policy, they were called ukraine projects, many in the truck or they seem to have no problem with this. the cross stuckey controlled and ukraine. i'm joined by my guest on laughlin in payers . he's a university lecturer in history and political philosophy in plymouth. we have patrick senningson. he is the editor and founder of 21st century, one 3rd and elizabeth. we cross alexander guerrero. he is an international legal analyst. the gentleman crossed up rules and effects. that means you can jump anytime you want and i always appreciate it. all right, let's start out with john. no, dan, over the last few days there's been a lot of inside baseball about, you know, what time is going to do with ukraine and we have these uh, of them wide variety wide spectrum of opinions coming from people that presumably will find find themselves in trumps. official orbits in january, but let me ask you, let me, let's ask some very broad,

simple questions and most people in the main stream don't even get to here to the united states and u. k. through nato. and their prox, or ukraine are sending missiles into the heart of russia. well, does rush, i have the right to retaliate against the u. k. in the united states. well, the question of right i think is the relevance to provide the question of whether israel has the right to exist when in special relations, what counts he's not right, but might, and who we are. russia has been might, and the right i would say go ahead. uh, well, yes. uh well i, i don't disagree. i'm not saying it doesn't have the right. i'm just saying that that is not a useful tool for analysis and stuff. sure. relations. because uh, rules are waged exactly when there is a disagreement about right. and ultimately is might that decides smoke? we're all here sitting in different parts of europe. your in moscow,

i'm in paris. the other company faces around the world. we don't know what's biden or whoever is running the united states is going to do. we call it know that no any, because we're not close and don't have access to the internal decision making. but also because the people themselves don't know. because in a whole situation, everything depends on the decisions of the opposite side. now all we can say, i think as commentators is we know the general line. so we know that the americans are programmed for violence and more violence. i, i think that's being clear enough for 20 authors. he is, they didn't really have any of the tools in their toolbox than that. russia, by contrast, does of course it has balance that is disposal, but it also has a a receipt which as far as i can tell, is very calculating and very rational and news of that. it mustn't push

things too far for police knows the risk. so pushing things too far. so yes, on the one hand, i think that's uh, biden, is playing a totally new listing game. it does what they seemed like at 1st a few days ago when, when he announced this thing. he noticed these missiles being sent into russia, they listed because the goal was simply to prevent from, from negotiating a piece. but that's another reading which the general, the retard general who's been at pointed to the ukraine portfolio outlined on fox news. he said, well, maybe this is a kind of employee, so that truck can then come back from that and have some kind of all the problems too. so we don't know, we do not know my, in my opinion, the question is if, if we, if we think as i do that, russia is winning on the bottom of the field. of course that could hold up a new kind of smoke. but leaving aside that scenario, my, i think the question is,

how far can rock should go in terms of its victory without inflicting a humiliating defeat on the incoming administration in the united states. for that, i really wonder if it's been in good faith as to faith to emma and, and this is something that i've talked about with you and others on this program ever since they started the special military operation. the west i'm going to and directed to patrick, the west deals and controlling narratives. ok, but negative. so in reality we, they're very rarely the same because you want a narrative. big baby with gives the impression that you are being able to create a reality. well, this administration is bundled that up pretty badly. but patrick, you know, this whole discussion about, you know, trump in 24 hours end of the conflict. and i tend to think this conflict is gonna end on the battlefield. let him just go. she ation table. patrick yeah,

the and donald trump's pre sold this is he's going to get a great deal. he's going to keep, you know, he's got a man, a from the american people to wine this conflict out. he's going to come back with a great deal. the problem is, is in doubt looking at the so called, subject matter experts that the trump administration has selected. i doubt that they have really the knowledge and the appreciation for the actual situation as it's develop the last 3 years. and as it is now and beyond and, and donald trump, himself has a very probably scant understanding of the depth in the 8 ball that the united states and nato are actually behind. and that ukraine itself is behind this conflict. there is no good deal for the, for nato, or for the west or for the united states, or there's no victorious. what one advisors saying that if, if putting doesn't negotiate with trump, we're going to open the spigots for aids,

