we crossed to david pine. he is deputy director of national operations for the task force on national and homeland security. all right, gentlemen. crosstalk rules and the fact that means it can jump any time you want, and i always appreciate re let me quote the outgoing general general. so try and make yourself america. you said a russian victory and ukraine would change the global system. well, i actually agree with him and i think it wouldn't be a bad idea. go ahead. right. well, yeah, i'm reminded that just 3 weeks ago who changed himself. talked about starting back and said that, you know, he dealt with them when he was present the driveway and at that point he showed no signs of dementia. this is the thing i remember about stone. burger, most of all is his full pod grunt day before the d u parliament on

let's say of september 7 last year where he said, you know, the russians offer the send bill. yep. um, you know, if you stop trying to get your credit in there, so it was not in days, so it was no boot grand. they go all way. well is a reset. oh, is in the store, they invaded it, got the guy looked the kind of the bag, right? that it is, you create a day, so this time would communicate is pretty much the same as last time when we all agree where that seems appropriately conditions are right. but the whole thing has to do with russia needing reassurance, right? that ukraine will be neutral and nobody seems willing to even enter chain that notion. so maybe stall bird is showing signs now of incipient, so it may be mid term dementia. what the thing? well, what we, it's hard to say with him is an individual that i can clearly say the as an organization, it's 75. ok. it started a little early in the case of nato,

but there is certainly a demented point of view there. wilma, one of the interesting things is we had a pending unofficial thing. nato is preparing for a prototype for a protracted wars. i thought it was a defensive alliance. so i mean they, they, they constantly blur or what their mission is here. i mean, well, if you're defensive alliance, why do you have to expand? no one's explained that to me. well, it's a defense is supposed to be a defense of alliance. i think that in a nato is a north atlantic. they're trying to expand into the pacific. they talk about championing human rights, but they somehow decided to invade libya. they can't seem to understand and what their mission truly is. and also it's important understand that really their mission has their tenure, their mission has passed. and i think the leadership knows that the,

that the jig is up, they know that their time is over, but they're sitting in this vacuum talking to themselves and encouraging themselves so that they can reinforce their own insecurities. i mean, we see, for example, in the washington post, they say that they're trying to trump proof of nato. and in order to prevent trap from doing any damage to nato, or to prevent the elimination of nato itself. well, that right there tells you that they clearly understand that their time is wayne and final point. as they talk about, they have to have victory in ukraine. the premise that they're using is because if russia, when they will take over europe, take over the world and then move on to the mon. know what that demonstrates is that may to itself will collapse. and i don't know how that they can expand

geographically, but they don't have any bullets because they're out of weaponry. so who are they going to fight and what are they gonna fight with? well, you know, david, the whole point. i mean, if you look at the origins of nato, which kind of makes sense, that was the cold war of the soviet union, had its own military block, the warsaw pact, and came into existence after the establishment of nato. it was an ideological struggle and of primarily for the soviet union was to maintain its gains and the 2nd world war and to have security against a revenge as west germany, etc, etc. but then the natal up to date doesn't think in terms of security at all. because because if you had a security architecture in europe, you wouldn't need nato because it wouldn't be a new architecture. would include russia and be with russia that we have, it's against russia without russia. that's nato is afraid of that,

because then it would risk its own existence. david, the absolutely right, yeah. so nato was a lot of those bits of alliance. up until the end of the soviet union, when the worst soft pack was disbanded, the nato should have thought well, um, the biggest span shortly thereafter, as well. in 1994, when all russian troops were withdrawn from eastern europe. and at this point, uh, you know, natal began to be in advance of alliance with, uh, its uh, brutal bombing of uh, of serbia yugoslavia and 1999. and, uh, is this been mentioned it's continued in with libya, syria and canal or in the parade. and there's a, you know, the only the only path to security for nato never states is by having some kind of mutual security braimer. notice that event i, uh, with the, with russia, right, as there's really no other path. and so, but david, we,

we had that with the soviet union with the helsinki process. we had that, okay, the indivisibility of security. we had that, okay. and, and re now the us as a noun, so they will deploy previously band, new killer capable missiles to germany. we're going backwards re, we had the i n f treaty. we're going backwards. right? yeah, peter, you know, i go back to the abm treaty which gave a strategic stability for 30 years, 3 decades count them. i was instrumental in that treaty. i was so chief of the soviet our policy bridge. and we told kissinger and x and the russians are really serious about those. they didn't want to spend themselves into oblivion and they were afraid of china. it was good to see a little march on them. we provided the a problem, have a the trust but verify. we provided the verification stuff and

