close the strait of hormuz this can be traced to other parts of the region including the gulf of other than iran can use its proxy forces its missile capacity it has cyber attacks as well as different tools like resuming the. let's say. capacity or potential that the country has but. i would say that the americans if they could have if they could they would have targeted iran and the rain and sides they didn't because they couldn't let's talk about this suppose it a promise for this council to attack it was the iranian taking down of an american navy drone which at least according to the russian intelligence happened within the rainy and air space if that's indeed the case then iran had. so for the right to do what it wanted to do. don't you think that that might have been the reason that spoke trump that they suppose it cuz this ballie for the strike is so weak

this is something according to the reports been hearing from american me that they said that they refrained to do so because they thought they felt that they thought that it happened in inside the iranian airspace iran clearly and transparently announced that because the drone enter into iran in the airspace they target that they wanted to send a warning to the united states by saying that if they aggressive in the territory they will target said that if they wanted to attack they would have killed about $150.00 people in the rain inside but the question comes to me is the americans a country in the past by nuclear bombs do they really care about killing 150 people in the world and maybe they do because donald trump is a very unusual president you can be very critical about him but he has. i think he

has his redeeming qualities at least and what i found very interesting is that he made this his decision as i said against the counsel of most of his security advisers and we are talking not about only john bolton who is always ready to you know bomb any country he sees but also you know his last hawkish advisers and one thing that i was kind of wondering about because it's clearly not trumpet sound that drawn into the iranian air space do you think that it was just the routing mistake or do you think that there were some forces perhaps in the united states who wanted that drawn to be in that territory and to be shot down and the events to kind of spiral down from there i would say that you know about one year ahead of presidential election in the united states a war or a military conflict can bring energy crisis. as in the region as the george bush the father by attacking the coase busy this cost as presidency back then i don't think trump wants to mean. yes to attack that he is worried

about the after math of the attack and that's why he made the decision his very because he wants to. run for office again he wants to have reelection and he needs to be cautious and if they he has some advice to favor a military attack against iran now my questions may sound a bit conspiratorial and yet we've had a series of several mysterious events already happening in the region which theoretically at least could have served as a promise for a strike on iran i'm talking about the attacks on oil tankers in the gulf of amman for in may and in june do you see any connection between those events and potentially the drone incident well i think they can be somehow relevant in terms of being suspicious because. iran and the united states both have announced

that they are not after a military war in the region so but there are some other 3rd parties or even some elements in it within the united states and within the trumpet the ministration who aspire year to see a war between iran and the united states they want to scale ation and that's why we have been seeing these things iran has been denouncing condemning these things while iranian leader was meeting the prime minister of japan one of those incidents happened in the sea of oman this doesn't make sense for iran to do such a thing at that timing exactly against the japanese tankers and i think in this situation where there iran is expected to react to the threats or pressure by the. united states that will be much easier to finger point to have the finger pointed toward iran and i think there might be some 3rd parties involved in this issue

there are some speculations on social media about the alleged involvement of people's mujahedeen of iran and their organization that is banned in iran but have border it in the united states there are also some allegations of that ties with saudi arabia but all at this point all those allegations are on the verified and they will remain and verified unless there is some neutral international investigation into the matter which has not been launched and i don't understand why because this is such a critical area for global maritime trade why do you think the international community remains so lackluster about these attacks 6 attacks already happening in the space of 2 months on the one hand they want to pressure iran because iran has started to reduce its and if they you mean the united states or they the international community would say that the 1st that the united states and its allies because they want europeans even they want to have pressure against iran in

order to stop iran from reducing its nuclear commitments under the nuclear deal also you know they want to have some make some allegations against iran there is no evidence look what the united arab emirates official said recently they said there is no evidence but before any investigation the americans and some western countries as well as some players in the region to try to let's say make allegations against iran and there was a tape recording between the. official talking to. be still very. still on verify yeah but no one has rejected has been no denial i mean you cannot make the whole case on these are no. more details that is one of the in the . patience this is something this so the arabia and the americas they have been always talking without doing any investigation they have been attacking iran and

