ah ah ah hello in welcome to cross hawk where all things are considered. i'm peter lavelle, western capitals, and they're pliant. corporate media continue to maintain the west is not at war with russia. however, the fact is, nato is a co belligerent, supplying financial support, arms and diplomatic cover forgive when the west claims, otherwise, it means it's losing ah,

cross sucking the west war on russia. i'm joined by my guest, jo, lori, and sydney. he's the editor in chief of consortium news dot com, in tulsa. we have jeremy, whose motto he is managing, editor of corporate action magazine and in los angeles, we have pi e, and he is a strategic planning consultant, a private equity advisor and an independent economic analyst. our gentleman cross roles and the fact that means you can jump anytime you want. and i always appreciate, let me go to jo 1st in sidney here, over the last week or so 10 days or so we've had peace proposals coming out. there's a leaks about a possibility of the u. k. france and germany having a proposal from what i've read, it's very ukraine centric, not security side drink. and the chinese came out with a 12 point proposal which has been widely dismissed in the west here. so what is the strategic goal here? i mean, if it's all focused on ukraine, and if you look at the chinese proposal,

it's heavy on security and i think that's the biggest difference between the 2. go ahead, joe. i think of when on, if a bohaman falls to russia is going to be a major turning point and a decision will have to be made will be in big humiliation for the united states, for europe and for zalinski. what do they do then? do they listen to the realists such as my crohn and shells as they are and peter, pavel of the czech republic, or the vin or to the neocons in the u. s. newland blinking southern and in europe, burbock and a bundle i and et cetera. maloney. what is the order they going to do, right? then we don't really know where biden's stands and all that, which is of course key. do they decide that there has to be a deal and what, and what russia at that point. way ahead and don't forget shots and shots a micron. told cholenski at a dinner in paris to writing february that just no way you crank or when the war

they had some commanding idea to launch an offensive gain, some more territory to push rush to the peace table. well, at this point, wretched to demand all the times if they want. if indeed, after buck mode, they decided that going to have to end this war. and that would mean for russia said they would want, obviously, recognition crimea. and the for republics had voted to join russia. they want to demilitarization of ukraine, the disbandment of nazi malicious. and the dado and u. s. treaties that they propose at the beginning, in december 2021 that had not been taken seriously. this more. this phase of the war would not have happened. so will they be able to swallow a loss and give those terms to richer? this is the big question really escalate? well, jeremy, that's, that's a jo is got it spot on here because i recently had and lena bear about the german foreign minister say that go where it war with russia. and then samantha power on a c, n c. and then town hall said the, on the west is at war with russia. i mean,

in they keep saying they're not a co belligerent here. that's why jeremy, that they, the russians have a hard time trusting anyone. i mean, they say one thing out of one side of their mouth and they do something else on the other side here. i mean there's, there's no, there's no interlocutor here, even jeremy. well, yeah, and even with the men's frame, you know, there was the mince peace frame or before. but we have the admission of angela merkel and before that poor shank that, that was just, you know, designed to by time you know, for the war that really they were planning on russia and we have, i mean, you can go back in history. i my book, the russians are coming again. sure. the 100 year passed the seats by the west and the united states, especially going back to the russian revolution where lenin was open to peace agreements and they sabotaged that. and then david, russia, i mean, you can look at the issue of nato expansion and the promise, the false promise. so absolutely, russia has no reason to trust the united states and to trust any agreements. and

that's why i would think they would be, you know, i mean, i think they would, you know, if their terms are granted, like joe is saying, i mean, obviously they would accept it, but they know the track record. and they know that they're out to get them, so they have to be very cautious and garza about anything they do. well, of course, my guess and to my audience here, the, the terms and conditions of negotiation of already been set out and joe was right. it was on december, 17, 2021. it's there, it was made public and it was dismissed by western capital, particularly washington pine. let me go to you in los angeles. you know, the, the chinese proposal fascinated me. i mean, it wasn't everything that russia wanted. as matter fact, the russian said we're, we're studying it very carefully that i mean, that was about is, is a tepid is response. if you could get here. but you know, the west doesn't want the chinese to be a power broker. i mean, it's a very nice neo colonial and they're mine in their thinking is that they,

