they sincerely believe, that is, it is like a cult, and now they are already preparing their own, let's say , cell, i don't know, their constituency in order to be ready, it is extremely dangerous, and by the way, literally there a month ago, so elon musk showed there that he was shooting, a rather big gun like that, or there from the hip and so on, that is, this is nonsense, but the most important thing is that in fact he gives an impetus to the fact that, well, in fact, the others are on the extreme right, they said it is normal. well, he doesn't give them a platform, and it's certainly dangerous, i'm here i absolutely agree with my colleague that trump, as a danger to us and to america and to the principle of democracy in general, and the second point, this is a civil confrontation that is already ready there, i hope, of course, that they will avoid it, that they will have enough of these restraints and counterweights embedded in them , but we cannot predict what will happen, we understand that it does not turn out that way by itself, the americans are much slower. than us in all these processes, but

they rely too much on dibst, they are convinced that nothing will change significantly, that these are surface waves, in fact america is as strong as ever, and that's gone, they don't realize it, they don't realize that there is no longer a west as such, that what we call the democratic world or the anglo-saxons are now very different interests and completely different politicians, and ultimately , it seems to me that we still underestimate russia's ability to influence events, everything that russia has been doing for the last 15 years, maybe even more, it is pressing additionally in order to remove its previous actions from the agenda, for example, now they have put a very disappointing diagnosis in fact, who does not understand, and the american elite does not understand what we call secondary special education, that is , the secondary special class does not understand, i am afraid that even the higher class does not understand... after harvard

, ukraine was chosen for the state department, not poland. those who chose poland had wonderful careers. and those who ukraine? no. ukraine in general has become such a taboo for many diplomats, politicians, experts, and analysts. and now it turns out that it is. point, because something is happening here, and there is not enough expertise and understanding, where do they come from chickens, bush's speeches, which are repeated in obama, which are repeated now, where from the misunderstanding, misunderstanding and fears in relation to russia, let's listen to timothy snyder's lecture, but now, they don't listen, unfortunately, this is such a mandatory course, for them, for themselves, and russia takes advantage of this.

more chaos, more misunderstandings , not understanding what to do, the desire to calm down, that is, somehow to be further from those events and further from this ukraine, which constantly excites something, some processes, this is not in the american character, not in the american pace, unfortunately, but the military-industrial complex, a lot of people talked about it, a lot of people hoped for it, that this would be the driving force that would unite the trumpists in the first place, and that huge money, and biden recently began to say that no- n-no, right there... thirds remain with you, they cannot unite, after all, become a certain russian force, they unite, it is not a matter of someone not supporting ukraine's aid or development the militarists of the defense-industrial complex in the states, no, the support is huge, the issue is that everyone is conducting bidding, and russia is fueling these bidding, by throwing in some ideas, i am convinced that we will receive money from the european union and support.

we will get, maybe even weapons, but about the money, i'm afraid, please, i want to find out, because i obviously missed this moment, and it was planned to be 60 yards from the united states of america and 50 from the european union, or i understand that they are different, but did they plan? for next year together, just definitely, this is synchronous, because there is a request, as, for example, we know that a third of our gdp has not been destroyed, and we actually need it, ukraine had to calculate 110, 100 mi, 50 for 4 years, from the eu side, yes, there is a program of the international monetary fund, for 115 billion , it was initiated by the international monetary fund and received support of 15 billion, this is money from the imf, and they had 50 billion for four years. to transfer in parallel

to the european union and the united states, but this is money for budgetary and slightly more support for ukraine, this is the financing of our deficit budget, first of all. american 60 billion. this is the problem, the problem is, of course, first of all, that our key donor and assistant in the military sphere with technology is the united states of america, and europe will not be able to physically compensate for what the united states should give, but how you say

about the fact that the west is not the west, and the deepstate is no longer the deepstate, obviously, and the russian intelligence was wrong about us, and the american intelligence was wrong about us, in short , the world has changed and everyone very much they were wrong, regarding the prospects of the war, and the ukrainians, and so on. well, then i support you, but it seems that they were very late with their decisions for two years, in terms of weapons, in terms of support, in terms of sanctions, they were late in everything. now they have a specific, specific gap with money and with weapons, they say that their defense complexes are not keeping up. and produce so many weapons, despite the fact that their gdp is much american, more than, for example, russia, why are they late with their plans b, plans c, if they do you need ukraine? i would throw in one more thing here, one point is important, and then i will answer: russia

