foreign affairs analyst are gentlemen cross our girls in effect, that means you can jump any time you want, and i always appreciate it. i'll just go to brian 1st in washington. i sent an introduction around. we've had 2 weeks of high level um everyone's positioning on. i think what we know now, what we now know is, oh, how much both sides disagree with each other on certain particular should be li, nato expansion. over the weekend. we have this solved story come out of the u. k, where the u. s. are confirmed without in sourcing it in the public anyway. and that russia has designed for regime change and care again, no details provided um at the end of last week i total number of experts and too much to my surprise. so someone were a little bit more optimistic than usual that yes, there hasn't been a breakthrough, but maybe that's a good thing. and then we have this over the weekend, and now we have evacuations from embassies here. where do we stand after 2 weeks go ahead? well, i don't think we stand in a far different place than we were at the beginning of this period 2 weeks ago. i'm

in washington, d. c. what an uproar over the evacuation of the u. s. embassy, and you have, i mean, the, the sense here is a great for voting that the russian invasion is imminent. that the u. s. government is taking, you know, dramatic measures to save american personnel. a real hype has been created. and at the same time, if you look at the washington post news paper, front page headlines, binds speech, elicits uproar. what's the uproar? is it that the u. s. in russia, the 2 largest nuclear powers may be on the verge of conflict? no, it's because biden happen to say that there might not be a major u. s. war against russia. in the event that there was a quote minor incursion into ukraine. so a bind is in a corner right now if he wanted to step back. and he said, look, let's, let's calm things down. let's not like play chicken, right,

right there in ukraine. i don't think he has any political rome. i mean, the closed ranks within the u. s. ruling establishment echoed by the media. whether it's m s, n b, c, or fox news, it's the same chorus and, and the question is why, what, as, what has actually happened? russia has a mass troops, allegedly inside of russia. russia has said in writing, look, this is a red line, couldn't said at the end of the year press conference. this is a red line. we will not let you crane. we will not let our border area be a staging ground for advanced weapons with missiles whose flight time might be 2 or 3 minutes to their targets in russia, or to allow ukraine to be permanently in nato. so that kind of scenario can play out. that's a red line, we're not going to let that happen. and so, and as he also said with the u. s. possibly of what russia do this at the us

mexican border, or the us canadian border, of course not. so again, this is an american created crisis, but one where russia actually does have to respond and actually make clear that this, in fact, is unacceptable. long term and short term for russia's national interest. you know, john went looking at the media drumbeat here and the gaff that we, well that was just mentioned by biden. i mean by just let the mass drop for a 2nd. each time you talked about one of the scenarios here. he got off script. this is what he does here, but one should expect that russia has its own scenario as well. but i mean the media, it seems to be the cheerleader as usual. you know, i always get worried when something's bipartisan in america because it's usually something bad like war. and this, the kind of illogical sequencing that the, this is the of the context of all you know, to protect ukraine. we have to send more weapons may be troops, but if you do that,

then russia feels threatened and then you get this, you get this cascade effect. i mean, doesn't anybody see that? and on top of it, all you claim isn't a member of nato. and the u. s. and its allies have made more or less clear that they're not going to fight for ukraine. so they're fighting over something that the leave the object that they're trying to protect, they're putting, making it more vulnerable. don't think see that. go ahead. joe. biden has brought nato to the edge of a catastrophe, potential catastrophe in the case of a war, just forget the nukes for a 2nd. if a, if a conventional war would break out a russian. but probably when in about a few weeks, i mean they just have to come in from the north like a dagger and hit key and hit key. i mean, they could just launch missile missiles and the key of and take out didn't military and political infrastructure. you can, it can be done, maybe in a matter of days. so nato will lose in a conventional war. but 1st, let's try go back 2nd. why answer the question, why is all happening? and the reason is because joe biden, his administration,