going to make everything we've given the lens you this far. it looked like peanuts . well, that's music to moscow. 0 is as far as i'm concerned, because this is death by a 1000 cuts for nato. and it means ukraine is going to be weaker. it's going to be a dysfunctional, rob state, and they might very well lose odessa in the process. and from a g, a strategic point of view, that's game over for nato southern front, as far as really, really, i'm just saying that i just wonder all of these, um, uh, uh, pseudo intellectuals, opining all the time. do they even understand the significance of odessa? i tend to doubt it here. look center. one of the things like the i've been saying from the very beginning is why would moscow negotiate with any of these people? we've already gone through mince one minutes to a stem bowl. i mean, again, you know, i don't want more to continue, but the only way for this war to come to an end is a, a determination on the battlefield because the west is de legitimized itself is

indigo shading partner. let at least that's my point of view, alexander. that's why russia basically needs to keep proceeding, which is good. so questions on the battlefield. just to talk only plus the only dates this regions where they are at present. the book also, which eve, more and more lance, which will be able to be locked, i wouldn't say negotiated that that wouldn't be seen in the future as arrived of russia to hold and to have peace on protection and security with this kind of buffer zone built into play, so you have to states want to keep spinning your band forces to us, for example, long range and size, or even like medium range missiles or gas there's. and so this means that the russia will have to decide that they need to continue more and more in the interior of the brain. and so maybe they reach tier because if what the rest of needs is, security and warranties. and presently russia has not meaning death and also rest

your has another fear, which is they have the ability to choose whether they want to have the initiative or not on the battlefield. what they have on the western side is only a dentist to react. and the more we try to be there against russia, by pushing them to the leaving it. this means that the rest of it will not be able to sit on the, on the, on the table and discuss any kind of preconditions because russia has, like people said before, not only right, but also lives. and even this will be the last name. so these last a ok, the weapons use on the battlefield. this has best of 2 worlds. this means that russia can use a kind of weapon that no one in the west has an equivalent, but also it can have a deterrent effect. but at the same time, it is the same role as your reference because it doesn't take have the side effects, it can be more additional, more localized to go through. so you 1st it has this one,

a quick guy. why would the rest of this side? it's from the beginning, the only plans that they have when this stuff is especially there for operation. i don't see any reason why they should do so. and you know, tell me what's really missed and all of this clap trap that we keep hearing is that this, in no way shape or form is actually helping ukraine mean. and this was always messed in these discussions. go, yeah, i, i agree with said the 2 previous speakers about. so what i'm trying to emphasize is that war is the continuation of politics by other means. in other words, you find people in order to obtain a piece, your advice will in order to obtain an outcome. and the i see for russia now. because as i say, we don't know want to, the united states is going to do. we know how the american foreign policy administrative stablish from it is structured. it's very one dimensional, it's will violence violence. the russian side is more nuanced. but to anyway,

that presents a bigger problem because how is russia even assuming, as alexander says, and i'm sure he's right, that they can be progress on the battlefields, maybe even to care for whatever. my question is, my, my, my, my, the thing is the question i putting to myself is how can such a military victories if indeed they a cause per leads to a political settlement? that is the problem. of course, they can lead to a political sacrament in ukraine. they can be receiving change in ukraine. that can be so lensky can flee and go off to wherever he's got his video or whatever that could happen. that's one scenario, probably the only realistic scenario actually. but us, we will know this is nothing more with ukraine, is what with nato to hell can right to achieve victory on the ground. by me, look,

she means and then have a political agreement with night. so when both sides, russia and nato of puts the issue of defeat to a victory on the next essential level. because russia says it's a alexis central president. of course, nato says that is an exercise for john. thank yeah. hi dan. let me throw this the patrick on, i think for rush, it is because it's fighting the collective west. okay. and the western countries are supplying material and intelligence and personnel to chat the russian russian, the sovereignty, and the rest is not catching the you k. and so attacking the united states, maybe it. so maybe that's a different conversation, but it is not ex, essential for nato. it's reputation only. it's maybe that's a central but not from a security point of view. apple that's, that's false, patrick. yeah, it's, it's, uh, the problem is the data, something's got to break the balancing act of narratives that john just laid out so eloquently. there, something's got to break in this, the united states isn't going to dismiss position. and it's,