alleging that iran has done because from an american perspective iran is at fault everywhere and on every issue now this whole situation in iraq has a company here because this whole situation reminds me a little bit the build up to the expected strike against syria back in 2013 that president obama called off in the last minute but baghdad cass's bally was much more serious the goo to attack which both russia and iran believe was staged it involved multiple human casualties and very very gory graphic images thankfully we haven't seen any of that in the case of iran do you think we will you know back then i would say that they were false flag operations because whenever the those armed forces or the terrorists were in a difficult situation those things happen in order to put pressure against the syrian government as well as those who are helping the syrian government to fight

back against the terrorists but whether we will have such kind of false flag operations against iran that is also possible because america is they also devoted a budget for such kind of covered operations against iran this is something which was announced by american media. you know hearing those lies about iran is nothing new pump a 0 when he was talking about his he was director of the cia he said that they told lies they cheated many times they might be telling those lies that they said in the past both this time about they can easily now president trump was very careful not to draw any rad lines but mike paris secretary of state whom you just mentioned essentially did it for him. he's sad that if there is any attack involving death of an american citizen it would be considered a cause for retaliation against iran how does it go with the iranian

leadership recent pledge to you respond even with greater force in case of any other intrusions across the border the downing of the drone was a warning to the united states in order not to repeat that kind of intuition into your reign in borders. or integrity. so i think if such a thing happens again you ron. i think will respond again evan stronger because they cannot see than watch the americans coming to you in an airspace and doing everything without being in the middle in the reaction even risking a major confrontation of which who definitely take the lives of many and many thousands of iranians say that the risk will be higher if you run does not respond because this will send the signal to the americans that you can come on the will not so they will come next time more and more and move on not react but if they are

the 1st point americans will be real thing so this can have a high risk iran has learned during the presidency of trump or according to the approach of the americans that if it plays at the low level of risk it will lose but it needs to play at the level of the risk and that's why the nuclear essentially a mirror trumps own tactics but as changes it may be trying for now at least is essentially playing on the side of the ukrainian leadership because he did not rush into war as some have act him into don't you think that there is something that the iranian leadership could do to solidify these kind of a fact. he says that he. wants to negotiate with iran but he left in the go sharing table after viewers of would say 12 years of negotiations

which led to a nuclear deal. in vienna so on now he's talking about negotiations look what happened recently they imposed sanctions they against the rain the commanders of diet you see they said that they will target the u.n. and foreign minister so if there is going if there is going to be any talks between iran and the united states the most likely life going to. be written in foreign minister is that he if so by imposing sanctions against that if i think i don't know if his imposing the sanctions against diplomacy and the negotiations so this shows contradiction as well as confusion in that ministration i think well that's. perhaps no it's surprising manifestation mr a slender we have to take a very short break now but maybe we'll be back in just a few moments stay tuned. as

we speak large organize care of and are on the march to the united states. 71 and a player coming out for a caring. this is a virtual invasion of our country. but i'm going to get out on a felony you know. in the form of

a feeling you know what. the night. is you can do is you know we're going to see a movie or who goes you know to. the actual supplied by a muslim slimy iranian journalist and political analyst sunny just before the break we started talking about. whether the uranian leadership could have a full more flexible approach one towards. president trump and perhaps some other towards more belligerent members of his administration and just

a few weeks ago iran's supreme leader posted on his official twitter account that he does not consider the president of the united states as a person deserving to exchange messages with i have no response for him and i will not answer him is that a wise approach i mean you said that the americans are contradictory on the why that they want to have talks but surely iran wants to talk is it the way to talk to the american president well this is not the only the approach of the leader but many in the wrong even those who remember by the presidential campaign of mr rouhani inside the country that many there are going for the negotiations with the united states in order to resolve the from the issues with the united states underneath the issue was the. beginning point in order to resolve other issues maybe including the regional issues so they engage in negotiations that could