is an absolute catastrophe. absolute catastrophe on the foreign policy front, on the domestic front domestically we have an economic crisis, the worst it 50 years. runaway inflation poverty is, is also increasing rapidly. a lot of discontent at home. of course, the, on the foreign policy front, the worst foreign policy disaster since 19 vietnam. and it's kind of stand obviously. so this is a man who's ministration is one disaster after another. he's got to deflect the popular discontent away from all these problems by your own admission. that's a losing proposition. i mean, this is what so paradoxical about it, because even by being quoting a pro active and showing strength of projecting strength, and it will end up in catastrophe, i would agree with you. it would only would any kind of conflict be very, very short. ok. and would also entail, if it were any kind of occupation would be minimal if any. ok, because of the technology. i mean,

let me go to you. i looted in the my 1st question to brian about this ridiculous story. coming out of the u. k. about course resume chain, except for not the americans doing it this time, but russia, which is completely nonsensical, even the figures that they have mentioned are looted lucas, even to consider them. why did this come out? why now? and why is the u. k. care so much about this, go ahead. in my opinion, i think are you kind of trying to find its place in the world after leaving the you are global britain is trying to support as it was doing all of these years on united states and american strategic goals, whatever it might be. so ukraine is the easiest part for the global britain to raise its voice because we know that it's shipped. oh, hi. what is the total cost for? i'm even expressing his article a few months ago in prospect magazine. so yes,

i think that united kingdom is trying to manage to constance for such actions like united states aiding the legal aid to ukraine in order to portray and justify these actions regarding the fact that they are instead of bringing peace, a possibility of peace. also finding some sort of a acceptable solutions full for both sides is just adding fuel to already very know the situation in the region. so also by referring to all the panelists, i would say that it is a little walk joe biden wants to have and it is more of the decline of the united states from its spectrum on a position in the world. it's trying to portray it so and it's ability to strike is influencing the world. so in this region,

regardless the fact that it might appeal to others that it might need to the nuclear war, which low same person wants to have. but i think is a part of the psychological, informational, as we know it's us, mary. a recent polls suggest the british citizens believe that russia will invite you crate in 2020. so we already see the repercussions of this cycle for a manufactured consent here. here, brian, because you know, one of the things i find very odd is, you know, the, that the head of nature cells and berg and then you have other leaders that are boosters for nature. the only thing about nato unity, nato unity. well, the more they talk about it, the more i have to wonder if that unity is really kind of been because once the 1st missile is fired, then the sanction start. um,

and if you look at how the sanctions could be applied, the biggest loser will be europe. it won't be russian because russia used to sanctions. it's been 8 years now, a sanctioned me since 2014. i can tell you, the average person hasn't felt it in russia. i live here. ok. but europeans will throw in rush out of the swiss system. so is russia going to give oil and gas for free? i mean, if there's no switch system, how are they going, how would the europeans able to pay for it? they can, has anybody bought this through? right? yeah, that's such an important point. peter, about europe. and you know, there's the europe of the establishment, and then there's the europe of the people. and when you think about what's happened in the last 20 years, the u. s. cancel the abm treaty and put and has said that that was really the beginning of the new cold war, the anti ballistic missile treaty that was cancelled in 2002. the only reason to do that is the signal that the u. s. or nato want to gain a 1st strike capability against russia. so is very destabilizing. and then he was

cancelled the intermediate nuclear range treaty. now, why did that treaty, which was signed by gorbachev and reagan in the late or mid $1080.00 is why did it become such a triggering event? because it affected europe. when the u. s. puts missiles with a flight time of 6 minutes to their soviet targets, which is what happened in 1982 in all of the european countries, the europeans then realize, well, wait a flight of war on our soil and it's going to be a nuclear war we are kind of like bait and we don't want to be bait. we don't want to be in the middle of your geo strategic designs which could likely lead to our deaths. and so that really became a dominant political event in the 1980s. and i think right now if, if we get past this stage of the crisis crane and wiser head start to, you know, articulate the message for europeans. the message should be, if there is