it's the approach to this europe. however, i think will be the breaking point politically in any way and what's happening. i just got back from central europe and hungry. having spoken to people in the ministry defense and so forth. they're very clear that they want to cease fire and they've wanted the cease fire for awhile. so slovakia hungry central, you have to close your to the front line. the more sanity you hear the further away from the front line, the more crazy the talk. so how is this going to play out politically? it's europe. this isn't sustainable for europe, for europe in nato members, if they ended it today. this, the donald trump in the united states could talk a wind for nato. they've militarize the entirety of the new line of contact between east and west. trump can say you got to pay your fair share, spend your 2 percent 10. the guy that happened, jump in here, drug have to go to a hard break, and after that hard, great, we'll continue our discussion. i'm trumping you brain, stay with our to the

what is by all means. so is only because part of human duty and crisis of all types like we're talking about, well, most of 26000000 a beat for flaws interiors needs. and you know, i'm talking about 12000000 displays. we are talking about 9 really and children outside of the schools. my students, uh, both combined municipal executives, if you will have said uh, still be good in the way of seeing katy and crisis news of the welcome at the cross stuff where

all things are considered. i'm here a little strange. we're talking about trump and ukraine. the okay, let's start out with alexander. i have the solution. ok, everybody, everybody in write it down but are not a posted in put it in your wallet because peter lavelle has the solution. if i'm being serious, actually, we need a helsinki 2 point. oh. well, we need to do is we need a european security architecture. they've been so reality. as of today we work out and then we work in what do i need? all the players, we solve security issues, the indivisibility of security. west is forgotten that term, it's not part of their for lexicon anymore, and that will solve the ukraine prices. the ukraine dilemma, as we work in words,

we don't start there, we start here, then we go there. alexander, am i right? yeah, beautiful. i mean, cousin case have been trying motion for that. the inspection is not an original idea on my part. sorry. yes, yes. yes. we all know that that's the risk of try over and over. but the west all is rejected it. why? because they thought they, they didn't have a domain, the control over all kinds of new political decisions more why? so until we have this in the west, i think it to be fairly unlikely to watch such a scenario to be enforced and not going on the battlefield. but well, why? i mean, presently, what we have is the wes listing itself in a position where you have only an alternative capitalization. meaning that you have to go for the military solution. and once you get the edge, only after that, they'll finally be able to recognize that there is no other alternative,

rather than accept that the other side, the superior. instead of having a balance, which is what everyone desires and gets the best solution for everyone. i need to pull the ballast worldwide, which will be able to work with all different forces, present phone line, and we would use the united nations for that. i mean, and to allow the united nations was for created for this, for us. and what we are witnessing is one side, trying to get the other side, the job, and pre vile over it. and it says on trying to spread its own ideals to the other side. so this is a matter of survival. and we've seen by, well, can only be achieved through the capital ation of your phone. and so we'd be, if we wait as westerners including ourselves in disposition, then there's no interruption. but there the, the, the, the solution, the right solution. of course the that's one, that's why i say we need a european solution security solution for every and then i,

when i say about when i speak of, of european i look nursing, what usually in the academies me see, wait national level as we blue are which is your opinion yet, because usually i hear who saw on the line and then other, other sherry poll bodies from the unit, speaking them up to your as east european union is itself bureau and then you have the rest of the law, but we have central, we have eastern your we have all the balkans. we have rush, you will have georgia, we have the doctors to the region. they are, all of them are included in your and you should or not only with them, but also with many other players that can help as a key security stability in dallas long life. we have many other players, no business turning into the ideal. i my deal is podcast here, so john, please for lots of cold water go ahead. guest of that's what i would like to do. i'm sorry to say that i thing that's, that's