and that was in it in scott ritter as squared sort of my my life's work noted. stays okay. now you have scott ritter is life's work. the neutral, the immediate range, nuclear forces treaty cop, put that last that 30 till years from get out of that. and now as you say, there's a special arrangement where new medium range, ballistic missiles, i go to go with the german or just like the pershing two's way back in the eighty's per guys. they were destroyed them in the eighty's. it surprised the hell out of me that we couldn't agree with the rush just to destroy a whole class of nuclear missile, but we did it. now we're back to square one. or even worse, i have some words to say about the f sixteens as well, but perhaps go ahead and went ahead and go, go ahead, go ahead, right, go ahead as well. you know, i was thinking back to when f sixteens or got came to the for a bite in was in japan,

a barcode fell after losing hundreds of thousands of ukrainian troops. right. as zalinski goes off to tokyo to the g 7 were bite and is, is that where you last fight in turn? so sullivan says, what we're gonna do, i'm the, how about, yeah, let's go maps exchange. and that's when buttons and now it says that he's going to let our allies go metric state. now that's the kind of decision making. i mean, did they check with the pedagogy to the checklist? but no, no, no, that's we need those up right away. now what's gonna happen when the f 16 is good, shut down. yep. and the, the other stuff puter is out. all these same people. there's a well missed the present. yeah, we have this a low you blow your mind. you look player weapon. so maybe that's the only day we have now. well, but he really likes raise, you know, the to, i'll tell it to is a, well, i'm right. i mean, the, the only, the only way forward for nato visa, the ukraine, is escalation. and what's really, what's at stake,

the very existence of ukraine, and as, as ray is pointed out, they entering into the realm of thinking about a new killer war. i mean, this is going into the realm of insanity. go ahead and watch it is. it is already in the realm of insanity in what re points out very, very clearly is there is no strategy here. there is, when you just say we were losing, what do we do now? oh, let's give them f sixteens. there's what is the desired outcome and results and if the desired outcome end result is the, the do dissolving the russian federation. that's just not going but right, but we all know that's the goal. we all know that that's, that's just and i want to walk to the main, but i don't think that that's going to happen anytime soon. and what they're

willing to do is risk nuclear annihilation in pursuit of a fantasy. so that the military industrial complex or the mickey met, as ray likes to refer to it can generate more revenue now. okay, david, that's a good point. in lieu of a strategy, let's just keep enriching the arms producers. okay. inside the beltway, so they can buy another house in the hamptons. go ahead. yeah, i mean, the strategy a big guy is for us to maintain its, uh, its iron grip on, on data, which is really just uh, you know, as part of the americas liberal empire and consist of, uh, imperial dependencies of united states. what we need to do here in the us is to transform us back to republic from empire and, and i think president trump is moving, you know, forward in that direction with a plan to restructure. nino whole us troops out of the eastern europe,

perhaps even a hand over the david. we're getting, we're approaching the bank here. a bit of tough trump is elected on that platform. don't you think they'll in peach in before and all your ration? well, it depends on whether there's, it's a, it's a democrat control house. i mean, if he wins, uh, we're gonna, you know, republicans will keep the house. so i okay. okay, well i, i take, i was, i'm being kind of facetious, but i think that they would have someone, lindsey graham would lead, read, lead the charge. right gentlemen, i have to jump in here. we're going to go to a hard break and now it's about hard breaks. we'll continue our discussion on nato at 75 years old. stay with are the, [000:00:00;00]

the, the car accepted. and i'm here to plan with you whatever you do. you do not watch my new show search like why watch something that's so different whitelisted opinions that he won't get anywhere else. welcome to planes or do have the state department, the c i a weapons, bankers, multi $1000000000.00 corporations. choose your fax for you. go ahead, change and whatever you do, don't want my show, say main street,

because i'm probably going to make you uncomfortable. my show is called stretching time, but again, it's not. we don't want to watch it because it might just change the way you the welcome ex, across stock were all things are considered on peter level to remind you, we're discussing nato at 75 years old. the ok, let's go back to re, obviously, nato is not in the mood. maybe it's incapable of compromise, even if in its own best interest, it's unwilling to compromise. but, you know, is there celebrating in washington? what comes to mind for me or broken promises? let me enumerate here, not one step in east. we met, that's 1st one ukrainian neutrality, another lie, indivisibility of security. i've already mentioned that on this program here. and

of course we all remember the mens process here. so, um, even if there were miraculously a piece feler, why would the russians believe anything coming out of the current administration, particularly considering who is in the war in the oval office? right. those are russian words, new for me. uh, those are the initials this most lovely, okay? incapable of reaching an agreement. okay, that's what they use now for the us. and in addition to the 3 you mentioned, i would simply say that not many people know the biden told to change directly in person on the telephone, on the 30th of december. yes, that's the us for not deploy often. so strike muscles and ukraine, 3 weeks later, and you're neva, love with us approach blinker nature. what about that? we're talking about that now. i'm like, yeah, that's that. but forget about that. we have the right to put the opposites or

