cross talking the conflict in ukraine. i'm joined by my guess. scott ritter in del mar. he's a former intelligence officer and united nations weapons inspector in tampa. we have larry johnson. he is a managing partner for a burg associates and a former c. i. a analyst and us state department counterterrorism official. and in philadelphia we cross state erin, good. he is a political scientist historian and author of american exception empire and the deep state. i tell him in cross talk roles, and in fact that means you can jump anytime you want. and i always appreciate, scott, let me go to you person delmar. i know we've been talking about this for months and months now. almost devoted every single program since the start of the conflict on the conflict and ukraine. but i think sometimes it's important to kind of step back and look at the very big picture here. so the 1st question is, i said in my introduction, how do you think there's conflict and ukraine is likely to end? this conflict will in, with a complete russian victory of that's the only possible solution. russia can tolerate nothing less than this,

having engaged in this conflict to the level it has. russia cannot tolerate a situation that allows this ukrainian government as it is currently configured to continue to exist and possess a military that's been empowered by nato, for the sole purpose of killing russians to have any anything other than the total defeat of the ukrainian government, ukrainian military means the russians are going to be fighting a forever war of attrition. and that's a strategic defeat for russia doesn't accomplish its primary goal in this conflict, which is to create the conditions for a new european security framework. i don't think russia wants a new european security framework that has an empowered emboldened ukraine, acting as a de facto nato proxy right on its border. so the only way this conflict ends is, as russia has said, with all objectives of the special military operation met. that includes denies vacation. that's the elimination of this lynch government demilitarization,

the total eradication of ukrainian military larry, the same question to you. and if i can kind of can capitalize with that we just heard from scott, i mean, i've been saying all along is that russia cannot accept a compromise in which it will have to do this again in the next 5 years or the next 10 years. that's why there must be a definitive outcome. there's no win win here is anybody likes to say in the west, larry? i agree with scott that the bottom line is there's not going to be negotiated settlement. this is not going to end to diplomacy. i think russia has come to the correct understanding that there is no basis, no foundation for negotiating with the united states, nor nato. there are not to be trusted entities. the issue though, is that russia is not fighting just ukraine. russia is fighting nato and was

fighting the united states. and yet, natal in the united states have very, very limited military power. they can actually project. all they can do is, you know, sort of like a drug pusher continuing to supply fentenol to some addicted attic like ukraine, and just continue to pump it in, hoping that they'll be able to come back and buy more product. but the reality is, ukraine's military capability has been eroded each and every day. it's not, we're not seen the, you know, the sudden arrival of fixed wing aircraft a rotary way or improved missile strikes are a lot more artillery. we're actually facing the situation where even the ability of the west, the nato, to resupply ukraine is ending. so ultimately, how this ends, militarily, it will end up with the defeat, not just of ukraine, but the defeat of nato. yes, and that's what i think has a lot of people nervous, and that's why they're so nervous about it here. essentially, same question,

there may be praise in a little bit differently. the binding ministration has already made it very clear that he believes it's unlikely that ukraine could ever win on the battlefield, but they nonetheless continue to supply it with ample amounts of money and arms here. i mean that is very hard to twist your head around because that means a lot of ukrainians are dying and a lot of people are making money in the arms industry and the taxpayer is paying for it. i mean, there's some, definitely winners and losers and that arrangement, if they can't win, why do they continue the conflict, aaron? well, in 1956, i believe it was. you had the uprisings in hungary, which were backed by cia and other elements of the u. s. and this ultimately, why do a crackdown from moscow and the, the u. s. did not intervene. and as a result, these, this movement was crushed. and it was used as a propaganda victory for the u. s. perhaps they are thinking that russia and that