how could the chinese be a broker? how, how, how could china come out on the, on the world stage, and mediate between invest in russia? i mean, it's a, it's a very backward looking approach, in my opinion. i mean, it's a major country, 2nd largest economy, maybe the biggest in the world. it's got a lot of clout and it should be listened to go ahead and buy in los angeles. everything is indirect, especially with the stakes high through global diplomacy. the chinese know if russia somehow i doubt it, but if they were to fall than the chinese would be next, right? a for what the west plans in turn. thus the chinese are soft signaling indirectly signaling death and alliance. i'd be not just, you know, as tight trading partner and whatnot, but a potential military backed, becoming stronger between these 2 year asian polls. for now, nato doesn't water direct war and can't afford it any way,

either economically or militarily nato's intention. i senses to simply try and reprise its experiences of the late seventy's through the early ninety's. a word exhausted the soviet union, using afghanistan's which i had dean tactically, lowered oil and gas prices, and heavy global p. r, and forcing gorbachev's ultimate sell out nato. today's seats to bleed russia dry of resources, money, man, power armaments, patience and good will with her neighbors and her allies to isolate and alienate rush as much as possible through the onslaught of economic and financial sanctions, military attrition, propaganda humiliation. and anything else that pi rest was high or not growing, and a lot of those things are in play. none, and all the things he just listed are not in play. what's, what russia's economy is growing. the you're in the west is into, in a growing into recession. i mean, there in the black here, not the red joe. one of the things that i find very frustrating is the terms and

conditions of the narrative, because i'm somehow to give a reprieve to ukraine. to get as much territory and then sit down and talk. well, 1st of all, the russians have no interested in doing that whatsoever. the problem here is that the, the, the, the west is looking for some kind of strategic defeat of russia. that's not going to happen, but the way out of this is to talk about the indivisibility of security, where everybody gets security. the west refuses to talk about way, refuses flat out job. yeah, we're bringing back to square one fact to what russia's been talking about for years. i mean, ever since he elson himself was also opposed to nato expansion. and they wanted russia security interest to be taken into account. couldn't ask clinton to join nato if they've continuously held a hand out to the west. and it's been clear what the west wants that they want to get back to the years in the ninety's, when they ran many things in russia, they acid stripped. the formerly state owned industries and enriched themselves in wall street and

a new class of oligarchs and on the enormous resorts is that russians has, is certainly what the west has been eyeing here, but they have to face the reality now. and again, it comes down to the realist versus the neo cons. will they begin to understand that their entire plan year, their information war, their economic war and their proxy war are failing? the of course, the information we're is working, the only in the western european americans and united states, people believe the store. but anyway, everywhere else in the world, it is not believe these a whole new economic system that's been growing up, economic, monetary, financial, and commercial system. in the us and europe are going to have to face the fact that they're on the outside looking in. they are isolated themselves. this is not a china of 3040 years ago or russia of the else in days. these are the complaint, it's not india 40 years ago or africa as well. so the entire world is changed and we seeing maybe the end of really the end of the last guess of colonialism that the african nations and latin america they are going to being neutral. formally,

but certainly not putting sanctions on russia. they have see, this is an opportunity now for a new world to be created in front of our eyes. and united states is going to have to swallow it and realize that they're no longer the power that they think that they are. and they have to do that quickly, could throw out an enormously dramatic point in human history. and because of nuclear weapons, maybe the most dramatic point in history where they can not escalate this, they've got to realize that bit off more than they can chew here and get to a new arrangement and become another member of the national community. yeah, well jeremy, that's something that is going to be almost impossible for the west to accept because it is being dethroned as the head edge amount of the world. and that is something that they, that the west can't begin to comprehend. it's in their interest to do it, but they can't comprehend it. jeremy, i would tend to agree, and that's why we are a very dangerous moment in history a because they can accept this reality the show describing. and so, there provoking conflicts now with russia and china at the same time. and these,

you know, threatened escalated to world war or nuclear wars. and yeah, they know, it's like somebody's, you know, dog backed into a corner and i don't know, he's willing to almost engage in suicidal behavior. what we kind of see and he can accept it. ah, so yeah, it's just, well, i mean i need an example of that. let me go to pine before we go to the break here . just the destruction of the nord stream, a pipelines that was an act of desperation. ok. they have no means they. they have no arguments, okay? they're not reasonable people. and they will do the most unreasonable, illegal, and act what that's actually a terrorist attack. ok fi before we go to the break, go ahead. i mean it's nato's demo, or certainly that of the neocons and neo liberals. same straus indifference, by the way, i mean to deceive, through tactical and seemingly random acts of sabotage, while chewing up the trust of so called allies. the higher the stakes, the shorter the time frames to act under the more desperately the cover of

