[000:00:00;00] a with hello in welcome to cross top, where all things are considered. i'm funeral about nato's ukraine. proxy war against russia almost spiraled out of control. after was erroneous, lee reported russia fired a missile, interpol, zalinski regime in its many western backers, couldn't believe their good fortune. finally, it was justification to start

a hot war against russia. alas, cooler heads prevailed, at least for now, ah, discussed these issues and more and joined by my guest glendale in oslo. he's a professor at the university, southeastern norway, as well as author of the book, great power politics in the 4th industrial revolution. and in budapest we have, george sent me, well, he's a podcast. we're at the goggle, which can be found on youtube and locals are a gentleman crossed out rules, and the fact that means you can jump anytime you want. and i always appreciated by the start out with ga, ga. what? oh, what a difference a week can make. oh my, we have this, i'm calling this program the, the missile of november. you obviously understand the reference here, but it's nothing to take lightly, particularly since on this program we have been predicting such a possible predicament would face the world. what do you make of all be here we had

claims counter claims or and went to article here which would be the step before article 5. and then we had the biting ministration. essentially just nip it in the bud in the very beginning. how do you make, how do you, how do you account for all of these things that are playing out at the same time? go ahead george. what i think it's been clear for quite some time the ukraine strategy has been to try to get out the rest of the world involved in a wall with russia. and ukraine has previously stated that nato should bomb russia later. should launch a preemptive nuclear attack on russia. and then lo and behold, we have this incident, which it was 1st reported that russia had attacked poland, and they go by goes into immediate effect on one girl

and everybody with russia. and so, when the true facts began to emerge fairly quickly, namely, a missile launch was ukraine. clearly, there was a day within western capitals where it was going to some of the most serious thought of it from ukraine's point of view is that it was seen almost immediately that ukraine was lying. and your brain had been lying for hours and hours and hours on that. this was clearly a russian. and now it's over say that those actually rather more to it than that. because if, what, if one thinks about how a launch, it doesn't really make a great deal of sense. but if, for instance, in russian launches on attack from the east to the west or from the south to the

north, y a launching i ukraine, which would be heading from west to east, would end up being another. the other direction is going from east to west, then will end up in poland. so the real question as to whether in fact the whole thing had been staged a set up a full flag attack for instigated by ukraine, possibly possibly also with collusion, bipolar we don't know whether that has happened, but i think that within the capitals of nato and particularly the night states which would have to do all the heavy lifting any on confrontation there was this very thought, hey, ukraine has just stage a false flag attack, trying to drag us into a nuclear war with russia. so it's a very serious situation. yeah, i mean, glen, i don't know. i'm trying to look at it from a very practical point of view, not an ideological one. i think george is right. i think there could have been. we

have no evidence here. you don't have any him, but i think it makes logical sense that could have been collusion between the governments of poland and ukraine to tom enlarge the war. have a hop war because we're in a proxy war right now against russia. but how is, how would you craning poland actually benefit from a hot war with russia? i don't understand that. i don't understand these countries that want to join nato . why are they putting a target on their backs? poland wants to be the hub of this proxy war against russia, which we can say, as we've seen as its dangers involved here. i mean, i understand the visceral hatred of russian wanting to destroy it. but it isn't so pathological that they're willing to destroy themselves in the process. your thoughts? well, i'm not sure about poland. a speculation here space. so, so i will for ukraine obviously that they are in the hot or with ross or so. so

will again. so let's get dinner open that you would like to get more involvement from the west. or, you know, they get with the conspiracy theory to point out that he wants nato to intervene in his war and ukraine side. so, so these are kind of clear to what extent poland of, within europe, poland obviously, is country that is more, most prepared to join in on this war against russia. about whether or not this means that they, they were in on this, if you will, i would know i would be more skeptical because i think this would very easily become a nuclear war. so i hope there's no colon who would be chairing for this, but i'm but, but even within your crane it's, it's not completely sure to what extent this is what's known by zalinski. obviously everyone has not recognized. you will see

a crane and missile the main disagreement seems to be now. was it to missile that went straight, trying to shoot a russian missile? or was this a deliberate attack? i mean, i think it was to maryland and poland. even question like what is going on there? you can have an accidental shot if you fire missile 100 kilometers in the wrong direction. so, so, you know, this indicates, you know, the question whether or not, you know, this is this putting all their ships in this fight is a good idea from hello, you know, going green does have a very tattered history of firing missiles in the wrong places. and hitting the wrong things is unfortunately, that's a good day for us. i mean, it could have been accidental or if it was delivered, trying to settle something. it could have been something all level of actual, just the people firing austin missiles, i'm not sure how far it would go away again. this is something conceivable about. so lensky would,