last for years they had the nuclear deal but the new president inside the united states after taking office he withdrew from the nuclear tang nuclear deal after some time so. you know iran sees no guarantee if they engage in talks with this administration in the united states. that no other president or another person or even the same person bo you know there's something you know strange and different again so there is no guarantee for you really is to engage in so there's no guarantees for anyone i mean russia is in a pretty similar situation when it comes to compared with iran i mean it faces the same type of political pressures sanctions intelligence after future it's competing with the united states and certain geopolitical fronts and yet i think. that the russians have been taking a very different they're very critical of the american policy but president putin has never said this and it worth about president trump personally. fullish

you know let me complete my answer by saying that iran does not rule out the possibility of any negotiations with the united states iran has said if the united states returns to the nuclear deal and compensates its commitments under the nuclear deal and removes the sanctions that are supposed to be gone that the nuclear deal in that condition iran by the engage in talks with the americans are not ready for the absolutely and the americans say that they will be you know you know more anxious you live in iran something everything they don't want you to be doing so don't you think that perhaps iran and the united states. are behaving towards each other in pretty much the same. matter. applying the tactic of maximum pressure asking for i'm realizing both things don't you think that in turn in certain terms you are very similar ok so who started you run the you know america's

vis true from the nuclear deal iran waited for over a year to see that the other parties and members of the nuclear deal to complain say that withdrawal what happened nothing so now iran wants to gradually again in order to save the nuclear deal to reduce its nuclear commitments but again in this 2 months of period that the iran gave to the europeans they have done nothing so far so i would say that iran didn't search explore for a guarantee before starting negotiations with the united states before the j c p a they clinched the deal but what happened the americans with 2 so they have shown a record that makes iran to be cautious about them and iran says if you want to engage you have to complain say and you have to keep your commitments and you have to show that you want do you really want to engage in talks but this doesn't appear

from american side now they also introduced personal sanctions against the supreme leader of iran and i see him ayatollah khomeini you wasn't planning to vacation at mar a lago or some other american destination so in practical terms i think those sanctions don't amount to much but symbolically of course i think the iranians cannot leave them unnoticed how much of a hinderance is that for any prospect of future talks so this goes against the backdrop of american claim to engage in talks with iran so if you want to talk to iran why are you imposing these sanctions and. then it's interesting that they're imposing the sanctions against the the people like. foreign minister zarif who might be the person who represent thinking iran in the negotiations or the office of the litter who is a major main figure in the country and can decide on different issues in

coordination with the parliaments and they are pretty orderly negotiation i think that indicates that they are not really for the negotiations we have been seeing from tampa administration officials have been writing themselves directly in the past that. with dressing the negotiation issue they want to leave the possibility of the rhetoric leave open this was stated by the john bolton that in the case that they are not really for negotiation now speaking about broader international formats the european still play to be with the iranians to keep up biding by the 2015 agreement even though they started kind of threatening iran of a certain consequences at a time when they themselves are being threatened with consequences by the americans if they are by and by the deal which of these 2 sides of of threats do you think is more potent. would say that the europeans want

to have the nuclear deal in place but they do not want to pay the cost and i think this indicates that saving the nuclear deal is not saving iran but will be saving the credibility as well as the let's say identity of the european side as well because the nuclear deal i think show that if the europeans do not have the americans on their own side. they will not be able to do anything i think this is not a danger against iran this is a good sample to indicate that this is the same thing can happen to others you know we have iran the phobia in the international arena the same thing happens in relations with russia look what the. some republicans are doing in relation to russia i'm now adays we're seeing the the same thing happening to china american

media as well as some journos they were writing about something like triple containment containing china russia as well as iran those who want to have independent policies and those who want to be resisting against the will of the united states who wants to impose its policies to all the parts of the world now last week iran said that it was on course to boast its stockpile of low and reached uranium beyond the limits prescribed by. next month it may go even further and raise the level of your own human race from an above 3.6 to 7 percent and from a proliferation point of yes far as i understand there is no big deal about it i mean every signatory to the nonproliferation treaty has that right it's not an automatic stuff to nuclear bomb and yet their way this issue has been covered in the media raises a lot of alarm especially in the west and i sometimes wonder if iran is partially

