i have some free time, they got me a completely unique record, the vienna boys' choir, singer, knabon, hayden, let's go listen, guys, let's line up, let's line up, quickly, hello, and alexander vladimirovich will be here soon, you came to listen to us, right? stop talking, one or two, who is this, like this, well, let's sing, a soldier is walking through the city, we know, forgive me, i don't understand, who are you actually? godunov, igor palych, the new chorister of our ensemble, who is yours, according to the order of the department of culture, now our choir must.

where shall we start? let's start with the boy valya, or maybe with your concert in the church, or maybe with lada shchegoreva? or do you want a criminal case to be opened against you? ah...

so let's quickly remember the text, well, now we'll learn the marches, one, two, three, the soldier has a day off, buttons in a row, aleksandr vladimirovich, let's all together, aleksandr vladimirovich, wait, well, that's not right, we have to fight, but what about the chorus? i haven't heard,

the choir is louder, louder, like in the army, but there is no more choir, girls, no, that's it, guys , well done, go to the guys, we march them, in on the air. big game. today in the middle east there is a relative calm. it is very relative, because israel continues to strike lebanon at hezbollah positions, but also at peaceful buildings where ordinary people live. but in general, it is a calm, even a relative calm before the storm, because there is a general.

it was also visible, there they are, there is no doubt about it, there is no doubt, they hit, they hit, so, it means, there was some kind of normal vision, there are all sorts of speculations about this, but not in this business, but how can you talk about the superiority of your air defense system over everyone else, when they

let missiles through, and the whole world can see it, well, this lie is alarming, well, lies can be different, you can carefully collect them, there is not a lie, but just human stupidity, it too... as if it is not always well tolerated, i don’t really like it when it comes to the head of state, if israel repelled everything so effectively, well, yes, maybe they don’t need to strike back, that’s exactly it, or maybe nothing will happen, the iranians once again they are showing restraint, they are again showing that they do not want further risks, and apparently the americans are not very keen either, in any case. to stand up for israel, especially if things are not going so well, maybe they will go with this planned offensive, maybe it will not happen at all, because iran has already said that it may stop there, because the retaliatory blow has been dealt, and iran will see whether israel will

do anything in response or not, there is a kind of shift tournament going on, i think that these they pricked, they pricked, here comes the exchange of blows. somewhere someone can stop or will it be endless, and it seems to me, in this fencing, in this fencing duel, there can hardly be a complete one hundred percent winner, there can be some partial temporary success, as it was already with israel, at first they simply screwed up on october 7 and the whole world was saying, where is this vaunted israeli intelligence, then it seems like the opposite, now everyone even some of our... colleagues are starting to praise now israel, that he solved all the goals and that he achieved success there, they did a great job, well, it turns out that it’s not great again now, because they got a very good beating on the brains, excuse me from the iranians, who’s next, how will

they stop this, that they need to stop somewhere a little, the americans don’t need this before the elections, well, we don’t need this either, because we can’t forget that we have a certain responsibility.

iran warned the united states about the strike, realizing that the united states is slowly they will warn israel, that is, there may be an iranian strike, it was not supposed to be really cruel, but it was quite impressive, i think the iranians are demonstrating this not for the first time, they are demonstrating good will, this is also connected, of course, with the new iranian leadership, of course, it decides...

they may strike, well, i would be afraid to say that they may use, well, they

don’t have real nuclear weapons yet, but they could, for example, launch them, considering that they have very powerful missile weapons, they fought for a long time to ensure that it was not included in the spv limitation, that they retained it, they were accused of you giving up nuclear weapons, but keeping missile weapons, they, therefore, believe that... that it was retained, and many hawks say that there, that if there were also nuclear weapons, like north korea, no one would dare to attack us at all, but in any case, if you look at the situation now, it turns out that iran will be able to strike, let's say with a dirty bomb, this is a dirty bomb, when it is simply radioactive, but this in response is not on what has already happened. this is if it will be, if there will be something new, they have already said that for now what do you think, is israel doing now, well if there

is a change of leadership, and i have big doubts, considering that uterash is now the persona of nongrata, the secretary general, the secretary general is closed to him, they said that the minister of foreign affairs of israel also stated that the secretary general should immediately resign, well yes. what do you think, could it be that the israelis have begun to go through the school of lack of manners in kiev? well, it seems to me that they have gone deeper, they have surpassed everyone, just as they praise their air defense, we must give them credit for the level of stupidity, in my opinion they have surpassed everyone and rudeness, i mean, of course, not the israelis in general, i mean netanyahu and his camarilla, what do you think will happen in lebanon? i mean israeli military action against hezbollah, but also against lebanon as