plausible deny a mil deniability must be sacrificed for the sake of doubling down on the optics of intimidation because it's better to be feared than love is the lay donald rumsfeld set paraphrasing, machiavelli and seymour hersh was actually tasked by the establishment and writing a sub stack piece on nord stream. as means of revealing the method in a cult speak, controlled opposition, as indirect confirmation of who and what i did, and orange nord stream, in order to signal that they're capable and willing to come in industrial terrorism racks bore. yet again, it's mind boggling how the premium masses do not see how they don't play. it's why lying boggling to me, the german cancel would sit next, the biden, and not say a word about it. that's mind blowing to me, gentlemen, i have to go to a break. and after that short break, we'll continue our discussion on the west war on russia. stay with

ah, ah ah hi, i'm rick sanchez and i'm here to play with you. whatever you do, you do not watch my new show. seriously, why watch something that's so different. my little opinion that you won't get anywhere else. welcome to please. i do have the state department,

the cia weapons makers, multi $1000000000.00 corporations. choose your fax for you. go ahead, my change and whatever you do, don't watch my show, stay main street because i'm probably going to make you uncomfortable. my show is called direct impact, but again, you probably don't wanna watch it because it might just change. and dwayne thing ah ah ah, welcome back to cross sack where all things are considered on peter level to remind you were discussing the west war on russia. i

can go back to jo in sydney. i'm joe biden, for whatever, if you'd agree or disagree with him like or dislike him, he's done something unprecedented. and in post world war 2 history, he's allowing or targeting pivoting to a position where there is a great power conflict every single president. for since f d r harry truman don't go to toe with the soviet union, not don't go toe to toe with russia. joe biden is doing that. and the reason why they nodded states never did it in the soviet union, never did it because it becomes existential. you could actually lose and probably both wig lose. this is unique and this is what makes it so very dangerous. if you look through history, great powers avoid wars with other great powers. go ahead, joe. ah, obviously, and yes, it's very shocking. how biden has come through with this policy that we all fear. hillary clinton would have done a chad. she won in 2016 and here we have

a she wanted a no fly zone, have a syrian, the head of the joint chiefs of staff at the time, testified that he, that will bring, will russia. so even back then, the idea of a war with russia was just a nonstarter and taboo that has ended. but i don't think this well of hope completely. and i'll say this, there are realists. there are realists. there was, for example, frank thought to stein my or who is now the german president not sang granma to, to symbolic position back in 2016. when there was a 30000 nato troops exercise marching from poland. at the same time, divisions were being sent to the baltic states right on the border with russia, nato divisions. he said, it's not the it that we should not be saved or saber rattling with russia. that anybody thinks that a tang parade on the border is a good idea, is out of their mind that we need to speak with russia and peter pol who is now the president elect of the czech republic, was a needle commander at the time. said that we're not developing a defense barrier against russian because there's no intelligent showing that

russia has any threat to ukraine. this was in 2016 russia gate was acting up. and at that time, there were these realist views that russia is not a threat to the west and this entire exercise that people forgot about. now, 30000 troops. no russia hasn't forgotten about that. so these people, these kinds of realist thinking and i have to put my crown and shelton that candle though they are extremely weak specially shells. they have to win this battle. they have to argue their case behind closed doors and we now it's lead to the wall street journal that they've told zelinski he can't when they got a settle. so they started to read this now and when we hear this coming out of realists in the us, if there are any. and i seem to be somebody from the pentagon that get biden's here and tell them you cannot do this any further that we got to find a face saving way out of this. because we bit off way too much here and were threatening to sculpture of civilization. so i'm have to hope that the realistic and in europe as well, can win out over these fanatics really. and there are too many of them. so i'm not

very optimistic in that respect in that respect, because jeremy on everything that joe says is absolutely right. but i mean, the, the tendency, this is ideologically driven. i keep saying, you know, what about peace and security. these people don't talk in those terms. it's a different idiom for them. jeremy, the, the, the argument that i keep hearing from these people in washington in london is that now we have to focus our energy on china and not russia. so it's the same mindset, okay? unfortunately, because of the way they're doing things are getting there because they're confronting both at the same time. so as i started out, you know, great powers usually avoid a going toe to toe with great powers. now the u. s. is going toe to toe with 2 great powers jeremy. well yeah, i get to the same before just completely self destructive behavior. chris hedges gave a very, very powerful speech at the rage against a war machine rally. and he just talked about this world of illusions that is neil

