united states and american congressmen who excluded uranium from the package of sanctions against the russian federation. judging by the previous section, so the u. s. they are still happy that the russian federation produces uranium separates isotopes and splice rated may few 2 united states. at the same time, i don't see him taking any reasonable or realistic steps to create their own separation industry. neither are europeans, although it seems to be a commercially profitable market. they haven't managed to do anything. i think the u. s. will remain dependent on the russian enrichment industry for at least the next 5 or maybe even 10 years. and that's all for now. be sure to check out our t v dot com for all of the latest breaking news and updates. was he right back here at the top of the hour? ah, ah,

ah ah, ah. hello in welcome to cross stock where all things are considered. i'm peter lavelle . it is said talk is cheap, but loose talk about dirty bombs is nothing less than dangerous with both russia and ukraine preparing for new offensive. the west is not shy, talking about nuclear weapons. is the west thinking the unthinkable? ah

cross sucking the unthinkable. i'm joined by my guess peer, emanuel tom and in brussels. he is a lecture at lee oh university and in pens mania. we have ted see he is a conflict consultant and retired us foreign service officer. hi, gentleman crosswalk, rules and effect. that means you can jump anytime you want, and i always appreciate, i mean, it's head 1st intense many. are you looking at the 3 of us right now? we're pretty much the same generation um and we grew up being children of the cold war. not to think about the unthinkable. having loose talk about nuclear weapons. but here we are, ted. it's almost in a casual way. it's being referenced in the media and by some western politicians. having said that, the russian side is never once even mentioned, it is reacted to western commentary. but it does not proactively say we're going to use these weapons. there is not one case of where you would know that following western media. ted, that's absolutely right. there's been

a lot of very lose talk. you've got some former high ranking us military officials saying that the u. s. should join a multilateral military for the ukraine, which is to say to take this thing from across the water was shooting more, we're prussia. and then fortunately, on the other hand, you both got people like retired admiral mike mullen, former chairman of the joint chiefs of staff under president george w bush and president obama saying this talk is great job. i was talking about arm again. we have to back right off that we have to get to the negotiating table soon by one means or another. so it's not total insanity in the west, but my god, there's a lot of talk taking place here manual and brussels again. you know, i want to go back to kind of when we were young men, there was the worry about having a limited nuclear war in europe. and now here we are all about 40 years, 50 years later with or we're hearing people talk about the unthinkable here. which

i find is, is quite astounding because when i look at europe and i look at the united states, what is the national security interest of ukraine for the, for the united states in europe, please explain that to me because i can understand it. go ahead and brussels. oh yes, soc jordy, your there was or who is if she are doing the cornwall, utter a nuclear war could o q e in the charter of europe. and because her aware of nuclear weapons seen us nuclear weapons in rush in soviet union at the time and the european. so we're feeding back to the could be view your of the arctic, the t r 2 of his nuclear war. and this is why your united kingdom on france decided to have your own nuclear bomb or to, to have your own new dissertation policy deterrence policy research in english are

now, oh we, we are, we are back to these talks about to media nuclear strikes. but i think today, or this is more a communication wall. i think you're a very same a huge communication campaign to try to depict russia as her, as e r grace or on potentially using the nuclear bumper. the limited nuclear bumps, but i don't think it is gonna happen because it's part of it, or of, of the sure of communication war and the russia. i never mentioned joel distress, but they were nuts, a user nuclear bob instead of a extreme case. so for, for threats to, to vital interest of russia and we are not, there are 2, you can't one of the, you know, eat this all started, lisa,

the recent iteration of this as a potential dirty bomb or false flag, which we've all been expecting ever since the start of this conflict because as i said in my introduction, the ukrainians and the russians are prepare ring for new offensives, probably sometime in the middle of next month. and then ukraine is going to be overwhelmed numerically. and so it, i'm not surprised or looking for a false flag of course, detonate something and blame the other side. that's the shorthand of it here. okay . which of course will create a coalition of the willing. i'm sure you've heard that phrase before to, to escalate this conflict here. and the only way the west can really escalate is to go new killer. because for, for the everson in ever since the end of the cold war, the united states have been fighting herds been in the middle east. ok. they don't have that conventional capacity. and that's why you go from selling used or giving use jump to the ukrainians. all the way to the ultimate weapon,

and that's the west has done that, not russia. go ahead. well, we've got the added complication, peter. the nato is in the process of practicing nuclear bombardment in euro. yep. under the rubric of steadfast noon, which it does every year. and this actually, when i was at nato, i worked with us mission to data from 2008 to 2011. when i retired from the foreign servers. and this drove home to me, the absurdity of the whole prospect of nato being, you know, a meaningful participate in any european conflict that involved the russian federation. because back in the day when they designed these plans, nato was in west germany. the worship courses were in east germany, and you could lie a few 100 kilometers at the most, who could nuke someone. so it makes sense to use small, single engine,