a completely unrealistic scenario. much like you, i may wish states in another universe in a parallel universe in the matrix beyond the matrix. the fact that you, you said just now you started and you finished, you said, oh, sorry, alexander, did you know the roster has been one thing that since, since since you didn't finish your sentence. alexander russia as being one thing that since at least $1899.00 since at least nicholas the 2nd, when uh, nicholas the 2nd convenient, the 1st take a peace conference by which was convenient under the initiative of the russian and pro, then rushed to try it again in 1938 in the road to munich, and to munich agreement was stopped at largely because the western power has refused a collective security agreement. then obviously as being as, as pizza said to this, being helsinki and 197172. that's the i see in 1990 all these attempts have failed. and therefore i would say that the best outcome that we can hope for. and i

say this with a heavy heart is and you called well i think that's what we will have the cold, who gave us a balance and he was a piece. the cohort was a piece. it was yes. so, so simple, but it was until and much as i would once again, i wish there was another outcome. but i called to see when i come to see one. and i'm afraid, i think that the breakdown has been so severe and so radical to break down your relations that i absolutely cannot see any way in which they could be a collective security agreement for a generation. well, that may be, john, you know? meanwhile, one else, i mean, i like the separation, i let the west coast, so what they mean, it's everywhere they would be, you know, their troubles are now wanting around the world, okay. they need to, they need to resolve their own problem just before the export. it to everybody else, you know, but saint patrick b um um we as well um professor amir sam or he,

he came up again to motor paper a little over a year ago called an ugly victory. and the russian will probably achieve because it will be on the battlefield. i have a coal or larry too much along the lines with jump jobs that have a victory, miserable piece. but that's probably what the best we can help for patrick. or, i mean the car and scrub crisis right now, especially what's happened over the last week is very instructive. if you look at the whole basis of nato. so what vladimir putin said after the attack comes, were launched into russian territory. you have the, the argument from the west is how they sold is were allowing zelinski to use us weapons. that's the argument that the west is selling. what put and then what russia saying is, well, well, he's doing an article 5 and reverse. they like to tell this trope and attack on one is back on all the improvements challenge, the western saying, well attacked by one. in this case,

the us or britain of france. we regard as an attack by all. so that, that's a real crisis from nato, because think about it. if pressure was to respond to striking nato military facility in poland for instance, or another country, they've taken enough hits on the chin with regards to a missile strikes in, in russia, russian territory. how is europe going to regard that action by russia? are they going to look at as a response or an unprovoked attack on nato? no, i think europe will make the political calculation that this is getting out of hand . and they also, many in europe will throw their hands up at that point, the conversation is changing rapidly around, you know, like i was below so, but they have to make that calculation. peter is what i'm saying in the political realm, this all matters. and it becomes a military strategy at the top of your lots of good good that the logic is impeccable. but you know, uh, you know, i always tried copious notes for these programs. and here's one line,

year of western leaders, a group of imbeciles. i mean, how can a group of imbeciles make rational decisions? mean these people are not serious. john, i'm sorry, let me go to, you know, i didn't know serious about patrick is right. uh, patrick is right. and we use the on the other hand, patrick, you said it's a military decision, it's a political decision. that's what i was referring to earlier. yes, they are in the sales box and they also put units and we've seen with this with shots, shots is now the fighting of deluxe. and on the issue of peace, that small, nothing. you know, that's quite bank. if the biggest country in western europe is fighting a data election between paysimple between the s p d and the c d u, that's no nothing. my call is that was in domestic terms, but he tried stone to forget in 2022, not very effectively. so,

i mean, of course, i don't even want to contemplate this scenario, patrick the you to just outlined. although it's obviously on the table, what will be the response for europe? god knows, i mean, i mean the under what it will be to release to double download riley against russia because york is present. i bought spots, but we don't know. you know me though and sandra, what, what year are we talking about here? i mean, as far as i can tell, there's never been an election in the european union about this conflict. okay. again, it's in a leak, elite agenda. okay. well why is schultz in this in this dilemma? because these more of this war is not popular. it's very detrimental to me, i would even say, well, certainly for the existence of nato, which could go in passing into the night and i would, i would be very happy. but you know, and giving you the respect of how much you love or hate to european union is there