is taking advantage of the situation, in what way? they involve us in increasing the technology of the army. given that the americans and europeans give us a shortage of both high-precision projectiles and new equipment, russia, due to this small number of our capabilities, adapts, studies western weapons, adapts its defense systems, reducing their effectiveness, what should our partners do, give to saturate us so technologically and instantaneously that we really had a radical technological what next , they don’t do what next, considering what they don’t do, it means that... the russian strategy to prolong the war, to adapt its economy, and therefore the missile attack is working - this is support for the idea of ​​the event, including that maybe ukraine should go on the defensive rather than on the offensive, they are working on exactly that, that

this is an idea, this is a proposal, but they didn't have one, but they didn't have one a month ago no strategy at all, but they, yes, yes, they faced the fact that the war was dragging on. a lot of problems and us and them, how to respond to this strategy of attrition, which was written about by zaluzhny, but there was no clear answer, now , judging by some publications, this proposal of a transition to active defense is appearing, but i think this is not yet definitively determined strategists, absolutely first in november was a very good analytical material of the german foreign policy council, which was basically a sensation. years and russia will recover in order to attack the i.e. this is a very important document, and in principle then in history said somewhere there 5 years, the poles said 5 years, the estonians said 5 years, two or three years, that is, we understand that the germans and, of course, the eastern

flank, they already understand that they are next and that ukraine must be helped, this is one understanding, but strategies there is no big one, as there is, i believe it is internal... red lines are drawn in the heads of several people. jake sullivan recently said that it is not profitable for russia, there are economic losses and so on, and it will go to negotiations. then his deputy, what he said, what does ukraine mean will achieve a certain positive on the battlefield, and then russia will go to negotiations. and they do not understand the essence of authoritarian, totalitarian regimes, willingness to sacrifice a lot to risk, unlike these comrades. and that's why we actually see such a situation now. that central eastern europe , understanding the threat, is trying to help us and push everyone else, the americans do not yet understand what to do, because they have a fork, that is, they understand that trump can come to power, and then all this help can end ukraine, that is something else needs to be done so that ukraine does not

crumble, relatively speaking, when trump comes, the politician, the politician writes, the officials, therefore, switch their attention to improving ukraine's position in possible peace negotiations. look, i would treat this publication, this article as a politician very much, you understand from all the cracks, it just says that they are allegedly changing biden . they don't change the strategy, they don't, that's the problem, the problem is that they have now failed in internal problems, and we do not receive american money, military aid precisely because of their internal problems and the internal crisis that is starting, biden has exactly the strategy, and mr. oleksandr said about it that it practically does not change, but the tactics reaction to new circumstances has changed several more times, because you remember that at first stingers should not be given, they will be. through the forests, and then they reached the actual f-16 heavy weapons, but most importantly, in relation to russia

, they did not draw the conclusion that ukraine has to win and russia to lose, they don't want that and in fact no one from the administration formulates it as lloyd austin said at the first ramstein, he said that ukrainians believe in victory, we believe in it too, we gathered here to help, and that is, this is a problem in the minds of several people, if it does not change. then the help we receive , i am sure of it, i have weapons first of all, they will not play the key role and will not give us the advantage that zaluzhny wrote about, the technological advantage over this horde that is approaching, listen, i no, not an ageist, yes, but nevertheless , well, they are these people who are running the united states of america now, they are 70 plus or 60 plus there, that is, they read, they read smart books and... they spent a lot time in libraries, they , they analyzed what was in kennedy,

what was the cold war between the united states of america and the soviet union, they studied the ways, how it came in, how it came out of that corner, and they seem to be analyzing it all , tell me how, now they came to that in fact america, the role of hegemon in the international politics of the united states of america hangs in the balance, specifically. in the fragment of the russian-ukrainian war and their objective thing is the shift of the economic center to the east and the fact that for the united states europe, well, it regained its importance after russia invaded last year not in the 14th year, because obama it it was not interesting, they left the middle east, but now they are returning, because there is israel that needs to be helped, and they actually failed, a domino effect followed. syria, libya and so on, but for them it is basically china and... they understand that they have few resources, they need to concentrate the tudyks here, and about this, let's say, the elderly