jet aircraft, carrier, nuclear weapons. i mean, it didn't make a huge amount of sense, but at least you could sort of envision it these days to even get to territory where you could drop a nuclear weapon. if you're talking about starting in germany, which is where us shared nuclear gravity, bombs are cap, kept in the netherlands, belgian, germany, italy, and turkey. god help us talking about getting a new u. s. b 61 gravity bomb nuclear bomb from germany to russian territory. you're going to have to fly thousands of kilometers. you're going to have to refuel in mid air, not once, not twice, but several times. and you're going to have to have a whole armada of conventional aircraft flying with you so that you can try and penetrate brush and airspace. this is insane. this is a declaration of war. it's an act of warning before you drop anything. so, you know, people talk about signaling using weapons,

you can signal using these things by the time you take off, you committed an act of war. so you know, they're still exercising with this stuff. that's what steadfast noon is. that's getting good at this ridiculous mission of taking f sixteens. for god's sake, i mean nuclear bombs onto them and pretending that they're going to fly to russian don't. is there any, any reason to doubt that this is not a credible nuclear deter it? as far as prison is concerned, it's absurd on its face here because it may go back to pear menu. well, i mean, this whole talk, this loose talk is a form of escalation in itself because the nato doesn't know really what to do. it's got it. it's painted itself into this corner and it's lashing out and that's the ultimate fear is going nucular, obviously appearing menu. well, one of the things i've noticed that it goes all the way back to 2014. you hear this all the time in western media to give the russians an off ramp to give potent an

off ramp. ok, which is a coated language for me. is it? how did, how does the westgate out of the predicament that it's put itself in? it constantly is having and so the west is looking because if you look at austin, you look at a stealth and berg. you look at a barrel. if nato, if russia wins, it's the end of the west, but they to russian not phrasing it that way. it's the west phrasing it, though they're phrasing it as an existential thing, not the russian. so it's almost, you know, this is a, they're predicting their own future and a very bizarre way. go ahead in brussels this, i think your vis country to, as they look to do, we for the future are international, older, and are actually the west erwin. survive. who will not disappear but in the future are murky. put our old or the west to will not be able to dictate everything,

any mo, that's her. that's a problem from the western part of you. actually, or b sir, is conflicting ukraine is accent, arranging the process to walter murphy put our war. yep. and if we look at the different do a piece, oats, or inert, 2011 or nato was still able to, to do a rashid change in libya. but then in syria, it failed to which were the rigid change because russia intervened in syria in 2015 . then he read the retreat of her washing done under a nato from a. i've got his stun in 2021. and then it ver, russia special operation in ukraine, after or no negotiations where a closed down or from the,

from the, from the ne to member states. because he didn't want to negotiate in europe and security arrangement. and this means that whatever of a result of his conflict in ukraine are probably you quinn will be a territoriality fragmented, but i'm convinced, but nato will not be able to enlarge any more a to ukraine. he's a future, a interactive, a really well. i agree with you because this is the list as a little guy about one more minute had. this is the limits and mrs. do or die for nato in nato is going to lose this and it's lose it badly. and the very idea of having nato is going to be put into question because no one's going to want to join an organization that loses ted. well peter, this organization hasn't had any reason. the dissolution of the soviet union full stop. it doesn't have a reason to exist, it can't find a reason to can't agree on one. and nato requires consensus and all of its members

state to do anything. and it's never been able to agree, for example, it rushes the enemy until the start of this current onward. and now a lot of loose talk is being flung around about how russia the enemy nato could never agree on that before. germany would never agree to that language. they couldn't agree that iran was an enemy because turkey wouldn't agree to that language. and now all of a sudden you've got, again, the nuclear exercises. you've got the mysterious demolition of natural gas pipelines to western europe. got the provision of advanced guided missiles, advanced anti radar missiles, advanced ship missiles to ukraine, some forms that have never been provided to any other l i have. i have to jump in here guys. we have to go to a hard break. and after that hard break will continue our discussion on the unthinkable. stay with our team. the

the oh, nice to conquer russian state. little never the i've tied as on the northland scheme of events. mm hm. and i'm not getting all sunset for a group in the 55 with the speed anyone else with rural van in the europe when you, when the kremlin, can you get machine restate on russia for date and split our t spoke neck. even our video agency, roughly all bands on youtube with