and it's suffering as a result of this, of this war. but its political leads are not in lock step with the people. go ahead, alexander, that's a desktop and it scares me the most is to see a witness that they are opinion. you know, we don't have any kind of for elections. we just vote for the environment and that's it. and from there what's laterally and what's allow me for i've gotten good stuff, fontes, loc moments, flowers as you know, they can only vote for the, there would be information and that's pretty much the powers that they're being falling on test. so it started off in a down in full, everyone in european union, the citizens to demonstrate that they have any power over anything. but in reality, they have absolutely none of because suddenly out of the blue, you can choose a new and your information. either you can choose a comes commissioners from every member states and you're not even going to check x . for example, the interests they pass, they're just going through the volt and they're going to be best. for example,

when i see the accounts linked with the information. after everything that she has been saying, i don't think she is the right person to push for the research solution that it's under uninstalled to, sorry, uh, the european union doesn't decide military policy in spite of its claim off. that's right, but we need to concentrate on this the national policy of breaking products in german at the end of costs of the united states. that's what matches. that's why that's why i've been busy and didn't realize when you check them up united states, you can find also the same when we speak about vitamins policies. well by then suppose these, they are not, it's cheese on policies. they are surely developed. we a lot of actors that we, most of them, we don't know who they are, and by then he's only the barrow to bring the mask, choose the news to read the message. hey, let me, let me get down the last minute. we'll try to be any different. and would you be any different, john? as well, of course i think he will be different. i mean, i say it's cool,

so i think yes, i think he will be different. i mean, in spite of everything, in spite of the must have reservations, i have about his appointments. he is and also says he wants to be bag. he wants to pull off a great show he wants to put on the legacy. and you know, that would be lots of big promises, putting an end to the welfare state. and so him, he loves the deal. uh so um and as i think i mentioned earlier, the general who is appointed for relations with, with ukraine, claims that the escalation by biking is a way of giving him some room for admin role. kelly his and well known to fox news viewers. other than that, we'll have to see gentlemen, that's all the time. i want to thank my guest in paris fremont than in lisbon. and of course, i want to thank our viewers for watching us here at our pc next time. remember, prospect rules the,

the russian states never as tight as on one of the most on screen and the best. i can. i'll send, send up the send the 65 with the keys 195 and speed. what else calls question about this? even though we will then in the european union, the kremlin media mission, the state on the rush to day and split the r t. suppose next, even our video agency, roughly all the band on youtube, the fitness center. for the question, did you say steven twist, which is the

big one? welcome to you. welcome to south africa. my name is tim carolina. coming to you from the city of gold in johannesburg. i'm not alone. i'm joined by the leader of the economic freedom fighters. they call him the commander in chief. see, i see mister mother in law. thank you so much for your time and thank you for joining us on our tea. you're quite a busy man to get hold of. thank you for everything as yeah, we've been trying to put this together for quite some time now, but i maybe we could find that in some way. you said we put 10 and put 10 as us. what did you mean about that sentiment? well, anyone that is being pursued by didn't put at least forces eastern alliance of the progressive forces in the whole entire went. and what putting these fighting for

really is justifiable. you can not to have america. and a european union wanting to will expand each territory to a point where it is not allowed to believe on pretend snake and damn. and we say in exchange for 2 months, keep them or hoses. he's not going to do that. he's going to have to defend his integrity. he's going to defend himself at at and t, and we've seen him doing it a better way and is taking long's tidings. and we understand that in to get along with the world that the internet's not going to play us would have come in and try to diffuse the attention and stuff they will a but it seems like they're not interested. your claim is this is such a small account to, to can even try to put up a fight a case, the price you,

unless he is doing so with this up board or something. but it does include thing that natural forces in america. and we know today that did i just the case? so eh, that's what we said when you are not going to infringe or not i that people territories. and i kind of attend that sort of nancy in depth cheese. they kind of development and expect them to come forward and not what they see on that meta. i'm sure you've seen the recent developments with the united states of america has allowed ukraine to strike deep into rushes territory by supplying and approving the use of long range weapons. now, if you were the president of russia, mr. vladimir, put in, what would you do in this kind of situation is to defend a advice you. there's no, any other way to do it. and then like i said, you cleaned as good know capacity.