a whole. well, they will continue to beat lebanon, fortifications and all kinds of structures, tunnels, fortified areas of hezbollah. hezbollah, of course, is very badly beaten and a little, so to speak, feels uncomfortable, but it is impossible to write it off completely, considering that there are still more than 40% of the population - these are motivated shiites, who have the ashes of the class in their hearts, and who will continue, harboring this inhuman anger about what israel has done continues to do, they will be ready for various kinds of actions, not excluding some painful suicides, which, as we know, are very difficult to stop. karan georgievich, again as a cinematic question, that's when you

think about the drama that is currently unfolding in the middle east, can it be stopped right now, so to speak, in the second act, without bringing it to the third, yes, the problem with this drama is that in it... there is no ending in sight, none at all, in my opinion, the situation is in such a dead end that i simply cannot imagine.

their own, their own, if you like, the truth is there in the sense that it is clear that for them, as they say, this is the only piece of land that is their homeland, which they built, so how can they get to some more or less acceptable ending, in my opinion, it is impossible to do today, in any case, i do not take it upon myself to imagine, i think that to a large extent this is of course... this is of course the responsibility lies on the shoulders of the current leadership of israel, which brought this situation, drove it, well, into a complete dead end, i do not really understand, how to explain with logic everything that has been happening lately, strictly speaking, it is obvious that israel, and the current leadership of israel

provoked iran in order to draw him into war, in principle, yesterday's strike is like... well, this is quite a sufficient reason to start a large-scale war, so to speak, this will happen, this is the feeling that no, by the way, we talked about this with you yesterday, yes, well then why, why did you do this, that excuse me, you can put a small one, now many of our colleagues are talking to you, that means israel wants to drag the us there and so on into this matter, it seems to me that on the contrary it provokes the us, on the contrary, the us provokes.

i don't think that then the overlap the strait of armuz, which is difficult, in a calf, large forces are needed to directly block it completely, i think that iran is quite capable of generally creating conditions under which, well, the conditions will be bad, disrupting normal shipping and especially the transportation of oil, commercial cargo, the movement of commercial ships,

if you allow me, i will add two more words, but i would still like to translate here.

russian experts on ukraine, he is the first deputy chairman of the duma committee on cis affairs, you have a specialized institute, and you've been following this situation very closely, and i want to ask you right away:

lyon in new york says there has been a noticeable shift in the tone and content of the discussion about a potential settlement of the conflict in ukraine. they note a greater openness among ukrainian officials to discussing the possibilities for reaching a peace agreement, even though russian troops remain on their territory, and more frank discussions among western officials about the urgency of a deal. the diplomats say the new minister ukrainian foreign minister andriy sybiga during his first trip to the us on fair. in meetings with his western counterparts , he discussed possible compromises and took a more pragmatic position on possible negotiations than his predecessor, following the principle of territory in exchange for security.

but in kiev, they were very upset that they were accused of pragmatism, that's what they said there. i attended every meeting of foreign minister sybiga in new york, and there were no proposals, discussions, or even...

to present some plan for victory, if the plan for victory is evidence of a greater desire for negotiations, then it seems to me that everything is somehow according to oruill, peace is war in reverse,

as for whether there really is secret diplomacy in the ukrainian conflict, during which its participants adhere to some other, and not public positions on this matter, then... so long, but this does not at all mean that it follows from this that we should be led by someone's propaganda and relax in the hope that ukraine or its allies in the west have now changed their point of view, are inclined to some compromises. it is obvious that we are talking about maneuvers, maneuvers. including in the propaganda sense, the personal points of view of this journalist or this newspaper, what he would like to see, but maybe, uh, uh,

exaggerates, exaggerates his own - expectations and attributes his own expectations to someone else. uh, it is clear that what is happening in the middle east clearly does not fit into the scenario of aggravation of relations. with russia and the desire to focus on victory over russia, victory in quotation marks, that this is forces the american administration to maneuver, and probably in ukraine they also understand that it is necessary to take into account the events in the middle east, attention has been switched to the middle east, bad news for a country that itself countries or regimes that themselves have signed off on the fact that without outside support...

