ah, ah ah hello and welcome to crosstalk, where all things are considered on peter lavelle. the great decoupling has finally occurred with russia suspending. it's participation in the new start arms control treaty. russia and the west have gone their own separate ways and in the process. arms control appears to be dead in the water. more troubling times ahead. i cross hocking decoupling. i'm joined by my guests. had c intense mania. he's a conflict consultant in a retired u. s. foreign service officer in paris,

we have some brick mall. he is a political commentator and in their shower. we costa christopher, hello, lee. he is a political analyst and researcher, or a gentleman cross how close. in fact, that means he can jump any time you want. and i would appreciate was got a tenant tens mania 1st. ted, i mean what, you know, i'm, i'm sure all of these saw the 2 speeches. one, the dub vladimir putin gave to the nation, an annual event. and bob biden's appearances in care of and in warsaw and you couldn't get more juxtaposed. ok, biden is on an ideological crusade. um, it's not, there's no sense of cause causality. there is no context. there's not even really a goal. the rest of the russian president talked about why brushes in this conflict . it's about geo politics and security, and you can't get more diverse than that. and this is one of the reasons why i think the west is misunderstanding why the conflict started in the 1st place. in white, it continues your thoughts, ted?

well, i think, peter, the problem that we continue to see is that the western uses to listen to russia has completely ignored russian red lines for many years now. and the real difficulty right at the moment, i believe, is unlike for us presidents who weren't listening to the president of the russian federation, we now have one who can't listen because he's not mentally quite there. but so a very good point. they're generally the same, a question to you is that this is one of the reasons why this conflict is, is construed in a, in radically different ways. again, russia is talking about security in right before the conflict on december 17th, 2001 they said look, here's what we need. we need to talk about these things. and they were completely blown off by washington and by nato. and, and here we are. and that russia's goal is to end this when it security is been assured, nobody in the west seriously wants to talk about the french president. if it's an

odd day or an even day, i can't really tell he flip flops back and forth here on this issue. here, but until both sides can get on the same page, this conflict isn't going to come to an end. go ahead in paris. yes, where i think you have to, with this conflict in perspective, in what happened over the 20th century, which is mostly the process of d colonization on the west, on the zation. it started 1920 with the backward congress. and you have been to the people of the are he and we just launched by lennon and a bunch of weeks coding for them to be decriminalized because they're here later. evolution in you hope was impossible. and that certainly happy to people like not to know what you mean and started the one part of the process of the conversation. the 2nd stage was the bundle conference in indonesia, in 1955 and the beginning of the non aligned movement, which launch a new stage for the, for the finance company, the completion of deacon and his asian in africa and elsewhere. and then also the

creation of down present would be independent, both from the companies block and then from the west and from the united states. and that went along her the well, i think. but of course with the collapse of the soviet union. the western has had, you know, that i've been busy with checks is to use the phrase used by studying during the quality zation. they did again. dizzy with texas. they thought that the, this a new those on your right in front of them and they're going to control the world. and it was, of course, the neo liberal b i. e. and there he can is ation of part of the world and interventions in yugoslavia architecture, etc. and now they have run into something highly difficult with his her show her. sure he's not, the ac is not here and even say i wasn't a success. and even against and was not to success, but certainly crush is much more resistant. and the main change lead to the war. i don't want to, this goes to war. it says is a personal and between the russia and china and the fact that the rest of the world,

including india, which has been thursday to china for many years and have good latin america and africans are, are getting closer to this new moscow busying axis. and out of us is the most significant event of the last year in my view, if aspect if or was going on in the can you change a new need against it? western the that such an excellent point to me. and i think this program is real about the coupling, but basically it's battle a battle of narratives is full and christopher here, chris, way it's fascinating went john had to say, because this is the, the west continues to want to recreate the world and its own image and where and they had a brick wall when it came to rush, rush said, now we're not going to go along with that. and the rest of the world is taking a good part of the world is taking that q is that? no, we will not follow your rules based order. what other mumbo jumbo you wanna throw at us here. there is a breach. there's a significant breach here, and it's having

