using and contradictory iran policy who's in charge *. prosecute some real news i'm joined by my guest to me he's a political analyst with sputnik international and in belgrade because marcus papadopoulos he's the editor of politics 1st magazine or a german cross-talk rules in effect that means you can jump in anytime you want and i always appreciate it's go to belgrade marcus we've had a tumultuous few weeks with the trump administration showing the world in one form or another it's a ram policy it is very confusing it is very contradictory and i have to wonder what is in play right here is this a big game of bluff or we just have multiple centers of power within the white house go trying to achieve their own aims because trump seems to be all over the place as a matter of fact even contradicting bolton and pompei oh it's a it's a very confusing picture what do you read go ahead belgrade. well peter any

discussion about the grow in american traits to iran would not be complete without reference to how iran is a great force for stability and security in the middle east because iran prevents it the cancerous tentacles of the taliban some extend in into the middle east and of course it was iran that ensured the defeat of isis in iraq now that it's not something you whatever currency hereabouts in western mainstream major but the fact is that iran is a great source of stability and security market to east but we still have a secretary of state might pump a 0 in public making claims that iran in isis are in league with each other are you still trying to sell that ok that's what they're selling the american public i mean this is not only is that wrong it is it's an immoral to make that claim because of

what you just said here let me turn to dmitri here i mean you know it's good to be 120000 troops it's going to be 10000 troops could be 1500 troops we keep hearing different things going on you know what is there any kind of focus. of policy here because we know that all of the major players including donald trump himself is not a great deal of untypically towards iran now you have policy makers in charge like bolton and pump a oh it looks like they have their own independent foreign policy of trump well to be frank with you i don't care much about the amount of troops because there's a lot there already and they're with the fate of war and peace will not be decided by the number of troops or the number of aircraft carriers seem to be decided in washington by public opinion and by by the confrontation between trump and the congress between various factions inside the white house and my feeling is that there is not going to be a new war. and why. are you know why i think we have to thank their 2016 election

for that because. huge critical for trump i don't like a lot of his personal traits and i don't like what he's doing but he is in cornflake with a kong or a so when he started talking about. on the table with iran which is basically a terrible war you know immediately he had the congress against him and we had dollars and there's a logical so instilled a domestic gambit here absolute if if if hillary clinton had been elected in 2016 and if she decided to start a war with iran the war would start 100 percent that's why i'm k.p. that trump war not because i like you most a person but because it prevented the wars or that's a good point let's go back to building marcus if the blitz time let's connect some other dance here trump during the campaign wanted to get out of the afghanistan wanted to get out of syria even tried in then he had to backtrack here i mean iran

is a perfect. distraction to maintain the current american foreign policy in the middle east and of course it makes the israelis and the saudis very happy go ahead marcus and belgrade. look iran is not iraq iran is not libya dear brainy an military is extremely powerful is extremely well motivated is extreme really well let's say and it's extremely well equipped and i don't believe whoever is in the white house or opt for the military option because in the event of a war between america and uganda americans wouldn't just be up against iranian military they would be up against millions of iranians who would follow and see for the front lines as we saw too in the iraq iran war what i think the americans are going to continue doing is to try and 6 the iranian economy because. if the americans are

successful then that will bring down iranian governments and thereby iranian revolution will be destroyed i've said this before with trump in the office this is so once in a not that this is a once in a lifetime opportunity for the americans to try and bring down the iranian government's i agree with the market going to stay with you here whatever the number of troops are going to be deployed it seems to me the most likely target. placement would be iraq because the iraqi parliament wants american troops to leave finally after what 18 years of buying only leave iraq this is something that the neo cons in the deep state do not want to have happen against the will of the iraqi people and i think that the again iran functions as a foil because well iran's influence in iraq now is far more far greater now than it ever was particularly before 2003 how do you reflect upon that. yes that is

a start it's a serious impediment for the americans should they wish to in arc on a military option against iran because on the one hand the iraqi government is twin extents compliant to the wishes to the demands of the americans but on the other hand as you just said they have very cool relations with iran in fact more could deal with relations with iran than what some people in the west believe so iraq would not be prepared would not tolerate the americans use in their air space or a maritime borders or their grounds for american troops to attack iran so the americans would be in a dilemma there but on the other hand apart from saudi arabia the americans do have vast military bases in gulf countries and that would be more than sufficient for a military campaign against the americans but i still don't believe the americans will resort to the military option against iran here it would cost them far too