a conflict at the end of nord stream to the americans are actually saying they may destroy. can you imagine, destroy nordstrom to using military means? i mean, what would that actually mean for europe? it would be devastation, it would be catastrophe. and again, for what, for what for the, for the rug government in ukraine there came to power as a consequence of a u. s. approach date, a coup d'etat in 2014. is that really worth it? and of course, most europeans will say, no, that's why breakers, i'd like to point out to people, the more ukraine's friends in the west. hell, the government in care of the smaller remarkably ukraine keeps getting in. this will happen also here. ok. just let me go to your real quick here. i mean, the way it's phrased it's about ukraine. it's not about ukraine. it's about nato expansion. that's it. that's part of the narrative that really irritates me. go ahead real quick. it's more about american hedge, m,

hedging many and about america, as we know in the last 10 years, trying to talk russia everywhere throughout the world, whether it's syria, of course, ukraine or venezuela. so this is just a situation. ukraine is just one more move in the grid. here we go to a hard break here, and after that hard break, we'll continue our discussion about russia. nato tension stay with r t ah ah, there may or may, we should all be mayor. may. we should all be angry because of what's going on, right. can't understand united states history and the role that slavery play is already very formal institution at a time, united states became a nation. it actually the find the nation,

the rise of capitalism clearly on the backs of white and the slave down if you had investigated lynchings, any great extent. you can't believe that really having the country and the country still stands in brick. i'm from the south. everybody. i know know what they're senior to some extent, i would argue that we're still fighting the civil war in the south is winning it's an open secret that private military companies have been playing a role in our conflicts world wide. u. s. government doesn't track the number of contractors and uses in places iraq or afghanistan, the united states army and the military and general is so reliance on the private sector. i would call the dependency, but we don't know who's the on the ground presence of these companies overseas. we just don't out west and private military companies can in their turn, views,

so cool subcontractors from countries with trouble pass. the chances are quite good that they had also been child diligence processes. i was a child, as well as my job professional job is he's with the whole 141. if i said that with, with no flaw, minimum own, if you want. sure which i mean to be merciless killing machines. now they fight and die in other people's was people. carol lock a dead soldier or dead marine shows up in this country. we start asking yourself, why did they die? why, what were they fighting for? nobody bothers down to market contractors. oh,

welcome back to crossed up. were all things are considered on peter lavelle? this is the home edition. remind you we're discussing russia nato relations. ah ok, let's go back to john and interrupt you. we had to go to a hard break here and what we've already went to the break i, i made it clear that this is a conflict that it entails russia and nato and not it's not that ukraine is a symptom of the problem. that isn't the problem. here and you chimed in and said, this is about american hegemony. keep going. and most the average american probably average european, they are not aware of the fact that there's a bigger, bigger chest game going on for the past. at least the past 10 years. we're going to forget the soviet or for the moment. but the past 10 years, we've seen russia and america go ahead to head in venezuela, of course, in syria, most commonly and now in ukraine. so we, with the question we have to ask is, why,

what does america hope to achieve these of you, russia and why is it doing it? why is america always trying to seek conflict with russia everywhere in the world? why is in america trying to find ways to cooperate with russia, to solve problems? because this is what's really intially about ukraine. if the, if the u. s. i want to be proud of my country and you want to see from my president . i wanted to see say, ok russian ukraine. what's a doubt in what solve this problem? we don't see that we don't see it at all. we see america saying, let's make this conflict even worse. let's see how we can mpeg up. let's see how we can make it more intense. let's create more threats. was create more tension. and this is why i'm really embarrassed about my government. that's because i'm really sad to say that, but it, it, that's, that's the reality we see that it's not the, it's not the old america where my father works for the federal government or life. and i was a different generation where they least tried somewhat to resolve conflicts. they tried somewhat, you know, i mean, you have even had the um, when the berlin wall went up, they the u. s. back down budapest,