a knock on effect. the global south is not reacting to the west wants. obviously china is and, and india is a, is a wild card here. there's a lot of things in play right now. christopher, go ahead. basically, you have to look at the past the, you know, few decades to understand after the collapse of the soviet union. it's not like the u. s. and it's a utopian partners and nato, all of a sudden were, you know, going out and generous to the global south, and generous to others. instead they did the opposite. they went on the warpath. they dis, 3rd yugoslavia, they went eventually into afghanistan into iraq, into libya. they've destroyed syria. they've gone through countless countries and just reeked havoc and devastation. so everybody else is watching this over the past few decades is saying, this is coming for us. not only russia and china, the dpr kate under, you know, 1st, under kim's janiella, now under kim's, on when they're watching. and they're saying absolutely not. we're not gonna

believe that they have our legitimate interests, or that they care about our sovereignty and our territorial integrity. they don't, and so ultimately, over the past few decades, you know, vladimir putin has tried or persistently to call for negotiations to call for diplomacy to call for something to happen. and what you've seen is further encroachment further expansion by nato. and so, of course, russia has a, a, an important part in its national defense. it's, it's national security, which is a strategic debt that can allow nato to come right to the border just within a few 100 kilometers of its capital. and it's major sites. so ultimately, when you're looking at this, when you're looking at the 2 speeches, you known is he to narratives, you see 2 completely different visions of the world. one under he gemini, of the west, when under u. s. u nato, imperialism, and the other with a new multiple, the world where people have respect for the sovereignty, the territorial integrity and the internal affairs of all the respective countries

. and is this public go ahead to head here, it go ahead, jump in, shall go ahead. well those, this week me, which is to the exhibit the it is we the chinese of baby gemini, could you say all aspect of your urban america, the gym and they have not, i've done to read but something. i hope there be another cluster about that because that seem to be, well, we were reading my mind. let me go to ted here on this here. i mean, the rest of the world is watching how the united states deals. it's with it's close allied germany and the north stream pipelines. i mean, if that's how american treats it spreads, how is america and its allies going to treat pose? i mean that, that, that western media doesn't want to talk about it, you know. but fema hirsch's the greatest living journalist of our time, and he's being ignored by the new york times, by the way, where he used to work here. but that event blowing up those pipelines is good. it

has ramifications that i think even the people in the white house have no idea what they're bun leashed. ted, go ahead. peter, i'll be the 1st to say that, say more very, haven't got everything he's written correct in a long and always interesting career. but at this time, i've worked with j sullivan. i work with toria new and everything he wrote. that's true to me. i think he got this one right. and i know he got it right. but the fact that it's now a public source and available to people without sort of hiding behind classifications means that the narrative is crumbling at light speed. pretending that it was anyone other than united states special courses that went in and did this act of destruction. and damaged europe for decades to come. thank you very much. you can safely ignore everyone. you can safely ignore the official narrative. the truth is out. yeah, well, christopher, i mean this was an active international terrorism. ok, i mean, and we in ok if, if,

if the united states didn't do it then who did it's kind of like the o. j. simpson trial. ok. i mean, if he didn't kill his ex wife and then who did ok, christopher. i think of 1st and foremost, you know, now that sy hersh has written this article, we've been saying it for, for months now, yet we've been saying that this did, that there was no possibility, no way that russia spend billions of dollars to create this pipeline. and to, and use it as part of their diplomacy, irreproachable with europe, the building, the mutual a sort of agreements and success of all of the entire continent. and all of a sudden they're going to go and destroy their own pipeline. it doesn't make sense . but of course, instantly you know, part of this, the reality that we're now living in, we were the one spreading misinformation and disinformation, quote, unquote, we were the one spreading. a, you know, a kremlin propaganda. it wasn't prevalent propaganda and it isn't. it's just of the ality that russia would not do this. it's not within, it is just out of the bounds of, of what would be realistic. and now that sy hersh has written this,

i think it's taking the lead off of a dis, a cocktail that, that the west is, is making in their mainstream media. and people are finally seeing and waking up and saying maybe maybe we're being duped, not only on north stream by blank, but on everything in french and connected with a variety of issues. whether be the operation ukraine, or for example, the balloon going over to you as, as my balloon. a bridge where you really just go ahead, we have 40 seconds before we go to the break i had jump. do you remember the day mind or how both of nicaragua, during descending the start time? yeah, i mean was, we were even condemned by the international court of justice and they never paid reparation. that's pure gang series and they used to do it to the south. another do it to you. oh, well, i mean it to all 3 of you in our audience here. what weapons of mass destruction does that ring? any bells or anyone here? i mean, if they light about that then the, then they a, we have to safely assume that they lie about