much and. so it would jeopardize the security principle allies and the brits waste saudi arabia and israel you know reflect upon the deal because i think marcus is right to me trump is showing that he's doing something ok but i think at the same time he's made it very clear i mean it's been hinted in the mainstream media that he doesn't want a war anything short of a war fine ok because he is a candidate for reelection here but i think what's really remarkable and i think this is the wood is not clear is that john bolton has waited decades to have the position he has right now and we know his record about regime change particularly when it comes to iran the temptation may be too great and if there is something does go wrong trump will have to own it i think one positive consequences of these terrible story is that the mainstream media is now critical of. saying i want to be against trump it's really kind of convincing i'm going to draw in john bolton he deserved it he deserved it for those of years you know they should have destroyed

him in the media many years goal but they're doing it now ok then what they're doing it now i agree with marcus that i don't believe in a war i don't believe in a war for several reasons you know 1st is. a good position in syria so there is a chance that if iran is attacked iranian allies in syria may may be difficult for israel you know so because of the expansion of iranian influence here i agree with marcus we have less chance for world war in the region because too many players have a lot to moves israel may be in danger the euro as basis may be in danger so by conducting these proactive. very group would be in danger of proactive policy over iran in in syria in iraq saved it saved it from this was. you know i think the

war was much more real under obama let me remind you know the people a lot of people are saying all trump is all for obama was just all. sort peaceful so when wars are barmer threatened iraq iran with the war in in the beginning of houston you're no us as the president immediately after apologizing for helping the quare in iran in 1953 you know this is the current overboard just that we get from a bomb ok we did it wrong now we're going to start a war on you right there so i think they're all in or things are changing for the bad thing and then we do list after warning years of suffering precisely because the rule over there of the destructive well what i said is deeper things can go wrong ok and that is the law of unintended consequence let go back to marcos here i mean both of you are saying is very very interesting is because when i went to the military industrial complex in the washington consensus want they want they need more than anything else they need a threat not a war they need

a threat and that's why they keep building up these threats you know any time north korea does something you know the west coast of the united states is in danger to me they inflate threats that's necessary the keep those budgets we can let's not forget just a few days ago the trump administration through some kind of corky lara won our prize we're told we're going to supply billions of dollars more of arms to saudi arabia because of the threat not because they would necessarily want war they want the threat do we maintain one minute before we go to the break here go ahead marcus well i certainly don't agree that things are getting better in the bit waste what i would say is this on the one hand there is more for an opportunity for achieving more stability in the middle east why because russia is back in the region that is very important but on the other hand trump like all the many of the residents they are they are making the region more solid so trump. even said recently he's

prepared to share technology with saudi arabia how how catastrophic could that be for the region should saudi arabia develop you know what. kristen's are the same ok david 10 seconds before we go to break well i think the situation is not good but the reason why there is a lesser chance for war is because iran is in yemen so saudi arabia does not feel secure in your longer iran is in syria so israel has to weigh its options i don't know if i don't agree with you there but i want to thank marcus papadopoulos in belgrade for joining us we're going to go to a short break and after that short break we'll continue our discussion on some real new state with our.

what is it called decline is magic internet the new type of digital currency the centralized digital scarcity chancellor. second for bankers call the genesis blog for reason they're calling it civil disobedience a source of optimism because i can control my own financial death any it's just a new way of coming to consensus is a game changer in the human history of this columbus discovering a new world paradigm shifting technology that transforms economics and finance in a heartbeat the apollo 11 landing on to the next and stacy. would normally just manufacture can be sentenced to the public will. when the ruling classes protect themselves. with the famous merry go round to lift. be the one percent of. the time

we can all middle of the room sick. leave. kind of financial survival job today was all about money laundering 1st visit this cash in just a different. oh good this is a good start well we have our 3 banks all set up here maybe something in your something in america something overseas in the cayman islands or do we do all these banks are complicit in their tough talk or say we just have to give much gold so i am ready to do some serious money laundering ok let's see how we did while we've got a nice luxury watch for max and for stacy oh beautiful jewelry how about. luxury automobile again for a mac. hey you know what money laundering is highly illegal. much kaiser of course.

