to hello and welcome to cross stock. were all things are considered on peter lavelle. nato says the line should not be considering a peace plan for ukraine, but instead, be focused on sending more weapons to cube again, the alliance demonstrates it can never entertain plans for peace and stability as well as security for all in the meantime, the slaughter continues the crossing nato, i'm joined by my guess, scott ritter in del mar is a former intelligence officer and united nations weapons inspector. in salt lake city. we have david pine. he is deputy director of national operations for the task force on national and homeland security. and in san francisco, we crossed to jack ross moves. he is an associate professor of economics at st. mary's college as well as the author of the scourge of neo liberalism. alright, gentlemen, cross stock rules and effect,

that means you can jump any time you want. and i always appreciate it. let's go to 1st. the scotts scotts in washington dc. scott, you're usually in delmar, but you're in washington. why to washington? because the, today we are closer to a nuclear or between united states and russia at any time in the nuclear, this is a far more dangerous situation than the cuban missile crisis. and if something isn't done to alter the trajectory that the united states is currently on with russia, there is a, not just possibility, but probably of a, of a nuclear war. so on saturday, i will be moderating it a uh, an event of the national press club of we're gonna have 3 panels of distinguish speakers talking about the danger of nuclear war and talking about what can be done to, to get congress to, to take action to put pressure on the buying the ministration between now and january, 28th, and also what can be done to get the trump transition team to speak out

forcefully against this policy. specifically, the use by ukraine of american provided american targeted attack of dismissals. the united states is a party to this conflict. we are actively attacking rush as we speak. i'll say it one more time. so your audience is very clear on this. the united states is attacking russia. this is an act of war. and if we continue to do this, russia has every right to respond in kind which could lead to direct conflict between united states and russia, which will inevitably become a nuclear. ringback so we're trying to stop this, this is what i've tried to do this coming saturday. well, i commend you and i hope it gets as much coverage as possible. i will do my best, obviously, david in, in salt lake city, on the back of what scott just said, which is very important. is it in the, in the media? is it, we get it? we're getting dribs and drabs right now of what of the a,

by the outgoing by the administration is leaving the incoming trump administration . we know the cast of characters we have. we've had a general keith kelly. we of the vans rick right now. um. okay, fine. but the thing is, i'm reading particularly like from bloomberg, a quote, ukraine seeks a sustainable piece. well, it's what she expects, the same stressing that temporary resolutions would not serve us. so ukrainian interest, this is a theme that we keep going over and over and over to russia, has interest to rush is involved in this here. but we constantly see plans being made really with the exclusion of russia. it's, that's not going to work. go ahead and salt lake city. you know, you're absolutely right here. um, when uh, you know, it's difficult when a power is, is in our countries when he, in a war there, in the once we get this the term. so in this case, russia has been when even more of the last 2 or 3 years,

i think this uh no longer debatable. and you know, as a result, you prayed in the us have to accept a piece, disagreement, terms that are minimally acceptable to the russian federation. and so that, that's really the key that's been missing all this talked about nato membership being pushed back. that's completely unacceptable to russia. the idea that we could, that we would send data peacekeepers to patrol a dmc that i mean that is that on arrival, there's no way that the present people would accept that. so you know, the key, the key to you praise security is, is not being align with west because we prefer not capable providing for the security of ukraine is as lost uh, 30 percent of its population since 2014 mostly refugees and its economy as it has been destroyed. it's pretty political structure, has been destroyed. it's notorious, been wiped out with a 1000000 casualties, which 400000 are data. and the only way you can have security is through

a friendly relations with russian federation. well, as it did from 1991 to 2014. yes. but see yeah, it's got a jack in san francisco. that's why i have long argued the day this started ukraine last because the european pan, your opinion, security order had been destroyed, did bits and patters right now. and that is because of nato, that is because of nato expansion. we need a complete re think when, when ukraine security is considered, it cannot be separated from russia's, and this is what the west, particularly nato does not want to deal with. go ahead in san francisco. i don't think uh, nato wants peace. they may, i agree with you. absolutely. i agree with you. sorry. go ahead. the items are good pieces on the agenda here. they're looking for some formula to begin negotiations without any kind of intent to several anything. and what we've got going on in the american ministration. now there's been some tense,

internal battle as to who is going to represent the trump administration in the truck, uh, a self licking ice cream cone. and then this is, it's all her medically close there. and plus, there is no communication with the russian federation at all. i mean, how can use that even think about negotiations? let's go back to the premises. the you discussed with your other guess of united states data or not looking for a piece. the current policy of the united states is to see the strategic defeat of russia using the ukrainian proxy conflict is the principal tool of the stabilisation. that is the official policy as united states and nato. so everything that's being done right now is not designed to be in opposition to the policy, but you recognize the difficulties of the current situation and try to mitigate that gets to feed by creating contain. but what we're looking at right now with all