would be kind of desperate. now would it take to do this deliberately target nathan, hold or so again, it's a lot of speculation now given that there's a final poland, it's interesting because as i mentioned, poland has been possibly the most in the country who would like was considering joining in on this war, so it's all very unclear at this moment on it because it on because it's unclear. it's very, very dangerous here. george, you know, we heard dessert from glen the, you know, a desperate. ok. i, i'm willing to believe that, but you could ukraine and it's leadership. they're not victims. here they are volunteers, they are volunteers in this conflict. ok, so you can't be desperate involving a volunteer at the same time. they don't make any sense to me, and ukraine would not be fighting today if you didn't have the backing of the

united states. so this is what makes it into a very complicated thing because, i mean by this continued support here, of course, the specter of new killer. a strike is on is on the table because of the continued support of by nato nations, particularly united states, another $37000000000.00 coming down the pipe way to what to kill russians. that's why it makes it so dangerous, george. yes, yes. extremely dangerous. as you say, a hand because ukraine has no hope of defeating russia. i mean, you great, only possible way out of this is to provoke a war between nature when russia metrics on the home, because it's so everyone loses. george is a kind of total destruction that ukraine is waging and what's wrong. the united states knows this. so united states knows

that ukraine cannot win this war. and the only way you brain and prevail is by involving the united states in the shooting will. with russia, the united states has been playing this game. you know, thinking well, this is good for us as long as we're weakening and we're damaging. russia is almost hurting russia, destroying is calling me killing them, a weakening them then it's good for us without thinking through as to the danger that the united states is quoting. so for the americans now to be upset with the ukrainians to the extent that they are upset, historically disingenuous. yeah, this is exactly what was going to have that ukraine strategy. there's no other strategy other than provoking a shooting law. and again, you know, where, where is this going to go? well, that seems to be the only way that it can result because neither the united states nor you crate,

nor anyone in nature seems to have any idea of how to bring any of this to an end. a need to say what will be decided on the battlefield? well, how one of the i was i going to be decided on the battlefield. i mean, either it would defeat total defeat for ukraine or the complete destruction of a population or nato will be involved in the shooting war. which again, is quite a distinct possibility. you know, glen logic would dictate ok, maybe politics and logic don't always get along very well. zelinski was very obviously he was lying about his interpretation of what happened here. and that, that sense, a chilling effect all through europe because that would be the extended battle field. and of course, you know, the united it's, you know, looking at it's protege in, in, in kemp as just the george has pointed out is that took delete every one down the path of destruction. it seems to me that we had

a cia director burns me with his russian counterpart. i have to wonder if they just said, look, the russian, you guys either do what you're going to do and we're going to do what we're going to do. but neither one of us are going to entertain ever under any circumstances. nuclear weapons is that, is that a sound theory? yes i, i think so because again, this is what a proxy horse are usually about to fight with other people's armies. and again, i fear i would ask your listeners if they should bury the record directly from united states, which is a round report from 2019. that is a very well known thing. thank mainly from her mainly because it has so close ties . who is said intelligence community in united states, it said that they have a hand in every war, you know, since her world war 2. but it was my, my point was about like stretching 2019, how to weaken russia. and ukraine was a key component to said, you know, keep threatening nato expansion, giving you more weapons to ukraine, to hit on bus because they're more intensified,

the more russia will be dragged them. and this would bleed the russians in terms of also money and people and people are getting killed, but also it sucks. a lot of resources, a moment to resources at russia, but has an additional benefit that is that the ukraine is becoming molded us an anti european or anti russian countries. keep in mind when they were offered root native future. nato membership in 2008 does only about 20 to 25 percent. what you want it to be part of it, the majority had a negative view of nato and, or opposed to view of russia so. so having an anti russian ukraine seemed like impossible, but now after russia's invasion, i think you know that it can be an anti russian sentiment in ukraine for decades to come, is not century. so i'm glad i hope i have that you have been here. i have to go to hard breaking out of that hard break. we'll continue our discussion on to really stay with our tea. ah

ah oh ah oh boy, is this the best of both? no issue. but for the mobile one, annual g d. p per capita is about $4000.00 euros. so lost does that? we've got a normal dollar, a wants to leave a planet kosky, seal with us really in to put them in your printers, where you'll find them all belong to come out safe, miniature littlest out there. to sort of thought of unemployment is off the chance . moldova territorial integrity and sovereignty. we respect a country which enjoys financial support from the u. s. and the youth is constantly roth, by political and corruption scandals, but older didn't scope moldova, obtaining

a new candidate status in 2022. ah ah, ah ah, well connect across that you're all things are considered. i'm futile. a bell. this is the home addition to remind you. we're discussing some real names. ah. okay, we're back in the break, glen, you. right before we went to the break, you want to finish up the point. please go right ahead. yes. so my, my, my point was that the mission was to have a, a slow burning. i'm going to stand in europe, if you will,

to slowly the russians. but the same round report warned that the, if the attempt us to much russia begins to take territories and is this kind of development that's not in america interests. also august, the direct war between the united states and russia is also not in the us interest . so, and this is where we're heading now because this is the tail wagging the dog thing, where are america might be dragged into a war which ends up in nuclear confrontation? this is nothing to us interests. so i think that this, this could be a real mistake on the part of the ukrainians because now the americans are very concerned that they might get pulled into a world like this. so, you know, in church i'm on our podcast, the goggle, you've sent in on a number of times and you've been very critical in some respects of the special military operation. is that it's a conflict on the cheap. what seems like the major powers are using ukraine as a proxy on the cheap and you can't do it forever. okay?