the ukrainian leader left washington empty-handed. the united states did not support him on two main issues. permission to use western weapons to strike deep into russian territory ukraine's application to join nato. the administration biden was against resolving both issues, fearing that it could push moscow to escalate the conflict and drag the united states and other allies into it. american officials were not impressed by zelensky's victory plan, which includes a request. since we are losing the war, they are thinking about how to washington office of the european council on foreign relations. well, i will add just one thing, that in many ways, the correspondent, it seems to me, spoke to people who are such

big. positions, these are simply different kinds of maneuvers taking into account the changing situation, both at the front and internationally taking into account, how do you see the situation at the front? well, the situation at the front is characterized of course by the fact that we need to strengthen our advance further, it is happening and... here is ugledar today, if

not completely, then in any case in large part is under the control of the russian armed forces, hence in the same western press suddenly one after another articles began to appear that well, in fact, the grapes are sour, this coal mine is not really needed and in general it doesn't mean anything and so on and so forth, and before that there were others opposite to the fact that this is the point of resistance, this is a testing moment, everything. ukraine continues to hold on to part of the captured territories in the kursk region, this is zelensky's logic, which exposes him as a pr man, a politician, but not at all the leader of the country who cares about his own population, it is more important for him to hold on to some square meters and kilometers in the kursk region regions, than to defend its own

territory. then this is the only way for it to attract attention and try to convince its western partners that it 's a waste of time, it is necessary to help it further, because it can, for example, hold some kilometers of russian territory as a result of its august offensive, and what is happening there directly in the main theater of military operations, which remains donbass, is supposedly secondary. it seems to me that, of course, if we had a plan and a perspective by today sufficiently rapid possible actions, then this would decide everything, whether it exists or not, whether we have enough forces for this or not, whether not just tactical strategic encirclements will be carried out, as during the great patriotic war, this is not a question for

me, this is a question for ... the military, who realistically assess both their own strength, the capabilities of the enemy, but what is predicted, this is predicted that, of course, under the impression of losses, including in ugledar and other places, when their own soldiers are abandoned by the command, when they are in in general, they don’t care about the withdrawal and preservation of their troops, they throw more and more new ones into the fire, mobilized, captured...

your opinion, well, for this you need to be, of course, more immersed in this, have more information, but i wouldn’t... no, that’s not how to say it, no, i wouldn’t simplify the situation, we see that in general there is a positional war going on, yes, there are certain successes in it, the kurdish part of the kurdish territory is under the control of the armed forces of ukraine, in general, they are fighting, which means they have a certain motivation, i heard that they are fighting the wrong thing.

there was no front line with this, i mean, that uh, that in this sense, in any case, i repeat, we, we must not under any circumstances again, we have made these mistakes several times, in my opinion, we have underestimated the enemy's capabilities, his motivation, it exists, we see that there really is a gradual, so to speak, squeezing out, but in general, it still largely resembles a positional war, difficult, with losses,

russia is on the verge of victory, this hostile coalition is giving ukraine more and more more weapons, they cannot give ukraine enough manpower, but in everything else they help ukraine a lot, that in these

conditions russia can move forward at all, but i am very, very impressed. we are going to commercial, we will return in just a few minutes. and we will move to washington, we will talk about the american elections. if you want to get an idea of ​​the mood of the people, talk to a taxi driver. istanbul, then this is machu, he is strong, always self-confident, sometimes it is difficult with a man, well, istanbul is also a difficult city. the turks walk with their heads turned back, wedged by the grandeur of a past gone forever. tell me, please, how should i address you, your excellency? but in short, yes. on

the night before the storming of constantinople, the orchestra played until the morning, the byzantines were stunned, we, the turks, the ottomans, the muslims, were first weaned off our table, separated from our roots, and then football and all sorts of other things were imposed on us. america should not dictate anything to us, what is written in my koran is important to me. new project. october 7 on first, there's a big game on air, we're moving to washington, where we're on skype with channel one's correspondent in the united states, mikhail akinchenko, mikhail, we're very happy to see you, thank you for.

i'll share it with you, personally, after watching the debates, you know, i had this analogy that i'd like to share with you, you know, like when you watch two cables, angry cables, on opposite sides of a fence, grinning at each other, baring their fangs, drooling, fur standing on end, the audience they gather around, discuss the advantages and disadvantages of possible...