mm with the suffered because we're getting them business and you clean them, but he had the ability daily that was chosen. yeah. americans, grey you, when you wrote it, you know, didn't go through. it is just such an article and also to provide you with stuff such and sure, ruckel him. his name's author of the defense student in full, which help wishing that you use her own the with them the pro and you're still still having issues with her as you talk to, to yours. we are both in love. the study skills does not wish to continue or to flourish musical material enough on the whole things to which your, which no longer your bushes in useful, not critical push to sustainable mon,

because look least new or your course load, useful cold. i don't know who's got to know for the don't know if i should just a booty with just opinion is come on the welcome back to cross stock where all things are considered. i'm peter lavelle to mind you were discussing the unthinkable me ah okay. but 1st off, we have another guest joining the discussion here. we have richard black and ashburn. he is a former virginia state senator. welcome to the program, richard. i know you listen to the little bit of the 1st part of the program. so i'm going to start off with a different topic. we've already seen how well, lloyd austin, the defense secretary, he made it very clear the, the objective, the united states is too weak in russia. well, maybe it will, maybe it won't. ok,

but at the so far it really hasn't did, only it has done is week in europe severely and we'll see how the impact is on the united states. so why are they doubling down on something that doesn't work ok? weakening russia hasn't come about richard? well, this is, this is not a short term project. if you go back to, to 2014, when under the obama administration, the decision was made to overthrow the government of kiev and install essentially a more or less on top of government. and, and then flood weapons in with the, with a view toward, toward building up a very large ukranian force. there is so much money invested. there is so much momentum that it, i think many people make a mistake. why?

thinking of this war as something that began on february the 24th. and when, when russia came across the border, russia had managed to stay out of this war from the time that it started back in 2014. at that point you had this, this revolutionary hunter, which took over in kiev and, and one of the 1st things they did was to remove russian as an official language from the constitution. 30 percent of all ukrainian or native speaking russians. many of them on the border and and so in the don boston in crimea, paper just said ok, we're, we're out of here. we're going to do this. and so the war began, and this was, this was a very hot war. this was not just some little border answer. we had 14000

people killed before russia ever entered the war. right, well i mean, richard, if i could point out here though it's the almost $15000.00 the are referring to are in the don bass and those were killed by ukrainian force and supplied and money by nato would be very clear about that. those 15000 people are not remembered and richard is absolutely right. this is going on the 8th year of this complex. let me go to the peer menu. well, we keep hearing whatever it takes for ukraine. i mean, as a european, does europe have the stomach for this? do they or leads, or do they represent the popular will? i mean, is it something that people in europe are really gung ho for? because i mean, i can read the papers, i can see oil prices, i see energy prices here, and it looks very doom and gloom. is it all worth it? ok, because we're, we're facing a rupture here. i don't know why the russians would rebuild nor stream. i don't know why so someone can blow it up again. i mean, this is a,

a turning point in european history. go ahead and brussels. yes, we see quite amazing situation. where are you c or v, sir? a european union member, see government, son on nato members. state governments are lining themselves on nerve inara chief on decisions. so to samsung, russia, we've, we've washington, or vo, i can see a mini, deeper or a disagree. but to i, i knew were experts i know so military or peeper, or citizens who totally disagree or we visser approach delivering you a weapon suit to ukraine, having sanctions against russia, which dummy cheese, european economy. they are demonstrations in different capitals. but the main news tree media does not speak about that just or relay, or ver, nora,

chief of her nature, all member states governments and are the must. atlantis ceased one and her except for hungary, which shows a different position or view your opinion of for many citizens is not taken into account on vis, vis you will create. i think you're a crises of political crises, it's a future because are the governments i have a feeling does not represent the mainstream opinion of people in europe who were not stupid. they defeated, they, they, they, your understand that this policies are damaging the european economy for o geopolitical interest, and certainly not european geopolitical age and do have of crises. we'd come in a few months in a few euros, but everything would come. it will come about,

you know, all 3 of my guests here. you know, we have the, the g 7 and we have the european, me and putting a price cap on russian energy. i think they get, have to worry about a price kept on american energy going to europe. that's going to be very serious because the americans are making money, hand over fist. ok, what they want to deny the russians they want to take for themselves at the expense of europe. ted, explain to me, you know, that we have, we talked about in the 1st part of the program, this loose talk about nukes, you know, to make it normalized, they get it all that. but they don't want to negotiate. i mean, if we were on the point of armageddon, wouldn't that be the reason to start talking? but we don't see that we see loose talk and we see this very rigid position. explain the logic or maybe it's not logical at all. go ahead. i have no explanation to your i honestly don't. $954.00, the dawn of the thermo nuclear age. then prime minister winston churchill said, meeting john to jaw is better than war 4 years later,