56. 68 are in process. i mean, you know, there are things that you can accomplish and things you can't accomplish here. that is a very different mindset. now, let me go back to you in london. again. what is the strategic value of ukraine to nato? other than being a weapons that po, against russia. because this is what it's really all about me. it is very rarely is . it mentioned in the media. there's something called the mens. the courts. ok meant wanting to this was back in the and in late 2014, during do to put a ceasefire to the civil war in ukraine. and the ukrainian government has implemented it would solve the problem. and the western powers have never really put much pressure on give. they give them more arms than they give pressure to honor an agreement that on they backed and, and russia is not part of it. they say, you know, rush is not fulfilling it. it's not even a signatory of it. this,

there's a way out, but no one in the media. no one in power seems to be interested in resolving it. to echo what john just said, go ahead in london. i guess up here ukraine has a significant amount of value for the american, how germany, it influences trading influence in the region. i guess the united states is not concerned about the well being of ukrainian people that will be of the people from the eastern european robotic state. but it's just simply trying to show or encroach its influence for us a russian border. so it is unacceptable by regardless whether it will be brought to me put, you know, some other leader is unacceptable for any country which is, you know, self respecting and, and trying to maintain a balance of power. as they say, it is, america again is just simply trying to put trade. so a said yeah. as

a promoter of universal values, spreading democracy all over the world, regardless the price of this democracy which is paid by blog. other people, americans, obviously. oh, you mean it is a lot, i mean, i can, you know, will never return to do to ukraine. crimea will be bought over russia, and we will see next couple of years of cyber. right. main goal for what i was trying to achieve. something that's way russians or perhaps change a civil moves in russia, which is going contrary to their actions because there's a significant rise in americanism, in russia, and also in eastern europe as well. so i'm not sure where, where they are going with this strategy. they are losing

a pushing effective iraq into china. so exactly will dismiss jam and chief of maybe will say, i mean, it was a very my opinion, according to my understanding of english language is remark. rude. because he mentioned a completely different person. regardless of this facts, we have to respect him. so if the word or united states and united kingdom, either ego, the thing that they need to respect of the country, not like all love, respect of the country, lead us. what is the way i and one of the i've said this for many, many years, countries like the united states and russia, united states, and they don't have to be friends, they should never be enemies. and that's my position here, right? you know, one issue that this never explained to western audiences is that,

you know, sending all of these arms to ukraine. there was a shipment there over the, i mean, a shipment from the u. k. had to avoid flying over germany because the germans, their policy is not to send a weapons into a, a potential battlefield situation. that shows you what the level of unity there is in, in nato. but, you know, when sending these arms, it's not to protect from a russian invasion for me, it is being could potentially and most likely be use as an another attack on the don bass. which of course, is a trigger for russia as well to make it very clear, you attacked a dumbass. these are, most of many of them are russian citizens. now they have russian passports because they've been cut off from everything from ukraine proper. they're under blockade. no wonder they want to become russian citizens and they're ethnically, russian, the vast majority of them here. and so here's the, the u. s. and the u. k. and other nato countries egging on the ukraine government

to start another conflict when we're there is a mechanism minsk agreements that i've mentioned here to resolve that this is something very maniacal. go ahead, right? yeah, it's, it's hard to, as you know, there's a balance when you're trying to think this through. is it like a maniacal design or just maniacal maniacally stupid? i mean, you know, it's really a question in my mind when you think about the last 20 years of u. s. policy, the u. s. invaded afghanistan. and 2 months later, the taliban agreed to surrender in exchange for amnesty and the american said no, we don't negotiate with terrorists. and then 20 years later, the taliban, when the war in afghanistan, the invasion of iraq, you know, you can go through the entire history of the, you know, states and all of these endless wars. and they're marked by these catastrophically, dumb decisions, really stupid decisions. so there's a maniacal stupidity that exist, but because the group think in washington is so strong,

none of the politicians can say, no, wait, let's actually go a different path because they'll be brought down whatever the latest hysteria is. so yeah, i mean, in the case of ukraine, what does the u. s. actually gain from from it, you know, intensifying a civil war by people in the eastern part of the country. obviously were offended by the fact that a fascist lead anti russian could a tie happened on february 22nd, 2014. that this new right when government band russian, as an official 2nd language that people in odessa in the trade union building were burnt alive. i mean, like, this is scary to the people in the eastern ukraine, and so there they look to russia, obviously, as you said, peter, because the russians, they've historically, always been russian. and then the u. s. as well work by having done this. russia has no acted as an aggressor in ukraine. i mean,