for a long time before these debates they exchanged barbs in absentia, promised to almost smear each other in these debates, but when the broadcast began, they approached each other, shook hands, sniffed, so to speak, began to quite calmly clarify positions, political positions of each other, and you know, in general the impression was created that - not only for outside observers, not only for viewers like me, but also for themselves, and for these candidates... the vice president, these the debates also turned out to be

a surprise to a certain extent, as soon as they converged, you know, on some key issues: the economy, well, inflation - these are the main problems in america that are now worrying voters, as all the polls show, the migration crisis, they outlined their positions and after that, when they began to clarify their positions with each other, it suddenly turned out that their positions, well, if not similar, then at least not so much different from each other, a rather remarkable moment. there was, you know, i noticed at the debates, it was a rather boring episode, but it was very indicative, indicative in this regard, when they discussed the climate, the energy agenda, the green transition, and vance accused volz of the fact that the democrats, because of their desire for a green agenda, are destroying the oil and gas industry of america, because of them energy prices are rising, to which volt said: no, wait a second, we are not replacing, we are not trying to replace hydrocarbons with green energy, we are simply concerned about the environment, here you are, - he said, pointing to

vence on trump, you want to ban green energy, yes, you are against the environment, to which vence, accordingly, responded in exactly the same way, no, nothing of the sort, we are also for the environment, but for the preservation of hydrocarbon energy, that is, this was, you know, from my point of view, here is a clear example of how similar these positions turned out to be, at least in the public space between the two vice-presidential candidates, and this was generally the case on many issues, but it was difficult to figure out what the essence of the contradictions between two. with the vice presidential candidates, and there walz again called trump a threat to democracy, to which vance retorted that he actually considers kamela harris a threat to democracy, and the current white house administration and kamela harris personally, who are trying to censor social networks, but this discussion did not

receive any further development, in fact, the discussion on the topic of the migration crisis did not receive much development, it suddenly turned out that ... and walz, at least what they declared from the debate stage, approximately they look at this problem in the same way, that is , they both oppose the penetration of illegal immigrants into america, primarily those with a criminal past, here they have no differences, they look at the ways to solve this problem differently, but they see the problem in the same way, and you know, so summing up the debate, i... i would probably say that it was a draw, you know, between democrats among democrats, even before the debate, just yesterday literally everyone was discussing how these debates could be a failure for walt, because everyone agreed , both democrats and republicans, that vance was a great debater, a great speaker, and over the last 2 and a half months, as

american journalists counted, he gave about a hundred interviews, and for comparison, tim walz, well, according to different estimates , over the last month and a half gave either two or three interviews, and cnn had already written the day before that walz was terribly worried before these debates, very nervous, and in one of the articles on the cnn website it was even written that walt was afraid of letting down his boss kamala haris, well, looking ahead or already back assessing the debates that took place, i can say that in fact, of course, he did not let us down, yes , he was worried, going out on that stage, it was clear that - he was very worried, very worried, but at the same time, you know, he looked like a schoolboy who had learned his lesson well, he was called to the board, so he stands at the board and is a little worried that maybe he will forget something, maybe he will mix something up, but he did not forget anything, did not mix anything up, in general, in fact, well, as it seemed to me, again, he spoke at

five, on the other hand, we didn't see any miracles, any heights of oratorical skill, but well, i don't know the exact answer to this question, but i want to draw attention to the fact that in general , during the entire hour and a half discussion, during the entire debate, only once was a question about foreign policy raised, about yesterday's strikes,

iran's missile strikes on israel, and you know, i think that probably it was some kind of... then they quickly switched to some of their own - home-made preparations that have nothing to do with foreign policy, and in general the entire debate were entirely devoted to the domestic american agenda, so it seems to me that there was some kind of, well, at least it looked like some kind of

unspoken agreement: we don’t touch foreign policy, and if it weren’t for yesterday’s events in israel and iran, then, probably, these... issues wouldn’t have been touched upon at all. mikhail, thank you very much, i hope that we will see you again soon on our air. thank you and take care, and take care of yourself in polarized america. thank you, we will try. thank you, dmitry, all the best. we are going to commercial. the man who was the first in the us to arm ukraine, the revelation of the former head.