cons live in the intellectual dishonesty, the willingness to see things realistically at all. and yeah, i think they live in a kind of bubble. they're not in tune with regular people, certainly not in russia, that region of the world. and so it's a very dangerous situation when you have this breed of, as you put a kind of fanatics. and we've already seen this havoc, they've wreaked in the middle east. they're attempt to overthrow government after government. so i mean that the american government really has been hijacked by these extremists and it's a threat to humanity at this point. and yeah, it's unbelievable to be provoking, china and russia at the same time, at a time when the u. s. economy is weakening and when china and the on these countries are becoming more stronger, you know, a pike. he give us the economics of it here. i mean, you've been on the program anytime since the started the military operation in

ukraine, and i've never really been able to comprehend why europe is willing to go down this path. you know, we have behind closed doors. you know, you have show, you have mac chrome, you know you tough. you have to make tough choices. i think that's what they said, does lensky here? but what about the tough choices for themself? go ahead pi. i mean, all of this, you can, we can use all the labels until the cows come home neo con, neo liberal, a, you know, mandarins, whatever it begs the question over, who runs things genuinely and how they run things. all of this misdirection. all of this a false flagging is a testament to the sense that those, that run things preferred. it obviously stay behind the scenes, you know, draw a multi billionaires to act in their stead. very, very old money drawing back centuries and working on a new world order that's been centuries in the making and yet is very highly over. leverage to the tune of hundreds of trillions of dollars. and here they are having

the playbook being flipped on them by the building your asian alliance. that is tying its monetary system to hard asset commodity. it a gold, physical, gold and silver and other precious metals, minerals, obviously, oil and natural gas. when you do that, you're basically calling the bluff. and not just since, you know, nixon took us off the gold standard 52 years ago or even bretton woods. but really begging the question of what the meaning of, of a new, more air or money should be. and none of this can be obviously put out in the open because it would quote unquote, effect confidence within markets, indices, everything. and hence, you just have to keep as, as the west and as those that are tasked with diplomacy or lack thereof. you know that the crazy man this, this nick sonya concept of just, you know, act like you're completely nuts in order to have the other side, the capitulate or

a, you know, to mirror. and you know, that the playbook is completely open to a russian, china, in every way imaginable, and they keep calling bluffs. and so it comes down to what are you going to do? i me, it, yes, you're gonna need to sacrifice all of europe for sickly. in order to salvage, you know, you're already over leverage economic system, which there's no end in sight over how you're going to continue to destroy the earth and decimate the, the meaning of heart asset money. in order to, you know, have very, very powerful nuclear armed and tightly allied, your asian countries that have, as your other guests mentioned, the loyalty of the rest of the world. practically, at this point, i capitulate and it's not going to happen. it's not going to happen. it would show the, you know, i know we've had a number of times where would i call peak zalinski, you know, in people wearing pins on their own pals and flags and all of that. but don't the,

the, don't the people that claim to be backing ukraine or have sympathy for don't they understand that the policies that the west is promoted is actually destroying ukraine? i mean, what is going to be left of ukraine when this is all said and done? i'm not very optimistic, there'll be much left joe. well, if they are trying to figure out and understand what's really happening here, they're going to stop with this blind loyalty towards the u. s. and european message about this all being an unprovoked invasion, and they've got to start to understand some of the context for how this happened. otherwise you won't be able to get out of it except with statesmanship. and this is, yeah, i agree with you peter. it's hard to be optimistic at all, but if you look back, eisenhower stopped. curtis le may want to drop 300 atomic bombs and hydrogen bombs and rush on the soviet union. and then there was the missile crisis, and kennedy worked it out by removing his. michelle's from turkey, and he didn't know he'd been kept. but joe, that, but that's why i'm in the back. that's why you mentioned the post war period,