his successor carol said george is better than. ready more war now, he was in australia at the time and maybe he thought he had to speak to the natives . i don't know the same general idea. ok. diplomacy talk more importantly. listen. if someone says they've got read lines ok, maybe you respect them. maybe you don't, but for heaven's sake, hear them out. and that's what's been signally missing. but then, the whole process of nato enlargement has been a series of selective deafness moments, nato, and us behalf. when russia says, hey guys, we're not your enemy. stop moving towards us. you know, they were 3 baltic republics in, you know, boom, boom, boom, all of a sudden, 2008 comes along ukraine and you're both promised. eventually,

membership and nato promised, which mean nader did something that they couldn't deliver on. so it's pissing off russian russia for no good reason. it's trying to like cheer up ukraine in georgia at that point, i suppose, but to no good in because it couldn't do nothing to make that come true without getting rush on board would you couldn't do because they've been ignoring russian red lines. so to go back to the beginning to talk, you also have to be really willing to listen, and that's something that nato and the west not done here. well, i mean, richard, i mean you didn't say the men sca cords directly, but you were making reference to it in your 1st answer here and that's a good jumping off point here. i mean, i'm all i am for negotiations. i want to see this conflict come to end as soon also i want to see the death and destruction come as soon as possible for everybody involved here. but there were that there was the minced process, the, the bridge, and the germans, and the french signed off on it. the, the courts themselves were on went through the united nations security council.

this, it was a legal, international document, but they weren't fulfilled the end. and we know that now that with the former president polish ankles had our we never took it seriously. we're buying time. stilton burg was bragging. how we use that time to help you. great. i mean they're all liars, they're not people to be trusted. and so, you know, when you the even the thought of coming to the negotiating table, will these people lied to us for 8 years? why are they going to tell us the truth now that the west has done this to themselves? they did not keep their agreements. go ahead, richard. well, that's true. and, you know, i think people have forgotten. but about 2 months after russia crossed over the border, russia and ukraine were engaged and productive peace talks. and they had hammered out the basics of a peace agreement when, when bore she also unexpectedly, lordship lawrence johnson forced johnson for she and

ordered them essentially, to cut off the peace talks and get back to war. we had no intention. we have such an enormous investment in war that we were not about to to let this i and now hopefully we're getting closer to an end point. but i'm not sure. i worry somewhat about an october surprise we, i agree with you, but you know what? i mean, and we go back to up here in menu because we're rapidly running out of time. i don't think it's a coincidence. i'm obviously authentic here. but you know, it's last year the afghan. griff came to an end and now we have the ukraine graft. i mean, there are so many interested parties not to see this complet come to an end, and it gets down to this greed material interest. and this in suffer a bull russo phobia wanting to punish russia, which is only damaging thus far,

mostly the west, and putting the global south in danger. go ahead and brussels. yes, actually are we know jeeps, but your country sure was. are i sent a re h and there by of the west just reporting ukraine at the time. oh, winner russia decided to or organize referendum enough of ukraine and to because then you were each was b is sort of irreverence cbre situation off to us and dirt referendum where organize any weight or the people decided to ruin. a fighter, russia, i know we are a situation where they could not to, we ukrainian, the army offense, you prevent the situation. this is why they try to escalate or weaver propaganda are a narrative of for, of a new cra, whoa, an

o. so got to you, russia is supposed to lose the wall, but not to what we are seeing on the field on butter fee to do because of a situation is quite to frozen. and know is a rare bessie bur. these territories are dumb bus, but also will cast an upper g. i very only fade we've russia and rock shot an army. we do everything to rates for the rest of her, of a country. all right, i'm going to jump anyway, right now. we've run out of time, gentlemen, it's fascinating discussion, but the pain dial is going up in the pain is only hitting certain people. and that's the west in the global south. not russia. many, thanks them, i guess in ashburn, brussels an intense mania. and thanks to our viewers for watching us here, darky. see you next time. remember crossed up with

moon when i was so wrong. when i a comes to an engagement, it was the trail. when so many find themselves will depart. we choose to look for the common ground with watching it was a shorter one, and i'm not going to stay like a

ah, ukraine wants to draw nato into a direct role with russia using a dirty bomb full life as a pretext. well, that's the claim by russia's deputy and void, the un us how speak a slums, a run for allegedly supporting russia with drones. while american nato continued to send billions of dollars in weapons to ukraine. 13 people are injured and done yet with public after ukrainian forces launch a multiple strikes on the topic. so i'm surrounding areas.