unfortunately, there is a big gap

between us and america in determining what is good and what is bad in the world. so, when it comes to the arabs and iran, then of course, for them, the current administration of the united states seems more benevolent than the possibility of trump coming, who moved the capital, who agreed with... with the recognition of the transfer of the capital of israel from tel aviv to jerusalem, who has his own son-in-law as an adviser, in general, quite active ties with the jewish zionist environment and so on and so forth, compared to harris, compared to the democrats, of course, what vance said is in fact at odds with the practice of president trump himself, who at the same time claims that he has never entered into... such a war, firstly, and secondly, demanded, as we know, that european countries pay for their own defense, doubted the need for

nato to exist so much that, as you know, a law was passed, according to which the president can't leave nato on its own, now, of course, it needs congressional approval, this decision was made precisely out of fear of trump, and vance says that allies must be supported everywhere, no matter what, this contradicts vance's own position, previously expressed not in the debates. about ukraine, that in fact we are dragging out a dummy there and we don't need to fight so hard for this ukraine and so on, that is, all this taken together says that in fact, yes, in matters of foreign policy they are completely they are talking opportunistically, what seems more advantageous today to those who are going into power but are in the opposition, they, of course, see weakness, inadequacy, and so on in any actions of the administration,

to this i can only add that since we touch on middle eastern issues , issues of attitudes towards israel, i always remember what my american colleagues tell me, they say: you know, he says, here is a question related to israel - this is not a question of foreign policy, this is a question of domestic policy, this is our internal affair the problem, that's all i wanted to say, well i 'll continue, apparently, as we memories, in

any case. trump, harris, the only thing that distinguishes, well, in my opinion, you know, these vice presidents, well, you know in movies, when you choose actors, there are interesting ones, and there are uninteresting ones, here they are uninteresting, that 's why they are interesting, here as an actor, you know, there alec yankovsky was always interesting, even if he was silent, and the other is uninteresting, these are uninteresting, here is trump, he is passionate, he is interesting, just watch him, his,

as they say, energy, he has it there.

and sergey rebkov also wisely advises the enemy to underestimate dasha, that's right, it was a big game, we'll meet tomorrow on air, he... prepared coups d'état all over the world, he was one of the few trusted by donald trump, the man who was the first in the us to arm ukraine, now promises kiev $ 500 billion to fight russia. revelation of the former head of the cia and us secretary of state mike pompeo. today on the show of ovan and lexus.

today's guests of the studio of the show of vavan lexus - this is american journalist tafurius maximus crane, retired lieutenant general of the foreign intelligence service, phd in history leonid petrovich reshetnikov, journalist michael boom and political scientist-americanist malik dudakov. friends, hello, let's get started. we talked with the former head of the cia and former us secretary of state michael pompeo, on behalf of two completely different characters. the first time.

many, many places. there is an opinion that the geopolitical psychology of russia feels stronger and considers the west weaker. and finally, we also know that in africa the chinese communist party is very active. the chinese will also work side by side with them. they have close ties with china, and that will lead to another conflict. i realize that there is bound to be another conflict over taiwan pretty soon. it is a very difficult question, but i

agree. in fact, with regard to taiwan, i am less concerned about a full-scale attack, that is, a full-scale attack, i believe that their intention is to undermine taiwan through political efforts, through propaganda, through information campaigns, with military pressure, kinetic pressure, cyber pressure, all these tools. i am convinced that the chinese are actively moving forward in attempts to fundamentally change the situation in the pacific region. i am also wary of the following.

well, look, in my opinion, yes, strategically , both the trumpist wing of the republican party, that is, there are more pragmatists, isolationists, and the interventionists in the form of neocons, but the goal is approximately the same, yes, they see china as an existential opponent of the united states in the 21st century, it's just that the strategy is a little different, and we see this difference in the situation in ukraine, yes, if trump's trumpist wing is proposing, well, essentially to do something that can be described as strangling russia in an embrace, then what... then let's come to an agreement with russia, let's arrange a division of ukraine, maybe lift some sanctions, in exchange we will demand that russia reduce the level of cooperation with the celestial empire, that is, as if to use russia, including as a battering ram against china, as they are trying to do now

and use the philippines, japan, south korea, india and many other countries, this is such a strategy, well, a little more pragmatic, although it also has nothing to do with our values ​​and with where we are moving, and mike pompeo's strategy is different, that there is no need to strangle anyone in an embrace, you just need to strangle. yes, that is, let's arrange a large-scale escalation, what the americans love, they have such a strategy, escalation for de-escalation, yes, we will provide a huge number of fighters, if they are in in principle, there is, a huge number of long-range missiles, we will strike deep into russian territory, destabilize russia, we will simply win in this way and then, as if in a new reality, we will fight with china, that is, as if tactically, of course , there are big differences, but strategically, the main target for them, of course, is china, and at the same time, yes, that is, we need to understand that this wing of the neocons -