leaders, well, you remember why it took place the second world war, because after the first world war the european community was traumatized and did not want war, on september 11, two wars lasted for 10 years or more, and obama actually comes and says that these endless, endless warriors must be ended, and in fact this opinion remains with them. that is, they did not want to escalate the situation, not understanding that russia will take advantage of this, and therefore these gaps are the first, and the second, more important, in my opinion, is not the question of biden himself, ideas are brought to him and young people bring ideas that, let's say, smelled gunpowder, this first of all, and secondly, they grew up among books, among abstract truths, among models of the world, while his eyes saw a lot of things, the truth, unfortunately, unfortunately...

mccain, who could not just like austin to formulate now. idea, and what idea? total victory is possible only through complete demilitarization, perhaps the deconstruction of russia, that for sure the american, chinese war is now taking place in ukraine, there are no such visionaries who would take it as a price tag, but i will remind you, after all, the elections in the usa are won on the basis of the domestic american agenda, and mccain in his at the time of the elections for... played, yes , the request was a little different, so yes, we want ideal leaders to come to power,

there will not be such, but for me it is more positive, i am a little imperfect, we want decisive ones, right , right, but look, well, they are determined, listen, we want, we want them to have, we want that we want the same good for them as we want for ourselves, we want to have statesmen at the head, you understand, the state, but it turns out that in managers came to power. the time that ends in a year, and he thinks to himself, damn it, i 'm running out, so in a year my tenure is over, i have to leave with a cool portfolio from there, so that, so, i have an undirected state pension, so. so that i can walk the streets of washington unguarded, right, but whatever joseph biden is correcting the mistakes that he made during the obama era, yes, in fact what we have is obamaism, merkelism and hollandism, yes, that is, in fact, obama, obama is in power, obama in the democratic party is now setting the agenda , but he

understood then, it seemed to him, that what is happening here in europe is not fundamental, he needs it. pivatuation, that is, a turn, a turn of the american car to the east, and therefore, of course, that he reacted the way he did. biden is doing a lot of positive things, i'm absolutely sure he believes that ukraine should become his foreign policy savior, in fact , he has a foreign policy in other directions, there is afghanistan, a critical exit, yes, for which they are criticized, in principle, it was one of those drops that gave putin the opportunity to make a decision. regarding the invasion, that is, it was taken into account, they did not renew the nuclear agreement with iran, yes, they did not start doing anything in principle with north korea, and they are already preparing for war, that is, on all fronts, well, there is no positive, the only thing is that he may to say about israel, but we see how feverish the west as a whole is, because, well , that is, such an aim is bent, one can

say, and they do not understand what is really happening there, because of these humanistic approaches , those who are... victims of given this particular situation, that is, there are problems in this, so biden made crazy progress on himself, but not enough for us to win the war against the largest nuclear power in the world, because from the point of view there, for example, i have strategic warheads equally as with russia, as with the united states, more tactical nuclear weapons, do they have a plan, who do the americans have, well, now i think that even a few, and analytical centers are working. sullivan and blinkin may have different plans, they may have their own plan, but there is no strategy, there are plans, but there is no such master strategy for total victory, there is absolutely no delay in making key decisions that will be so radical, and more

there is one thing, there is a feeling that they are losing control, and... it all happens at the same time, russia works for chaos, and there is positive argentina, negative in islamic the world, india, which has suddenly started to play its own game and is not so accepting of american policy to be an element of the ring around china, and all this feeling that the world that they were used to, that they understood, it was over, and now the idea was formulated absolutely clearly. there are 10 years to rearrange world institutions and the world agenda, who has 10 years? aren't you 10 years old? they have in their time, no, i’m afraid that the chinese think like this about 10 years or even more, although now it it will be related that with the age of xi jinping, and yes, how will it continue to develop in china, with the age