they can make some case for russian talent after this, after this war and for propaganda purposes, it's difficult to say russia has yet to turn key into dresden as the, you know, the british in the u. s. did a drug world war to basically leveled the city with conventional weapons. it was russia would seem to have that capability at any moment, which makes it very strange conflict where the, the power imbalances so vast on the thought in baffling favor on the side of the russians. and but they have yet, they've been slow in the way that they've gone about this. i think that was a surprise to the us who is, but who and it's been spun as russian weakness, but i don't think that's really been the case. so i don't see how it is without a russian victory and less nato in the u. s. inter overtly, and which would lead to a nuclear war. so i don't see how a russian victory can be avoided the question as to what will happen to the zalinski regime is still up in the air. and they could russia live with them still

existing as a land locked basket can stay the question i, i think russia couldn't let deal with that quite easily because it will be the use problem. ok. the you can take care of a bastard child called the new ukraine. i think that's what's good to be the result here. let me go back to scott here. you nothing about ukraine without ukraine. that's they love to say that. ok, but that wasn't the case. it's them, bull, i mean, and so, what kind of agency does the lensky have in this situation? because it looks like any kind of neglect. we can't use the word diplomacy because the policies to avoid wars, wherein a war right now, negotiations, but lensky said there will be no negotiations. i don't think he came up with that on, on his own. scott. no, i mean we, we know, april in early april, the ukrainian government was in a position to be at least have serious discussions with their russian counterparts

about a diplomatic off ramp from this conflict. russia was, you know, prepared to, you limit the scope and scale of its special military operation objectives. and in exchange for, you know, the, the termination of this, of this conflict, a ukraine was prepared to discuss it and they were told by the west. no, because the west, i think in bolden bye is your is the, your other guest indicated by the failure of russia to live up to the expectations of american military analyst has perceived the, the low key approach russia was taking as a sign of weakness. and so they said, oh, we can exploit this and we can actually further our objective of stripping you train away. so we don't want to negotiated settlement that limits our ability or we want to expand this conflict. and so they shot down diplomacy. it began the process of a massive infusion of military assistance transform into ukrainian army into

a defacto nato proxy of it. and this is set it up. so even now, when today we have a situation where the west is realizing, holy cow, we're going to lose that we need a different off ramp to minimize to mitigate the consequences of this last ukrainians have double down. they can't negotiate a way out. there's no way to ukrainian government live internally from a domestic perspective. if they negotiated a settlement that gave russia crimea, the bombast, care songs, upper asia, that just isn't going to happen. so there can be no negotiated settlement. the only thing that's going to happen here is unconditional surrender on the part of ukraine . then. oh, fully nato will find a way to, you know, solve its own wounds in a responsible fashion. a not overreacting. don't let you go and go into it and ukraine or romania, the winnable dover, things of that nature. yeah. but then larry mean, then what is the use of nato if it can't win against russia?

because it was designed against russia. ok. that's why it's so it's existential for this useless, outdated alliance. ok? they made it out to be or not to be, it's their fault and they're going to pay the consequences for larry. there they are. a beta operates much like a fantasy war game or a video game in their own minds. they can accomplish a lot of things, but the reality is they don't have the, the true strength, the actual number of soldiers that they can move quickly to the front. the 5 are, i was sort of surprised this last week with cbs news coming out and touting that the 100 and for board is general media ready? ready to invade them? well, wait a 2nd. they arrived in june. so they've been there. they've been there at least 5 months. so now why all of the excitement and, and that boils down to the, the simple fact that with the counting the presence of the 101st year board,

along with general david the tre us now to call in for some sort of multinational force, modeled after what went into a rock in 2003. these are signs of weakness and desperation because they realize nato kid, you know the 40. so 4700 members of the 101st airborne, all they are as a lethal speed bump for the russians. russians will roll over them and kill a lot of americans. and it's not like the united states and germany and the u. k. have the 23400000 troops standing by that they could easily deploy nato's fixed wing aircraft ability to penetrate. rush in air spaces, nell rushes, anti or missile defense system is superb. the west has nothing compromise. so when you put all of this together, what, what you're seeing is that nato is beginning to recognize that it's just the white elephant. and it, it has no more relevance to the 21st century. but the parallel as us,