historically 2 of his opponents used to claim that there are 3 issues that turkey is too poor. and too if you still muslim the fact is we are too poor is no longer correct because our per capita purchase very is high year than some of the current deal member countries. welcome back to cross talk where all things are considered i'm peter lavelle to remind you we're discussing some real moves. and now we're joined by john laughlin in paris he is a lecturer in political philosophy and i says the catholic university of wendy welcome to the program john thank you for taking time out today to resume he is finally leaving we all were predicting it none of us got the date right but we knew

the exit was coming. could have she succeeded but was it a task beyond any one being prime minister after all in all fairness both part major parties in parliament are divided on this and she never had her heart in bragg's it so at the beginning of this program i said braggs it claims another victim that victim is to rest of me who's next go ahead john. well we'll have to wait and see who is next as you know the favorite is forest johnson but i think that the commentators are pretty unanimous in britain and they all say one thing and that is that she is this was the worst prime minister probably be in the entire history of the united kingdom and certainly in anybody's memory you're being very generous and gentlemanly peter to say that it was a task that no one could have managed but i'm afraid i don't share that view i think that she made every single mistake possible and she stuck at it by

pretending to believe in bricks it when as you say in your question she didn't and that was only the 1st of many acts of dishonesty you see i think one of the difficulties that we have when trying to come to grips with this terrible prime ministership is that she gives the appearance to reason may of being a straightforward honest beautiful woman in fact she has shown herself in the last 3 years to be completely dishonest saying things that she didn't believe in breaks it means breaks it no deal is better than a bad deal and so on and these. lies have led to her downfall because as a result of not believing in what she was doing and in trying to do something she was not admitting to do she of course came up against the buffers of reality and failed so i don't think there can be any mitigating circumstances for her at all she made every single strategic error every single tactical error and she above all

made an error of human integrity and that really i think in politics is unforgivable you know one of the major criticisms is that she only she had self-interest that was it was what would be a good point to wrestle me and secondly what would be good for the conservative party those were 2 cardinal errors i think many people would say because she never really believed in bragg's that and some people would say. she the last 3 years she was so secretive in her negotiations that basically giving a fake come plea to the to the british public and expecting parliament to pass a plan that they had really nothing to do with in the 1st place team well i don't know if anyone. would resolve this problem in closer to asian because i think it would raise it and then he would have a leader that was for but exiting everything there might have been a different well i mean david cameron before her seem to me to be absolutely the

warst prime minister you could get was then him because he compared. to nazi germany and he you know said that putin somehow played with that of her ground on which was absolute nonsense you know but then she would leave him you know with souls very shallow did him you know no one forced her to make that statement ah you know russia i you know what you're up to no she didn't because we were not up to it in bad that actually and if we were off doing it and bad they would have shown the evidence they still haven't shown even the man who was supposedly poisoned you know so my you know my lessons that i think we can draw from this whole situation is that these liberal globalist now liberal ideology is very very vindictive you know if. many of them penalize colossus if naziism penalize nations like the deuils or they're all the people out to liberalism

penalize us the nations that oppose its globalist projects it's right you know the e.u. was a globalist broad jacked and the british voted against it and they would have cried ourselves about brussels through all this has been this way of indictive. but that was supposed to be a lesson to everyone else but i want to talk about the future which i find it made me go back to paris or john john boris johnson i mean we know a lot about him already and he's a leading contender i mean we have cameron we have to wrestle may is the worst john to get to be any better than either one of them go ahead john. no i in the not necessarily he has other defects he doesn't have the same one. any but he's not known as a forceful leader and he wasn't a particularly good foreign secretary he was obviously terrible on the russian issue but he didn't give the impression of being a good leader he is of course very popular in the country and popular with

conservative activists but i'm not particularly optimistic about him being able to succeed where she failed but i do want to although i very much agree with what dmitri babich has just said there are there are 2 other points that mustn't be forgotten the 1st is that if she had had the same majority as david cameron she may well have succeeded better but she lost her own majority by calling an election early in 2017 and then fighting it in parts of the country which were never going to vote conservative and the 2nd point that i would the 2nd lesson i'd like to draw from this because this refers to your question peter about the future is that to release them a failure has been obvious to anyone for at least 6 months if not since 2017 after the election frankly she should have resigned i think effectively lost it and yet she was kept in power by the conservative party by conservative members of parliament. by the senate and so her failure is also a sign of