of everyone, no, well, it is, yes, but in the states, yes, now, if biden goes there and trump comes, it's already the situation, it will change a lot , regarding the plan, i think there was a plan, the plan was simple, in the spring, or at the beginning of the year, there were hopes that our troops would go to the administrative border with crimea, to the coast of the sea of ​​azov, after that we can start negotiations, this was approximately the plan, but there was no strategy, and by the way, what is the mistake here are these articles in politics, or deliberate manipulation, they also say that there was supposedly... a strategy for the defeat of russia, they did not have a strategy for the defeat of russia, the main strategy was conditional, i would say general, not specific, in that ukraine did not lose the war, help us so that, yes, prevent the defeat of ukraine, this strategy continues to work, i think they will follow it, but

they did not have a strategy to defeat russia, and this was their mistake, and this plan is not it worked... the plan is to start negotiations when it is successful enough the offensive of the ukrainian troops, you know, it looks like this joke that you are eating fish, but there is no fish, you are eating fish, how should the plan work, when there is nothing to be done, now, now we need to develop a joint plan, it seems to me that the work on this is what she is doing, they are trying to develop this military political plan, let's see what will come out of it, how it will work, because everything rests on the supply of weapons, on meeting the needs of the ukrainian army, but i will add a little positive. it seems to me that this is what alexander said, that there is already awareness, and we mentioned it, there is an awareness in europe as well, it appears, that there is a risk, a huge risk of russian. attack, that this is not only a risk for us and a problem for us, but a potential problem for europe, but this awareness was not there, but we mentioned the situation between the first and second world wars,

i absolutely agree, this trauma of the war was in europe, in the usa also experienced a wave of isolationism at that time, and for a long time, despite the fact that franklin, like roosevelt, was a very intelligent leader, he refrained from interfering in european affairs, because the mood in american society. were completely different, yes, now the awareness that there is a risk on the part of russia, i think it will push, consolidate, at least the european elites in support of ukraine, despite all the wavering fathers who are with the right-wing populists, i think that as soon as more or less settles in the usa, here is this course in support of ukraine, i think it will recover, because this is in their interest, otherwise it will be a challenge for the united states, the storm may last a little bit i do not agree about, if in the case there is trump, so there is the heritage foundation, which was quite so conservative of the regeneration type, and now it is actually working out

a strategy for trump and there is no place for ukraine there, that is, it is a conflict that needs to be ended somehow and focused primarily on china, and they are they absolutely have normal arguments for this for their own audience, i don't remember 13 trills with us, they have a foreign debt, that is, we live in debt. we are not developing in the countries there in china , the infrastructure is better, we need it to focus on their own, that is, the totalitarian approach, that is, they're working it out, and thank god that now there's only a small core of republicans who profess it, it's literally 5-7 screamers over there like matt gates or margeryl green over there who say it, they extremely anti-ukrainian, recently there was a tweet by mjt, she gave a screenshot of the russian version of this textbook. where it is written, which means that the victory was stolen from trump in the 20th year, and she says that even the kremlin textbooks are more true than in the general

american media, that is, there are these threats, there is in principle the understanding of a large number of americans that there are internal problems , dissatisfaction with the political system, that is, all of this is there, and of course, that this plays into the favor of those who say, let's mind our own business, and we have china, because taiwan for us , the key issue is more important, that is, this... but on the other hand, we see that for biden, a large number of americans, it has become a matter of principles, that is, we do not have an ideology of fighting communism with a free world, but an authoritarian regime of authoritarian regimes with democratic, that is formulated by biden, and a large number of people say not because ukrainians are dying, not because there is danger in europe, but because it is a broader ideological basis on which this opposition is taking place and we must help ukraine, so... well, there is positive things, but there are systemic ones that can spoil this beautiful picture, about which no, well, i say, it is beautiful not in the sense that there are potential risks and problems in the states, we

do not know how this potential will end crisis that may arise as a result presidential elections in the usa, i am talking about more positive trends in terms of awareness of risks and threats from russia in europe, but europe was not quite ready, not ready to fight exactly, yes, but if you yourself are not ready. to fight, then you need to help us make it in time, so that, yes, there are fewer risks for europe, this is the awareness of the united states or europe itself, while in europe, in the states, i think some of the politicians, some of the elites understand this, but they are too focused on internal problems, so for us actually, next year it could be, you know, an option, on the one hand, if there's enough support for us, from europe, and from the united states, then hold on, hold on for another year, further on... building up military production, and if there is also a need, the interest of the american military industry in the first place, to provide weapons for us, well, then this