it's such an alice in wonderland. things you have to wonder, are they making this up because they're trying to do everyone? are they making this up because they're trying to do everyone, and they're also so stupid that they actually believe their own propaganda. and, well, i, me, you know, i think you remember there in with the, one of the trumpet impeachment i, testimonies is that, you know, for 14000 people have died in the don bass during this conflict, but not one person, not one democrat. what were public in point? well, who killed those people? always the give government. they killed their own people in the down. but no one even asked that question here. john, i see you nodding your head there in the corner. you agree with your thoughts? go ahead. yeah, what you just, what you just said right now, which is actually scandalous, horrible, that our media, our government cannot even recognize the fact that it was the printing government that killed these people are just horrible. the level of arrogance and,

and deception and propaganda is truly horrible. but just one thing i wanted to say is that, i mean, of course, we all know the business angle of american foreign policy and american military policy will know that i'm not going to repeat that. i'm, you know, hundreds of millions of dollars are spent. we always need an enemy to justify those expenditures. ok, that's good when a stand, let's look back. awesome. look at the ideological issue here. and namely that when president trump, when trump was president, we had there was no serious problem between russia, united states. i mean, it was a incident, syria, but for the most part, relations are com. justin you had a binding comes in a little bit that way. go. so now everything is horrible with biting comes in. suddenly tensions are absolutely extraordinary. and in a very negative sense. so what's happening here? well, we have a sort of out liberal regime, biden's administration, and they want to promote their liberal values all across the world. and of course,

russia is what russia is, the defender of traditional values, which means it's the arch enemy of the liberal group that runs washington, that runs got states. now, therefore, de facto russia must be brought to its knees. russia missed pay the price for being this defender of traditional values, which of course me, sounds absurd because i believe let people live, let each country live it's life and protect its culture as they wish. but that's myself. unfortunately, people will washington d. c. thing differently. and this again, ideological components is very important to remember here. i think you, i think you're absolutely right. i've been saying it for years. i'm glad to hear someone to agree with me. i really want to be the last word here. where is this going? because it get the impression that you know, this low octane thinker blinking thinks that, you know, he, the russians are just going to cave a great while concessions because america, because on the right side of history, we're all that other kind of nonsense go ahead. last 20 seconds to you, my friend,

i think the disagreements will continue. i think the lead us in moscow will be us a proof. so for racial now, because otherwise we would already have a war, a major conflict between 2 policy and unfortunately until the leadership and policy makers in washington to see will start thinking in those messianic terms of spreading liberal international values and stock acknowledging the other people's rights for, i mean the rights to have their own saying that and they own security and national interests. this will not go anywhere is the issue. russia to has national security issues just like every other country. we enter on a pessimistic not i want to thank my guess in washington, new york in london. i want to think or be worse for watching us here. r t c an ex i'm remember across ah ah.

a financial survival guide. stacy, let's learn about fill out. let's say i'm actually can you please turn grief on face of the fight? wall street. thank you for helping with enjoy. that right. fell out. it will display a chance all down through here. all of us, larry over here. so your cancer, always a little nicer than this evidence of absolute poverty, despair. people in our city and other cities all across america are living like this. we're at the original eat and village that opened up in 2018 right now.

there's 31 homes on the property. it's a little over 4 acres with 31 homes and a community center. unfortunately, a lot of people don't make it out of edition more homelessness law and i'm just really happy with it. my dad you with oh, oh, when i looked showed the wrong one i just don't know. i mean you world, yes, to say proud disdain, because the african and engagement equals the trail. when so many find themselves worlds apart, we choose to look for common ground. join

me every thursday on the alex simon shows and i'll be speaking to guess in the world of politics, sport, business, i'm show business. i'll see you then. ah, i would prefer to be led by law. the law will he now was i, british prime minister barak johnson's political life is just hanging by a thread for the government inquiry into downing street locked down violations expected to be released later today. paula police probe is underway. post in the program here. one ot we speak to a british mother whose son died after he went to a and e with chest pains, but was told to wait for 4 hours to see a doctor. and countries across europe, ease that covey restrictions, despite ne, record infection rate, while health officials get mixed signals on the threat of alma kron.