stripe processing your grade, and maybe we're talking about how many were put in. but so there was another one. and last but not least, of course, most the, there's a lot of the agreement that was made out there in uh, in an east stumble uh, in march, april of 2022, where the initials were on those agreements and bodies. johnson came in the u. k. and so now and no agreement when any of these damn russians, we're gonna bite on bite on and we'll give you everything i need to provide. yeah, well, it's all in. so you made a very poor choice app, but now we see the results of all that. well, i mean, but i'm sure his bank account has a benefit enormously and the people around him. i mean, he's not even the legal president. okay. he's head of the care regime. well, and one of the interesting things that i've been watching over the years is, you know, we, even at this summit to,

in washington they're talking about expansion. okay. i it continuing to do so in the balkans a and then going into central asia. i if i'm not mistaken, an official from armenia was invited to the to the conference so. but it seems to me that ne toes ambitions are not just as we see it right now, but they want to replace the united nations. we have, there's a rules based order. they have their own sense of, of legality is against international law. it's against international institutions, and this is, this is kind of nato's a. it's a vehicle for the united states maintain, had gemini, go ahead and washington. and as we know with the rise of the shanghai cooperation organization and the operative word, there is cooperation with the rise of bricks with the rise of the organization of the state health states. the time for this imperialist expansion has ended

the folks at nato. they just haven't gotten the memo yet. and because now the ship nato is a militaristic organization. and when you look at the seo, when you look at bricks, when you look at the shanghai, when you look at the health states, they are operating collectively from an economic perspective. and this takes me quickly back to uh, what i'm one of my favorite films, the godfather, when uh, when, when virgil, the church, the lots on says and tom, he says look, i don't like violence, i'm a business man. blood is expensive. and the united states wants to and especially things to lindsey graham spread all the ukrainian blood he can get his hands on while these other countries are moving beyond that, starting their own currencies so that they can engage in trade. which leads to development. yeah, uh and development and gender security as well. david, you know,

also kind of parting shot from the nato conferences, a targeting china be and it's claims of dual use technology. it's selling to the russians. they've never been really clear about that. but you know, a china is enabling russian ukraine, but it's a nato, it enabling other more as well. and you crazy, they never seem to get the balance. they are go ahead david. yeah, it's extremely hypocritical for the us and data to argue that china is not allowed to aid aid to russia militarily or strategically. well, uh, you know, the us is providing a long range missiles with, with should hit the russian targets deep inside rush and even, you know, potentially missile defense radar. so to take out the, you know, chuck, so for us is a nuclear command control system. so uh, yeah it's, it's, uh, it's fine, but uh, we establish kind of a,

a revised international order which reflects your national order is it currently exists with russia. china us is a, is the only nuclear super bowers been without this empire of the us. it's established in europe, it re, you know, the ins and outs of government and decision making. who is making this a nato policy in washington who is making ukraine policy in washington. and who's making russian policy in washington, a spell on solid name sullivan, and the name lincoln. and so a supporting actor or austin and victoria nolan, the hiding in the shadows for the ladies from still in the spring there. and they're in control. and you know, maybe the best evidence of that is that on the way out of that is just this should ministration is on the way out. and they decide that they'll pick china. now is the bidding why as the enable are, as they say a and as the you know,

as the blame for all this stuff. and if you look at china and they've already, as david said, call it out as hypocritical. but if you also look very closely at how the world is divided now, and india, just having come from a hot summer with food chain, and you're looked at the nato folks. so did anyone notice anything this? think about all those nato poke. so $32.00 of them, you're all white, you're old, but like the rest of us. ok, they're all white, right? well in and many of them are from countries that were the great colonial powers. same thing. that's exactly right. so the whole world sees that and how we're of isolated russia. gimme a break, we have isolated ourselves, and that's this very clear by mode. it shows it some odd square is very clear by, by this last gash. now as far as data is concerned,

and nothing is going to happen in ukraine until after november, when in the us election, it takes place. but then natal has got a really worry about its longevity and whether it's so has any useful usefulness at all. it might be quite well more. i mean, this is the thing, this is a craving choice that they, that nato is made. you know, it's almost like do or die. it's a s x a central. but if it's a choice, they don't have to make this choice. they can say, well, you know, we should have a new security arrangement that's, that's what needs to be done. that's what russia offered before this all happened, but they can't do it as well. you put it in the context of do or die. i would put it in the context of do or suicide. because the, the united states via nato started the conflict with russia via ukraine. the united states is trying, it's best to start a fight with china. the tie one there, you know, there's an adage on the corner,