a deep corruption i would say not i'm not talking about financial corruption but moral and actual corruption inside the conservative party so we will be distracted now for several months by this show this beauty pageant and that frequently. but the fact is that they have still got the same member m.p.'s in place in july and the same figures in parliament and that innes and it's is going to remain a problem only today sunday that chancellor the exchequer the current one who will no doubt go but will still be an m.p. has said as he implied. that he might vote against a conservative government if for no deal bricks it there also this that but see that's the whole the whole point is that we still you know to resume his leaving boat and boris johnson may be coming but we still have briggs looming here and with no answers whatsoever i mean this is going to be a major distraction because it's all show it's all optics but the problem remains

well. i can only comment in this way and these people want to teach the wall democracy you know the e.u. and the u.k. kind of been saying during the last 30 years that they're the absolute pinnacle of civilization they're the you know they're the most democratic clients and look old they cannot agree on the simplest things you know 1st the e.u. said that britain might have to pay 40 a from 40 to 100000000000 euros for walked for the ministry and you know given it administrating services through the u.k. it's precisely these services that people voted against you know and people are now being forced to pay for something that they didn't like you know so it just shows us how inept the e.u. is and when and how difficult it is you know any structure the reason why the e.u.

is it will be a big danger now not only because of this election year in which maybe a bar just can finally get into the european parliament and not only because there's been so rude to this alternative by just you know give em off stump the former belgian prime minister who has one of the biggest factions in the european parliament called them russia's 5th column that you know he called salvini and or burn and other basically you know important people kinds of government well they've all done that reminds me all the war stems in our soviet history this is the way the dissidents were called exactly. and the e.u. was not only because of this but also because there is no way you can leave it legally if you don't yeah it's the whole it's course it's the hotel california that's for sure john but it's what is really fascinating to me and very very sad is that the the e.u. project as it's developed it's basically

a destroyer of nations that's why we have these alternative populist conservative in many ways culturally conservative many ways sprouting all over the place because the mission it's not it's not written in the details but it's simple it's implied in the. and up line is that you have to have your nation destroyed to become a viable member of the e.u. and of course it serves the leeds purposes go ahead john. well that's exactly right it's always had a post national ideology and that outpost national ideology has only got stronger in the last 20 years it's the maastricht treaty and the introduction of the single currency and it remains the central dogma of the european union and what is so incredible about this continuing obsession with the european union in britain is that as anybody who lives in europe on the continent of europe can see the project is collapsing internally never mind britain which itself is a major catastrophe breck's it is

a major catastrophe for the european union because britain's departure if it happens is the equivalent of out of one country leaving but of 20 countries exaggerate about cyprus and luxembourg and all the small countries but of course internally as we all know poland and hungary and up in arms the greeks and the germans are at each other's throats even the french and the germans see very differently on that front subject than in fact the european union because there's everything is decided together has become a structural system for exporting your problems to your neighbors so you explore your unemployment if your poland you explore your unemployment employment to britain germany obviously exports massively its goods to other countries you export your debt problems if you're greece or spain or another country to the rest of the eurozone and that is why that thing is structurally condemned to collapse because it is based on a system of d. responsibilities ation in other words of socialism at an international level only

2nd well the only of the spores that the york had or this was done. and i think the best quantum came from their american conservative where a bad bill can enhance his article published in the fall and called what are on a bar would have in your all unique national identity what's wrong with that comment on the e.u. 11 ok that's it there we're moment of time many thanks to my guests here in moscow belgrade. and in paris and thanks to our viewers for watching us here r.t.c. unix time and remember cross talk rules. this in petersburg international economic forum is a unique event in today's business world. over the last 21 years the forum has become

a leading global platform for discussing their key economic issues facing russia emerging markets and the world thousands of business community members attend a forum to address today's and vital issues. watch our special forum coverage on r.t. . you know world a big partisan movie has a lot and conspiracy it's time to wake up to dig deeper to hit the stories that mainstream media refuses to tell more than ever we need to be smarter we need to stop slamming the door on the bad and shouting past each other it's time for critical thinking it's time to fight for the middle for the truth the time is now for watching closely watching the hawks.

and very well. for. those who are going all of.

the stuff. i brought. along with. the highest 20. in the u.k. . expected to win the conservatives and. the british prime minister stepping down after failing to get. through the roof i said well up and running.