to blame for it because on the one hand it is its own inalienable right to pursue peaceful nuclear energy but on the other hand it uses nuclear issues so much in political and geopolitical negotiations that it's all right seems to be compromised by now you know that's the story with you ron has been saying for years and decades those even possessing the clear warheads burthens they have been. concerned about iran's civil nuclear in their g these measures which you run has taking have been voluntary under a nuclear deal called the j c p. if one side and one party doesn't keep to the commitments and according to. the paragraph 26 paragraph 36 of the same deal the other side can. abandon fully or

in partially come at them and iran is going in accordance with that the same thing but the other parties who have not kept to their commitments do not want to see their own share and their own side but the have focused on the rent inside and that's why they are not saying and telling all the truth and this is an issue which you ron has all along said that it wants to go after a non military nuclear program in order to meet its civil needs but the others have . nuclear weapons and interestingly they are worried about. non military usage of that it's not about justice for me it's more about the way the narrative has been shaped because 15 years ago when iran made some of its 1st concessions. on enriching uranium and introduced some confidence building measures those measures were perceived as temporary now days the conversation is almost like iran

has to give up its nuclear right altogether i mean this is essentially what the trumpet ministration is asking for the total ban on any nuclear enrichment any uranium enrichment in iran. why do you think this narrative has changed so much and not in iran's favor. i think americas think they might. achieve this but this was the story during the george bush the where arguing for 0 richmond for iran but in the would see the last days of the bush administration in office they understood that they can know this and they wanted to shift toward letting iran to have some enrichment and that's why the same thing happened during the obama administration because before those pressures and sanctions against iran

iran had a couple of hundreds of centrifuges but in the end it after the sanctions on the pressure it ended up to have thousands of centrifuges and the same story can have happened and be repeated as this i mean we have been seeing these stories in the past years iran and if the 3 european countries they had then they greenman in 2003 but iran that its own part the other part under the fresh of the americans didn't fulfill its commitments and they can we're seeing the americans are repeating the same story well this might happen in future as well. yes it surely can and i think we're already seeing that scenario unfolding again iran pursuing its nuclear program that americans keeping some of the strangest sanctions ever at the iranian population i heard you say is suffering it's having its a fact on society i don't know how i would ask that question in relation to my

country but do you think it's worth it do you think it's worth you know to fight sore hard for this right to enrich uranium and put so many a millions of your citizens and so many generations through so much hardship i think i will know how to dress but you know yes the sanctions bring economic hardship it can. bringing lots of problems to the daily lives of people and contrary to what they say exactly sanctions are targeting ordinary people in every country including in the wrong so but i think the main target of the americans is to change the calculus the behavior or the regime in iran but what is happening in practice you're wrong behavior in the region is not changing iran wants to resume the activities the calculus into iran is not changing so iran

thinks that maybe its resistance as it happened in the past might change mike work the other way round and change the calculus in washington but it's a vicious circle that harming everybody anyway mr sonner we have to leave it here but i greatly appreciate you coming over and sharing your perspective but that's thank you very much thank you i encourage our viewers to keep this conversation going in our social media pages and hope to syria again same place same time here on worlds apart.

good food descriptions sound up even for the owners so how to choose just pet food industry is telling us what to feed our pets really more based on what they want to sell us than was necessarily good for the pet turns out may not be as people believe we have animals that have you know diabetes and arthritis they have auto immune disorders allergies we are actually creating these problems it's a huge epidemic of problems all of them i believe can be linked to very simple problem of diet and some dog owners so heartbreaking stories about their pets less treats a larger corporations are not very interested in proving or disproving the value of

their food because they're already making a $1000000000.00 on it and there's no reason to do that research. so what we've got to do is identify the threats that we have it's crazy confrontation let it be an arms race is often scary dramatic development only closely i'm going to resist i don't see how that strategy will be successful very. time to sit down and talk.

making history becomes the 1st ever sitting u.s. president to enter north korea. really organize meeting with kim jong. remain for you know. i'm looking forward to taking. on his country i'm looking forward but. also in the stories that shaped the week a trade war the u.s. and china positive steps in relations with moscow and washington g. 20 summit in japan. the meeting was good and businesslike we discussed.

russia and the united states and we had a discussion we had actually we had a great discussion.