a whole lot of things. maybe about everything we'll go. we'll ask head when we come back from the break because he used to work in the belly of the beast itself. are gentlemen, we're going to go to a short break after that short break. we'll continue our discussion on decoupling st with our t at this hour, american and coalition forces are in the early stages of military operations to disarm iraq, to free its people, and to defend the world from grey, who we will bring to the iraqi people, food, and medicines and supplies and freedom with

ah, i think russia in the 21st century has taken several opportunities to try to see if there would be interested in the west to create new boundaries to create a new relationship. and as you mentioned, time and time and time again, it would get flatly rejected because we have sort of pushed russia into this corner, ideologically attitude. me to say, you're the adversary. you're the, we may not be in a formal bipolar ideological cold war anymore. but we're not going to allow a new relationship to develop with i rick sanchez and i am here to plead with you. whatever you do,

you do not watch my yourself seriously. why watch something that's so different. my little opinion that you won't get anywhere else. look, if it pleases you to have the state department, the c, i, a weapons makers, multi $1000000000.00 corporations. choose your fax for you. go ahead. i change and whatever you do. don't watch my show. stay main street because i'm probably gonna make you uncomfortable. my show is called direct impact, but again, you probably don't want to watch it because it might just change the wing thing. ah, welcome back to cross stock where all things are considered on peter bell to remind you we're discussing decoupling. okay, let's go back to ted intends when you had you said something quite tantalizing in the 1st part of the program that you've worked with the likes of jake sullivan and

you believe that they were very much involved in this on this plan to destroy the pipelines can you give us a little bit? i mean, that's kind of a tease and not very fair to me. our viewers explain yourself. well, let's just say that everything that hersh wrote about the 2 of them being involved with the planning and execution of this operation rims true. having seen them in action when i was with the u. s. mission at nato. okay, well that, that, that's not a lot of detail, but we're gonna take your word on it. okay. i me go back to christopher christopher . you know, that there's this all this talk i, i look at the pages of, you know, like, responsible state craft, anti war dot com, even american conservative. and they're talk to, they talk about an a, some kind of negotiated and what is there to negotiate. i mean, rush has already made it clear what it wants to have happen. and until the west reacts to that, i don't understand what these negotiations are all about. and oh, by the way, i cease fire. well, why would brush you agree, agree to a ceasefire?

so nato can build up ukraine again, and they do it 5 years from now. i mean, on the, you know, you know, one of the, all 3 of you, you know, it really disappoints me, is that a lot of smart people over the last year have said really stupid things. i expected more from them. christopher, go ahead. now i would, i would say that you're absolutely correct and not only that, but it put in has been and the russian government and leverage have been saying this for, for years and years. nobody's been listening. russia's security concerns have been at the forefront of all of their major speeches of all their diplomatic overtures and it hasn't been acted upon. and the reason is that the u. s. and nato are not really concerned, and not really in any way willing to give even an inch to the russians because that's not part of the war machines plan. because you need to have the enemy, you need to have, and russia is the longer communist russia is no longer the soviet union. but you see how they reproduce this language. now they reproduce it because they need that enemy because their stockholders in these a big military industrial complex,

you know, corporations, they need it, they need it because they need to make more armaments. more missiles were planes, more ships, whatever they need. so i think ultimately when you're looking at this, what negotiation, what's settlement, what ceasefire can come from a conflict where one site does not respect the national security interest of the other side, nor it's overtures in saying, we don't want a belligerent alliance at our border. that is a relic of the cold work when we disbanded the other part of that military alliance . you know, the one in opposition to it. it doesn't make sense. there can be no negotiation. no settlement of this current crisis, unless the, the u. s. and nato and the european partners take seriously russia's security concerns, an advocate for a ukraine that won't join nato, that will be neutral. and that won't be a breeding ground for all of the things that are being concocted in washington and in brussels and in the halls of power in the wes english. and if we're going to put