on the eve of world war 2, the united states still had a horse cavalry, and a horse calvary was no longer, no longer relevant to war. all right, gentlemen, we're going to go to a short break, and after that she break, we'll continue our discussion on the conflict in ukraine staying with a little, you know, one? no, sir, no, no, admiral. who are job? no, no. what door? more shrill than what they should end up unit 73. 1 was a unique organization in the history of the world. what they were trying to do was to simply do nothing short and build the most powerful and most deadly

biological weapons program that the world had ever known. a production issue or short lived that they're not killed when you saw new rochelle keep on more more general martha, this is meant nguyen from all one of our new i'm i got the owner myself. i got your name. i got on monday. i wish to know about the only whole new food in august or more polished enough, jr. let's i had to put all of their mother on all our buddy bill could you could help us out. oh boy, that's good to go on. what the on this for? she my a new other. i'm all i can send more

a month or put them out. give us a ah. in 2022. the italian government approved a package of military aid to ukraine. coordination with nature to help ukrainians defend themselves and fight back about 150000000 euro as well. i make a weep, almost. even atomic bombs are hearing all the same nato and the you are the ones that people will die just for make money. the one that had been yes there while you mess you got for. if you're gone through my she thought complete. i mean there's water damage with me. you need to be done to get i want

for them in those will dollars more sir. me my shape as role tool or a for opa exec leila. lesser opinion polls show that over 70 percent of italians are against military support for ukraine. i landed in confront the day for us laughter. e flat, a level, yet we only got it more on a skid out and go home and do not she them the, the, the daily data going the will, i was just a lot a lot you, they've been running fine. theda the the welcome make the cross stock where all things are considered. i'm peter le beltran, and you were discussing the conflict and ukraine. mm. mm. okay,

let's go back to erin and philadelphia. want to stay with this. the refusal to negotiate. aaron, i don't just so much about this conflict coming from the west doesn't make any sense to me whatsoever. we and the entire, you know, this was an unprovoked attack. you know, all of this ridiculous narratives that have become doubt. meaning that there was no pre history to any of this here. i can't see how this not negotiating, not talking benefits. ukraine in any way is metric. they're the, they're the ones that they're going to be getting the short end of the stick. because nato will like it's wounds, it's biden's war as biden's fall. but you know, you be the ukrainian people end up getting the short end of the stick here. because if you don't negotiate, then, then the russians have no reason to stop what they're doing. i mean, i don't understand the logic here if you, if ukraine truly is important to the west, go ahead. aaron. well, they're not really important to the west. i think it was henry kissinger who said it's dangerous to be americans enemy, but deadly to be america's friends. so what,

why won't they negotiate? i would say, i'm assuming that nato is really the sovereign in ukraine, and zelinski knows that between nato and nazis or the neo nazis in ukraine, that are a minority, but a very violent and well armed and intelligence connected minority that he doesn't have a lot of room to negotiate unless the u. s. says and can get him some kind of protection . i think he had been told he could have negotiated peace with russia. he would have done that and been fine with that. that was the platform that he ran on. but yeah, it's a tragedy and the ukrainians are being slaughtered. and i don't see what the u. s. plan is long term. i tend to think more and more these days that the us actually plans to lower the russians into invading ukraine and expected them to roll over, roll over them over all over the country like the u. s. did in iraq. and that's

sort of the gist of an intercept article, although they spin it in a different way. so perhaps the u. s. plan was to get them into some kind of afghanistan occupation, but i don't think russia really wants to occupy those parts of the bitterly anti russian parts of ukraine to begin with. so the u. s. seems to be just a string with a long, maybe hoping for some kind of gambit or miracle that will reverse their fortunes. but it's hard to see what the strategy even is at this point. and the you can't seem to be be being led to the slaughter really? yeah, scott, you know, it's been mentioned before and in the many, many programs. i've done this since the conflict started, but it's very interesting how, particularly the americans, maybe the british, when they, when they analyze russians, military efforts in ukraine, they see it through the prism of shocking are they, they can't seem to comprehend what the russians are doing. the russians are bogged down, they have no ammo, they have no morale, but they see it through the vice and maybe like, you know, and the, the 2003 war against iraq go ahead. i mean, it is, this is