because biden is an anomaly. you know, all you're, you're right the, these past presidents, you know, and maybe it's because of ego in legacy. but, you know, taking a line from dr. strange love. i don't want to be the greatest mass murderer since adolf hitler. okay. every single president had that mantra except for buying. jo i, he's a warmongers, he's been that way. i'm in the iraq war. is his war as much as anyone else is a 2003 invasion. he saw 1997 as the head of the senate for religious committee. he said, if we expand nato, it's going to create a hostile reaction from russia and he should be okay with that. now he's got, it launched our reaction and he happens to be sitting in the white house. the guy is not all there, many of his face it, that's another thing we have to factor in year. it's extremely dangerous to have a man in his mental condition in this situation right now. so again, i'm not that optimistic. i'm saying that the realists have to grant control here and stop this. and i don't know a new credit as far as your question is going to be destroyed every day is getting destroyed more and more than using your cranes. and as your guests earlier said,

why are the ukranian people waking up? realize what ponds they being used as they don't, because for them to local issue, they don't like russia. they think russia is just attacking them and they don't understand that you a political game going on here a lot of ukrainians. i think so. yes, there are countries being destroy on the altar of american incredible ambition and an ag money. and i think this got to be this turning point where they scored the stops. but how did they climb down from this? this is really where the question lies. you know, joe had of state as a chart. no head of state is in charge of anything. transatlantic lee not even those that they've deployed like newland or otherwise we really need to get to the bottom of who is actually calling the shots. that's that start with square one. yeah, but i mean i, i'll say to all 3 of you and then go to, to jeremy. i think we're in the most dangerous point in this conflict right now because everything the west is done is back fired or failed. it doesn't have the world behind them. jeremy, i'm really worried about a false flag about chemical biological nucular. false lag an event. that's what i

most worried about. 40 seconds before we go. go ahead, jeremy. well yeah, well i think we've seen plenty of false flies already during this conflict and we've seen your false atrocity fabrication like in boca, ah, so i think that's going to continue. and, yeah, i mean, there's a presser, with the saw, the chemical weapon attack. we could very easily see something like that as a pretext for further escalation. and i think as far as who's writing this, we have to look at the military industrial complex. and these, you know, company that have made huge profits. office like raytheon, you know, they basically control the pentagon with lloyd austin. ah, so i think, you know, he's politicians are mere figureheads and yet by his shifted throughout his career he was, you know, he was involved. busy in some of the arms agreements, i believe when he was in the back in the eighty's and he had a more diverse wow, you know, we don't, don't forget, jo biden's involved in the destruction of our, the former yugoslavia. he was like, played a key role on that without the i gentlemen,

i gotta jump in. here we go. we've run out of time. fascinating. this discussion, i want to thank my guest and tulsa, los angeles and, and said me, and i want to thank my viewers for watching us here at ortiz. see you next time? remember, possibles? ah ah, during the 2nd well, when nazi occupied, poland, virginia was a farming region today is part of ukraine. between 19431945 members of the ukrainian insurgent army, led by stepan bandera. nasa could thousands of poles in virginia in a diabolical ethnic cleansing process. the mergers were particularly horrific and brutal villages were burned and property looted the bellini. a massacre is without doubt, one of the bloodiest episodes in polish ukrainian history. my al ukrainian politician,

the still reluctant to talk about these events, how to modern day ukraine and poland view this tragedy of the past. and why does the memory of belinda still divide people away? well, never be a victory for russia. wait, we shall see what you're still waiting my to do a new modem, but you look at a meal. crane war is a proxy war. this is a war between russia and the united states. milan are made, it comes to nurse, she kept them in carbon dioxide. america for she was, are in europe, not in europe. engage in conflict with russian forges. the american forces are hearing the friend nato allies. what happens if nato escalades even more than the special military operations become a war when you put them up? so that was a demo or another 1000 is my store. i see it,

i see your to us. thank you. costliest. i mean, live, so i, you sleep, you sure you can you stuff to with almost them once you in only this, don't furnish them or in your sewage. never speak of the girl who's with the following sanctions imposed on russia in the you and elsewhere in the world. electricity and gas prices have risen sharply. protests are taking place all over year. no upper spend a day has been base on sheep annuity coming from russia. russian guest jeep and she bowed. affordable and shipped. you are in a stable which has been proved,

not the case. and the access to the big china market. did you? well, that is no longer open topic, always been a long stopped set door, delicious. and on the one beach and with his crucial adult may adapt. little don't come in because he think o'clock my mom tom will be because she's house for lack of brush, but they'll do a prestige reporting will a with with.