our money on annually to bear bach, i think we're all in really big trouble. okay. is on the, it was interesting a go to a new cycles ago, the former vice president of the united states pence was on fox news. and he referred to russia as the soviet union, and that's just the problem. they keep saying. they still think in that paradigm, they think in a cold war paradigm here. and i could tell you living here for a quarter of century, they have dispensed with that paradigm. completely, it's the west that continues to embrace it. go ahead in paris. working there is one continue to do with the soviet union. is that the current version? not, not? yes, in the us, there aren't a gym and they can. they don't. she did not like the safety of her unipolar world, and the soviet union was against it too. and that's what made it popular in the rest of the world to some extent. and i think it's also what makes russia popular in the us of the world to some extent, because they did the lead of the world of the global south against this unipolar

world is american, the german ages, american exceptionalism, etc, etc. so i think that's in depth and there is a continued de hayden, there is no continued d as well. so, so can i make on the political system is concerned. but there's this mentality which i, i must say, praise the russians. well, is that the project is a jim american hegemony was the europeans of the western european at least embrace . but then of course that's they're taking as the, the main, the main continuity view ish and demand. he's of his intent hostility to her show that we have in the west. well, of it, there's other, another continuity, it's western had gemini, that has not changed here at 180 and looking at what's coming out of the administration in the, in, from an nato smelted berg. i mean, they're sending out a really a wide array of messages. there's no more ammunition, we don't know how much more aid we can give. but then there are biden is saying,

as long as it takes still, and it seems to me that there's the messaging is getting kind of sloppy on their part because it's, it's the, the, the, that in the narrative is beginning to crack your thoughts. go ahead, ted. absolutely agree, peter. i think there's a note of desperation creeping into that messaging, quite frankly. but in nato we're dealing with something that shouldn't have existed one minute longer than the soviet union. it's never had a purpose after the end of the soviet union. it never will have a purpose. everything they try and come up with is, is frankly a nonsense. there's never been consensus within to agree before the recent conflict in russia with the enemy. and even now they haven't officially placed russia in their documents, said b enemy. and there's a good reason for that because frankly, there's still some, some reasonable, you know, stream thinking people in europe. i wish i could say the same about washington right now. this whole situation is one of the websites making. obviously,

nato keeps searching for a reason or natal reminds me in that sense of the scientists, us nuclear laborin tories to just the 1st discovery of nuclear winter back in the mid eighties, when global arsenals that build down from sort of the 70000 nuclear weapons down to the sort of mid below, teens of thousands of nuclear weapons decided to sort of put up with nuclear winter back in the eighty's because they still have a lot to do and still maintain their pensions. these days, the threat from nuclear winter to the nuclear establishment, the nuclear weapons mafia. the big numer cartel is i like to call it. and that manufacturers, government depart. everyone involved is substantial because we can't afford to have tens of thousands of nuclear weapons around. we can't afford to have tens of hundreds and nuclear weapons around because we're this close to the apocalypse, even if nothing pops off in the ukraine. and in that sense, those, you know,

the los alamos national laboratory scientists are preserving their own careers. yeah, the same way that they know and it's infrastructure i mean without already exists. that's the biggest problem. very. you've already kind of touched upon it, but you know, again, you know, the, the juxtaposition could not be more clear. i mean, nato is a business model. i mean it's, it's about generating budgets for expenditures, okay. on the weapons that don't necessarily would have to work actually up again. but if you get a budget to get the next year's budget bigger than that, that one before. i mean, it's all about driving out there. it's preservation and wasting other people's money. okay. because i don't think the americans are going to send their big tanks there. you know why? because they'll be destroyed immediately after they cross the border. and they know that ok, but you know if you to promise all 50 tanks and you gotta order 50 more tanks. hey,

everybody understand how this works. go ahead christopher. i have to agree and actually was known chomsky years ago who said that the only reason for nato survival afterwards was really to maintain and control world energy supplies. and so you look at all the words, don't forget, nato was involved in the overthrow of the government. the wal mart, gadhafi and libya actively involved in destroying that country. actively involved on the ground with the u. s. effort now, forgot his son, providing support as part of coalitions for other campaigns of securing shipping lanes and things like that, against the quote unquote pirates and who knows what? so i think ultimately bear their purpose. and the way i see it is similar to how others have seen it, which is as a, as an imperialist arm, it's sort of the imperialist armed forces of dis, the unipolar and hedge, a monic of global structure. so when you look at it in that sense,