a huge problem in the west because we don't have an appropriate metric to do this. you know, and i have to admit, i was guilty of the same thing. when this conflict started. i was applying my experience from desert storm and saying i was mirror imaging, how we approach that conflict on to russia. what i knew were rushes, military capabilities, but i didn't factor in was the history of the russian and ukrainian people. i didn't factor in that. you know, this is the equivalent of new york going to war against new jersey. yeah. i know, you know, new jersey girls marry, new york boys, new york boys, mary, new jersey girls. they have family, they have friends that lives communities and some of their war with one another and what you expect in the role in there and kill them as if they don't matter of this war has a, a psychological of reality attached to it because of that the complex history and in between russia, ukraine that the west just doesn't get,

we just don't comprehend that we don't know how to adapt our own prejudices about how war should be waged to this reality that this is almost in effect a civil war. yeah. between people who have coexisted peacefully, you scratch a russian, you get a ukraine, you scratch ukraine, you get a russian, we in the west, don't get it. we don't understand why russia is going in whole hog, because that's what we would do against the iraqis. because we have no emotional connection with the iraqis. but i'm telling you right now, new yorkers with napa new jersey, the way we bond iraq, they would go in soft. they would say, we don't want to do this. let's work this thing out. the new jersey would feel the same way as ukraine in russia. i know the ukranian government is taking a very hard stand. i know that there's this a neo nazi element, but the right don't hate ukrainian to. well, it's good, scott is absolutely right here because this is really what this is with injected into the, my don, this maryland anti russians element. ok. and very much supported by the west,

by the way, that was their, their leverage to create this. they wanted to create an ethnic, they do it all over the world. by the way, it's about the 1st time larry, i want to talk about for the rest of the program. i think we're all in agreement here, and i know my viewers are, is that scott said it right from the top, you know, victory for russia. what does that mean for the international system? because i don't think the us is the, and it's always going to take it to well, go ahead. larry. the system created in the immediate aftermath of world war 2 is that it just doesn't, you know, like a chicken running around with a check off. doesn't realize that it's dead, washington, london, or land, or much the same condition that started with the, with the position of the sanctions on russia and disrupting the international financial order. once you remove russia from swift and swift is simply just a mechanism for communication between international banks,

the incentive to set up an alternative financial system increased dramatically. and then when you couple that with the time pressure and bullying, washington is trying to bring to bear on china, india, other large countries which actually do have some significant economic resources. even brazil. then the, the mechanism of staying within the old international order, or the desire to stay with that old old international order evaporates. and you've now had both russia, china, india, brazil, south africa, working towards constructing an alternative financial order. that's number one. and now we're even seen signs zones from, from the russians of, you know, maybe we just need to walk out of the us. the u. n has become a useless organization from the standpoint of both russia and china. and once that happens, we have now completely destroyed the foundation that was the basis of peace in the

aftermath of world war 2. so we're, we're on the, we're on raleigh, i think the threshold of a genuine multi polar world as opposed to this unit polar world. that we've experienced over the last 20 years with the united states writing. you know, we're in charge. yeah. but i agree with that, aaron. i mean russia, china, india, brazil can live with the multi polar world. ok. they've actually pushed for it. ok . can the west can tolerate that because that that's for me, the biggest, if we look at in the biggest picture, it's about maintaining western hegemony and that is of slowly seeping away. and, you know, a hedge m on doesn't like to see that happen if they can stop it. go ahead, aaron, it may well be that the ukraine war is something like the suez crisis for the u. s . empire. when the u. s. set out during world war 2 to establish a global empire after the war. it was all planned by wall street council on foreign

relations. there was opposition to that in the us establishment in the form of the vice president henry wallace who instead called for a century of the common man and this idea of a world world order governed by. ready international law, generally speaking, and that would allow technology to be dispersed to the global south forward colonized countries at the time this, they were still colonized. this was abandoned in favor of the american century. ok . so the century of a common man or is very similar to the idea of a multi polar world with national law, like what china has been proposing in recent years. and this may be what happens. it seems like europe is going to be devastated by the fall out of this, this conflict in ukraine. and it seems also like, you know, the global south has every incentive to want to cut its ties with the exploitative, neo colonial system that the u. s. has presided over since the end, the world war 2. so henry wallace failed to establish this kind of world through