because number one, ukraine is being rounded into into dust. ok. it's, it's a, it's a electricity grid is as failing it, but it will be completely failed within a matter of weeks with winter here. and that's, you know, the u. s. is the prospect of bits and proxy losing. on the other hand, you have the american proxy in care that is threatening new killer armageddon for assault. so there's a lot of miscalculation going on here. does that account for? and i don't, i truly gentlemen don't have my head around who's really promoting negotiations. millie a so and then the russians, the villains gave what's going on here, george, can you make any sense of this all, or is this the father war and intentional dis information which comes with every conflict? go ahead, jordan. well i, i tend to think that there is a intentional dis information. i mean, obviously they're arkansas among the u. s. military one to stand these things

that ukraine cannot go on fighting this war forever. the casualties sustain a rendez, that ultimately infrastructure can be totally just destroy it, to the point that it will be no power at all the entire country. so i think that they probably do think it was about maybe maybe it's time for some sort of a cease fire, a nice few months during which we can replenish the forces to revise your brains flagging for tunes. but without any sense of how you can bring this to an end and you know, a little, you know, a isn't going to buy into any idea. well, let's just freeze everything in place 34 months,

and then allow the united just to replace all of ukraine's losses. so that that isn't happening. but there's also an often happens with the united states to kind of go to come back up routine. we, you know, we have really, apparently, well, maybe we should negotiate and then you have a hole in the state, and i know we have to head towards victory. so i think there's a lot of this information going on. i mean, the measure would be, is anyone coming out with any serious plan to do to negotiate? but you know, those are, this will be the 3 or 4 points that we would accept a for a final settlement. i don't see anything like that. so i'm kind of skeptical about the stories about america, but some sort of negotiation, you know, 2 words, final settlement. that's the key, ga, the key to all of this here, glen, because, you know, you can talk about, you know, a cease fire prisoner exchange and all these kind of things. but that has nothing

to do with the final settlement. and i've been adamant since the start of the special military operation is that russia um embarked upon this military operation . so it won't have to do it again in 5 years or 10 years, or 15 years. it wants a final settlement. and that's what the west is and able to comprehend or agree to because it would mean losing. okay, and that's something they're not, they can contemplate at this point. but because they have their volunteer, not their victim in ukraine. this is a set of cards that they have. go ahead. well, i think the problem is that this is escalated so far out of control. i mean, even nato is recognizing that if russia prevails, this is effectively a loss of nato. and, you know, the american military leaders are saying the same thing that i mean to interrupt you like, but they're the ones that are making that decision. there's like, if we don't, when we think that's very curious to me,

okay. because nato could actually reinvent itself by saying we actually are a defensive military and we will not be able to go forward with these military adventures in outer area and stuff like that. maybe it's a self fulfilling prophecy this what they're saying about themselves. go ahead. oh no, i agree with that. i think that would be a healthy development for nato as well. if they went back to the way they were during the cold war, which was a status quo car, one which did not expand and one which did not to intervene or attack other countries. so the, sorry about that could be a positive development. but i'm by, but my point was that the nato has kind of put it as political legitimacy now on, on the line. so, can everyone has seemingly everything to lose now, which is why it's so difficult for all the parts to step back. because again, what, what russia runs as a political settlement is to address who wasn't addressed after the cold war when it began to expand. he wants to have a european secured architecture which isn't based on the idea that stability

derives from expanding. the american military lies closer and closer to russian border, so they need a solution. they need a settlement this and i do agree, i don't think a 10 per seas firewall. we work out the deal is possible because again, if i notice this will be seen as a simply having a time to take a breath and, and rearm ukraine in the meanwhile. so, and also they had to remember the means agreement from 2015. that in person shinkel you went out in the media and you said we're open while we were never in funding to instead of implement is a peace agreement. we were just the buying time to our or self, este americans came in the trained, our troops who built up from having nothing to biggest armies in europe. and also this is, i guess what the russians will be afraid of. so i agree, i think if is proposed to cease fire, i don't think russia would go along. if there was a complete deal to reorganize european security, i don't think it would go along with diminished their role as the dominant force. so that's why this is a scary, there's no,