you understand that as it continues to expand and don't forget, it's the only in europe. columbia is a quote unquote global partner of nato. dave, they're trying to bring in other partners in, for example, oceania. so you're looking at this and you're saying this really is the global reach of well, but christopher was, isn't it really obvious to you? is that what the, what did these mandarins, the west they want to do? they wanted, they want a short circuit. the united nations, they want to have their own global coalition of the willing and, and nato doesn't want to have any or the united states. want to have any restraints put on it here. i think that's very much part of it. and i also agree, you're absolutely right all a great deal that is directed at energy here, that we're almost out of time here at ted, you know, as far as with a guy who shall you want to jump in, go ahead. what i just wanted to say that if i look at the peace movement thing to the west in the fan, so even germany, it's a car or belgium. i mean, you know,

the 1st of all condemn of good the russian intervention and put in so between sports, et cetera. then they done them to some extent $82.00. but they never said latasha should do military security. and so most important, in my view for the security of the haitian people who live in ukraine. i mean ido, we are to believe that people in dumbass and he may actually want to be canyon under the present king and his team and have been forced to be hushed by which includes which i think is totally unbelievable or has we have to realize that these people should have rights. why should you train the height of independence in the soviet union? be sacrosanct? but the height of said that there was some of the russian people who have been put in a cane at the time of the soviet limitation of no heights whatsoever and uses and make any sense. and as something which he stood in your bay of so called anti war movements. well, yeah. parent apparently i've hear a rally. i think you're making reference to the united states. if, if you, if you're against, are the more than your opponent puppet in your

a white supremacist. but tad, is it, the united states senate in nato countries are supporting, essentially, and least nazi elements in care of that no one wants to talk about on the west. 3rd to we have 20 seconds. go ahead and head. okay, i'm here for 20 seconds worth of fun here. let's think what the west could do to make a difference in the, in the war in ukraine right now. is there something of value that nato has in europe, that it could give away in return for say, negotiations commencing between russia and ukraine for a peace settlement. we have to think really hard about this, but if it were me, i'd be looking at the nuclear gravity. bombs with us, maintains, in europe for no good reason. okay, that's and hang on a very depressing point. thank you. how to write a gentleman and that's all the time we have. i want to thank my guests in tasmania, paris, and, and bear shar and thanks to our viewers for watching us here at our dc unix. i'm remember, cross stuck with ah,

my name is frank emerged from philadelphia. got in the movement in 8813 going on 14. we were violent towards those people because we believe there were this race were here 1st, and this is our country being part of that movement. i got your sense of power. when i felt powerless, we got a pension when i felt invisible, him accepted when i felt level life after hey, is an organization that was founded by 4 o skin in the on the white supremacists in the u. s. in canada. and they found each other and they knew that they wanted to help other guys get out was 2 parts to getting out of a violent extremist group. the 1st part is disengagement, which is where you leave the social group. and then the next part is d. radicalization we're belief systems audiology are removed. it was very impactful.

when someone finally came along with no fear, no judgement, you heard my story did nothing to challenge it. look forward to talking to you all. that technology should work for people. a robot must obey the orders given by human beings, except where such short or is it conflict with the 1st law? show your identification. we should be very careful about artificial intelligence. at the point, obviously is to create a truck rather than a very job with artificial intelligence. we'll summoning with obama protective own existence, with some

nation may be able to turn a blind eye to atrocities and other countries. the united states of america is different. wearable people long to be free, they will find a friend in the united states, ah, with you little bit about it all to anybody crazy. so the city in p jaw. you look at the incentives of each cigarette. 2 color revolutions is one among several means to reach the goal of conquering foreign lands and bringing them on to the help of u. s. western economic interests. people been sad, it, i didn't that he did to that group by the democrats. yeah, you shouldn't correct it. so no, we just say

a soft pile. whenever you get to the final goal, these seem revolutions to ensure that there are no independent players in the world anymore. ah, everybody, i'm rick sanchez. you know, after covering news all over the world and founding a $1000000000.00 company, i'm here to tell you, well, as much as i possibly can tell it like it is. so welcome to what we call direct impact. it seems these days to me anyway, like there's every day another group of countries who are forging a coalition to see if there really is strength in numbers, right? you know what they're finding, what, what they're finding, if there really is strength the numbers is it.