don't start and that won't be that. and they don't seem to understand that. so if you just stop trying to punch the, the adversary in the eye and sit down and have some conversations. maybe we can find them avenue to piece, but as gills got here and says, ask them why they're fighting for, and they'll never tell you the economics of war. it was a david, even though there's a lot of bluster, you know, when you think about what, what military capacity we don't, we take uh, off the table on nuclear capacity. the military's in, in, in nato. we're not that particularly strong, but they're not really well funded. turkey has the biggest army, they're not getting involved in this at all here. i mean, it's a lot of a bureaucrats in my mind that have really pushed jobs. and you know, they're threatening the global war, but this, but they, they don't really have capacity other than a new killer capacity. go ahead,

david. yeah, this is absolutely true. i mean, uh the, uh, britain, france and germany each can per deploy up to one brigade in eastern europe. yeah. whereas, you know, the u. s. can provide more and then of course, maybe a couple $100000.00 troops if we, if we were to search. but, you know, russia has, uh, 12 combined arms arbys. uh, they might have more and yeah that's, that's how much they start out with. and a by triple the size of their, of their ground forces a double this, you know, they increase their military by 50 percent. they increase the military spending by, by a double in their, their now it's a head cold war level. so of the spinning it in the sizes of their armed forces. so you know, the us and nato are, are much weaker than it than have been presented in, in a, in a conventional or even just the conventional and i got a cyber war. i think russian would be victories. i wouldn't, you know, wouldn't think that they, you know, russian troops would drive to the, to the las channel,

but certainly they could take that all the eastern europe without a whole lot of difficulty. right. we got one minute left here. how will history remember this guy con tab and washington this week as well? hopefully they'll get you down below the headlines. hopefully they'll know that there's adequate proof. that rusher does not intend to go beyond ukraine, so to speak. the accords in each stumble in march, april 2022 showed that code 10 did stop and then it was double crossed. our case stopped before it took all right or ukraine. so why is it going to go to fall into the english channel? so seldom has there been a case where some, some serious as so been adequately debunk beforehand. for god say rush, i did stop. it's not going to stop now. well, the problem is the gentleman with right out of time nato doesn't want to stop. that's the problem. i want to take my guess in raleigh washington in,

in salt lake city. and of course i want to thank our viewers for watching us here at our dc. you next time remember prospect. the, [000:00:00;00] the position i would suggest in belgrade was suggesting that we send americans and, and the bridges on the drain and put on your bill is us, have been obama moved on. you probably now know about seeing what

a strong one needs here all the on use will take it alley. it will see the former so fast as you know it was on your middle city. so what i knew on file past closeness, most of all this stuff in this one is, know if the guys doing a source or cit, emotional around you, it may be, you know, a, a lot less radioactive than the something is active uranium, but still its radioactive it has toxins that the kid killed the laptop you want me to go and see. so ease of us here. again, let's see the echo seats. the boeing good. i don't, you know, those huge a mold. were suggesting we firm cell great. the bill cause what they was the each

the the ok. hello again everybody. i'm rick sanchez. this is direct impact. and this is what we're going to be talking about. you have to get decent, courageous, visionary people who believe in something bigger than their own. he is right, he is super smart. he is not afraid to speak the truth. he's

a harvard professor and he's running to be the president of the united states. cornell west joins me here on direct impact. let's do this. the, the, you know, i thought a lot, i thought a lot about what we wanted to start to show with the today and i was, i was thinking of myself as the way it looks to the united states and wonders, what the hell is going on here is what they're saying, they seem to man who happen to be the oldest presidents in the history of the united states and now they want to do it again. one seems to be a little offers walker and the other seems to need a rocker. they represent 2 parties that are generally the same, intend to offer up mostly status quote, people with the status quo ideas of truth. and the way most americans see it. both parties lie both loved to play up narrative that divide rather than unify. again,

that's the way most americans see it. so why, why is it continue? let me give you an example by the way of what i'm talking about. the whole country knows that there, there's something horribly wrong with the president's mental and physical fitness. i mean, you, there's no, there's no escaping that, right. and, and it, and it's killing his pulse and it's killing his, his chances of winning the presidency. and not to mention it's killing us party now to. so given that scenario, you wouldn't think right, that republicans would just shut off, leave it alone. shakespeare said, what leave well enough alone, but they can't. they can't help themselves. they're starving for the spotlight starving for attention. so yesterday, i'm sitting here watching the news and these guys, they call a group news conference yesterday to say, i told you so about you know about,