carno. and the non align movement were picked off one by one over decades, or they just died or other things happened. but that, that failed those that attempt in the seventy's for a new international economic order garbage i was calling for something like this at the time of the around the time that the soviet union was dissolved. but it looks like there may be a shift to an actual multi polar world in the wake of this because the u. s. power is evaporating. and that's what makes it so dangerous that where the real risk is the the u. s. empire. that's why the u. s is risking nuclear doomsday over ukraine, which is absolutely absurd on its face. again, scott, i can't let the progress of the 30 progressive democrats letter go, go unnoticed here. what do you think about that? i mean they were, they supposed to be the, the moral, a bastion of a true foreign policy, a middle class foreign policy. what a flip flop, what an embarrassment, what a shame, scott. and what an exposure of the reality ocean,

the dissolution of the, the american singularity, the american hedge amman, look the, these are people who no one ultimate truth. while their campaigns may be financed by special interests. therefore, they must have policies in place that a fee, the hand held that that makes the hand that feeds them happy. they get elected by the american people and the american people aren't happy with this current policy by large american people are drifting away from the notion of supporting ukraine with billions of dollars while we need help. the democrat that this letter was written because they saw the writing on the wall. they're going to get wiped out in the midterms. i. one of the reasons is because of the economy, and it's very difficult to explain to american people who want it further investment here at home. why we're giving billions in a wasted effort in ukraine. so they wrote a letter, they got ahead of the, of the head of their skis in terms of the white house. so they were slammed back.

yea, you know, what's going to happen. get wiped out in the mid terms. and other republicans are come in and the republicans known or to stay in power. it's not big that they have to be pro proven. it just add to an act policies to keep the american public happy so that they can get voted in the next time. and this is what the end of the american empire looks like. it's not going to be so much dealer military giant running around the world. going crazy. it's going to be this slough slow death of the american people just saying we're done. we're finished isolation as of that's what we're going to see. i don't think you're going to be seen nuclear war. be seen in, well, i think fingers crossed because these people have do very crazy things. again, particularly recently, let's hope your prognosis plays out or i tillman, that's all the time we have many, thanks them i guess in philadelphia, tampa and, and down there. and thanks to our viewers for watching us here at r t c. and next time, remember across ah,

ah no one no sir, no, no, admiral, who are you? no, no. what door, more shrill than what they should of unit 73. 1 was a unique organization in the history of the world. what they were trying to do was to simply do nothing short, then build the most powerful and most deadly biological weapons program that the world had ever known. drill a production issue or sure, doug go did that. they're not killed when you

saw new quarter. she'll keep on more more general martha, this is meant nguyen from all one of our new i'm i got the sale. i got your name. i got on monday. i wished enough about doing whole new food in or got more or less than a jr. let's i had to put a couch. nice. oh boy, that's good to go on. what the on this well, she my a new on all i can send more a month or put them out. thank you. bye with

oh, well, never be a victory for russia. with locate me. ukraine war is a proxy war. this is a war between russia and the united states. as oman made it comes to not shooting the, an in cowboy outside. america for sure. warren, you're not in your gauge of conflict of russian forties. american forces are here to defend nato allies. what happens that nato escalates even more indiscretion. military operations become a war with national and that doesn't is much i see it that i see you with with so i use 3. you should unique and you stuff

with in your sewage near i speak of the girl who's with the new u. s. defense strategy. suggests the preemptive nuclear weapons against nuclear threat contradicting president biden pleasure. can the potential use of need a fuse to jeff and i found the livelihood. that's the message from ghana and ivory coast. to avoid crossing a global co production form in protest at mightily. payments to follow up with germany and strong smell like the need for the fact that what they call unfair economic competition from american space could possibly result in that transit long take trade war.