is a chance for us, yes, if they have time to launch weapons, but now i will finish, but there is also a second scenario, which is quite likely, if not next year, then at the beginning of the 25th year, that is, let's say, when it is not enough potential, internal will, yes, let's go at least... to a temporary peace, at least a temporary peace, and they will prepare, well, let's say, certain prerequisites for this in order to freeze the conflict, it's still in a good way, because putin now sees the increasing weakness of the west, and this whets his appetites, yes, freezing the conflict is not enough for him, he is ready to ask, is putin ready to freeze the conflict? at the moment no, at the moment no, and therefore the task. minimum for us and for the event to stop putin, to stop, this is a minimum task, i am not talking about a maximum yet, because there are many circumstances here, and we need to persevere and

the west must understand that they have to... satisfy our needs so that we at least persevere, well look, they should also have a lot of their own needs, from the point of view that they may have a war there, then there, then in taiwan, then in the balkans, then in the baltics too, maybe a boil, and, but i , when studying this report of the united states congressional commission on the strategic posture of the united states through 35, which they rewrote because two years ago, they had one strategic opponent, it was only russia, and now they... no longer consider russia specifically and china separately, they believe that russia and china are something in common, two common criminals, against whom they must and adjust their bod and defense-industrial complex and so on and so on and so on, and here they are actually this report, if you have read it, i will tell the audience, it is actually about their mistakes, what mistakes they missed, and here they are write that they missed the most important mistake, because roosevelt's will said

that america should always... have an arsenal to defend itself. america decided to live a peaceful life, and did not prepare such an arsenal for war. many people in america said that we are practically an island nation, and who would need tanks, who would attack us, and so on, and absolutely not taking into account the fact that these tanks may be needed precisely in taiwan to solve those issues, and, or somewhere in the balkans, or somewhere there some suval corridor, or something else, or protect some nato country and so on and so forth, that is, america approached the russian-ukrainian war unprepared, america approaches any conflict unprepared now, correct or not? it is possible, one tern: in the military sense, the united states approached the second world war also not very ready, in fact, in one and a half or two years, they adjusted, well, they did not create from scratch , but they created, well, let’s say this, from not very developed loans, they have there were no elections

then, there was a movement. well, there were elections, because they were held during the war, but again all the weaknesses of russian weapons and american weapons are obvious to china, so china will rearm at a very fast pace, much faster than the western world, i am afraid that russia will also adapt much faster, and the most important thing for me is that this is woodrow wilson's rake, but woodrow wilson the then president. tomnychka, a pacifist, after coming to power, began to militarize the united states of america, questions, questions, let's put three dots, yes, well, as always, we started discussing the most interesting thing here, while the news is long, now we will talk about it to speak, we stopped at something , we stopped at that, yes, who does the united states need now in order to make strategic decisions that can change something,

not only in the states, but in the whole world, you know, i have a... you discussed this idea, it was spinning in your head, but does the united states understand that it is starting to lag behind russia more and more, and it is already reacting, and not imposing its policy, yes of course, this is the whole situation in ukraine, it was an attempt to catch up events that went wrong as it turned out, not as prepared, and returning to the role of leadership, it would seem that the level of development of the world is such that individual leadership is important... and there are systems that should win something, but no, we are on the eve of a phase transition , a turbulent world, it requires real leadership, which of the leaders of these marshals with their plans appeared in the last two years, we see how much ursula funderlainen really showed herself as a strong politician, and it is a great happiness for ukraine that there is such a politician european, but not everyone perceives it, that's why.

what am i talking about, what am i talking about, so to speak, some kind of global leadership, so the imf made decisions that were non-standard for this rather conservative institution, so we see how scholz's policy has changed, who also showed his they don't accept, ratings too, they still have a history, yes, that is, people and here and there now at that moment, johnson immediately rolled yes from the political no.