that doesn't seem to be any way out of this yet because it, because gorgeous is a a conflict. it never should have happened. there were so many ways, so many off rims. you and i talked about all 3 of us, talked about this for hours and hours, you know, there's still a way out. there's still a way of and nonetheless, they decided to go down this path and it was perfectly predictable just as glens stated to all of us. yeah, exactly right. and then glenn outlined it perfectly. now. it really is, it's hard to see how those get any kind of a meeting point, which isn't a total defeat on one side or the other because russia to accept anything like means 3. 0 would be complete defeat. i mean, you know, you mean you've gone through this 9 months of all these enormous casualties just to go back to an agreement that we know the west has absolutely no intention of

hearing. so, you know, the, the sign. yeah. you're fine. you know, we'll have a new agreement and then they'll break it, you need it violated. so, and that now, and nato has drawn a line in the sand, so that the says, no, we have to win this because if we don't, then you know, this is a complete defeat all the west. so it's want to see how this any kind of a meter, you know, it's really, it's really disgraceful that nato identifies itself is being synonymous with the west. it's not ok that it, that's what it's really, it's really, it's, it's gruesome when you think about england, because this is all about a country that is not even in nato and the country that has no national security of vital interest to the west. but it does to russia, this was in pose. i guy keep saying, i know it's not popular. ukraine volunteered for this. and as we're speaking right now, there are ukrainian officials saying to ukrainians, if you can leave the country,

leave me for the next 3 or 4 months. this is going to be really bad here. ok. this was all predictable one. yes, but even though your credit is not one and one entity in the sense, because we say, well why doesn't? so let's go sit down and talk. obviously, if the lights are about to go off, you know, you've got 500000 russian troops about the storm. you know, this is a time sit down but, but, well, you know, coming to someone excuse defense if you will. if he would sit down and negotiate with russia, he doesn't have supreme control necessarily like what would happen with much of the military who opposes him. in solution, i argue that he's not possibly in on this. and i would also point out what happened in the beginning because it went to, let's get 1st was to go to didn't keep in mind. he wants them to 3 percent of the vote on the piece platform that we can go online, then you can find all the videos. he went to the front line. you talk to the awesome and distracting, and that's how i say listen, we we agreed with poodle back our heavy weapons and they pretty much face to face. know that like i happen, we will or sent you

a letter. we will marshall you. if you're trying to impose a peace deal, even his own advice, a leader, right? so he told you he did an interview where he said, so it's good hanging the tree in care execute that is if you trust implementing that, he's his disagreement. so it might be that did this is still the case, so i don't think that he has this complete freedom of control over the ukrainian arm either. i mean, but george's was perfectly predict will be united states doesn't have co equals in these conflicts. it has to supplicate and, and they will again, they volunteered to be the proxy and all of this, and this is the outcome because the u. s. will print money that doesn't have, but he can't print weapons. they can't print ammo because that's where they are right now. the stock stockpiles are empty. and now this is what we have here. and then then the, the what, oh, what about the oversight for all of this? i mean, this is all coming to a conclusion that was purely on predictable,

at least in my mind, and i think in yours, yes, the ukraine is a holy subsidiary of the united states. and the united states continues with his disingenuous claims, saying, well, we'll do this one will go on as long as ukraine wants it to go into, you know, we're, we're leading the final decision. do you agree to it yet? we completely bank, rolling your grade, we're bankrupting ourselves by banker owning it. we're pouring in everything we have from our allmers into your grades, but the final decision is entirely ukraine. even though we know that the moment we cut off the arm spigot, ukraine will just stop. wouldn't be able to continue it one second longer. but oh no, no. the final decision is when you break, it's already disingenuous. but any of the nato countries, which are also could be supplicants of the united states, go along with this nonsensical story that we had for richie, soon as the british prime minister was a,

was in key of the other day spouting this absolute nonsense with everything is ready up to ukraine? i mean, you know, we, we don't have any say in this, which i had when i have a brain once. oh, nothing about your brain without ukraine. that's how well and the program went to thing like it has the nice low in budapest. i think our viewers for watching us here at r t c and x. i remember across back roads. ah ah ah, in release of hunter rushing, state little narrative, i phone in the most landscape with 55 with speaking with weaver van in the european union. the kremlin. yup,

machines. the state on russia for date and c r t spoke neck given our video agency, roughly all band on youtube, a with me ah

. the republic of moldova ranks is one of the poorest countries in europe. a bunker should logwood a mother when he was an annual g. d. p per capita is about $4000.00 euros. and even the cultural amount is mainly made up of remittances. central abroad by migrant. moldova worker's laws that we've got a molar with the economy, revolves around agriculture for virtue. when you're a little more bullet wash, they're finishing up a man. i don't their primary kosky seal for quite a few any for them in your prison line, your mobile number to come out say yes, i would have thought of some thoughts that are single thought of those other