these thoughts about these is not about normalize relations. creating good relations is about containing russia about trying to limit the scope and scale of the russian victory to keep it temporary in nature until some future day when the russian gauge is not reverse the ukrainians are straight up honest about this. so the trump administration has to understand that any success with russia, because i agree with your, your, your, your guess this is a non starter. i can't speak on behalf of the russian government. indeed, just simply, a period of the show was get a very budget irritate the, the i would just prevent prohibited me from speaking to you to our team, to anybody in the russian government. but i don't to speak 6, the strategic defeat of russia. russia will never sit down at the table with us. why sit down and talk to an enemy who's trying to defeat you? what you need to do, therefore, it is defeat the enemy, which is what russian is doing on the battlefield. and you great. yeah, david,

the way the it's being reported that, you know, mean what's coming out of the, by the administration, which of course is trying to make the situation as worse as possible. that is a new and remarkable achievement of this outgoing failed administration. but essentially what they're doing is they're saying what's have min minutes 3. i mean it's, you know, almost no one knows that because the, the, or outside of a few programs like this and a judge nap where scott appears quite often. people do know that history means one to but we're not going to do number 3, that's not an on the cards. go ahead day as well. main street was the symbol agreement. you know, russia committed their internal air and ask for it for a pre working training and territory of their enough work structure likely would have been next the, the drop off people through complex. but that still would have left 93 percent of the grades in or nationally recognize territory for any control. so they had a tremendous opportunity to have a win win piece agreement back in march 2012, 22. and the final step restaurants of the retail or so i don't think divided

restoration is interested in these they're, they're trying to rash up the world, present the, you know, truck with the, with a hard to sabotage. is there a sincere attempt? and the more i think trunk will be successful in uh, you know, 14 a ceasefire that ends in the warren ukraine. i'm a little bit more skeptical that he'll be willing to immediately entertain piece terms that are, you know, a long term piece terms that are acceptable to russia. yeah. by disappointment, in general, can walk through the problem or the but the problem with that is i'll go and go back to jack in san francisco. is it a ceasefire? isn't the solution here that doesn't solve the security problems that the, the european cotton and faces right? now a ceasefire, a truce, it's not going to work for the reasons that scott, just a numerated. go ahead jack before we go to the break. yeah, i don't think they even minuses fire. i, i think they want another formula for continually in a conflict. maybe at a, at

a lower intensity here. the us, uh, you know, the neo cons don't leave. they have to be, they have to be driven out that there's no solution to this through a negotiation in a compromise and ok, it's all over. let's go home. no, they'll stay and they'll find some way and that's what they're searching for. right now, they're searching for some new a new arrangement where the, the war can be continued under the. yeah. but that, that wouldn't mean what's going right back to the beginning of the program. wisconsin, that would mean escalation. well gentlemen, we don't have much further to go before you're at the ultimate escalation, jack. i mean, 10 seconds before we go to the break deck. yeah, well, uh, i don't think they want the further escalation unless they can. uh, you know, more uh russia into using tactical moods. i think that's what the price i,

i think they have, they've taken care of that. what weapon care category. and we'll get to talk about that in the next part of the program. gentlemen, i'm going to jump in here, we're going to go to a short break, and after that short break, we'll continue our discussion on nato and ukraine staying with our team. the in 1943 at the height of world war 2. bengal was hit by famine a year before jeff and his groups drove the rate is out of neighboring vermont and came close to the indian possessions of the british empire. london's response to the threat was completely inadequate. the british actively used the scorched earth policy while retreating, they turned everything around them into an uncouth deserts, having no mercy on other people's territory. food in large amounts was exported to

great britain from the starving provinces. boats used for fishing and transporting food along the river system more confiscated from the local population, the barbaric actions of the colonial administration. let the monster its consequences. can a year, up to 3800000 people die from starvation and disease caused by mail nutrition. though great britain itself had enough resources to overcome the disaster. at the same time, 170000 tons of australian wheat made its way back starving in the debris. it is aisles. i hate indians. they are a beastly people with a beastly religion. the payment was their own fault for breeding like rabbits, british prime minister, winston churchill commented on the report just of the tragedy. the famine of 1943 became the climax in the british policy of genocide against the indian population. according to historians,

from 12 to 29000000 people overall died from starvation alone during the reign of the british in india. the welcome at the cross stock were all things are considered. i'm peter le belcher mind. you were discussing nato n. you create the, let's go back to scott in washington, you know, for all the talk of, of negotiations. i'm getting a team together and the point person on all that. scott, at the end of the day, this is going to be dealt with on the battlefields is that's the only because of the, the type of people that are being um, involved in this here. i mean, what that mean, kelly is what i mean. he and he's been doing this for like 70 years or something. i mean, people don't change. okay. and that's why it's going to be settled on the battlefield

. scott, you know, i, i believe that again, i don't pretend to have any insight into russian government thinking i don't speak on behalf of the russian government. that's the little aside for the f b i who's watching this that's just my assessment. after years of studying the russian government, this russian government, they haven't done what they've done here. they didn't initiate what they called military technical means back in february of 2022. just to throw it all away. people need to understand that russia has committed to a course of action that will only hit this is an extra stipulation for russia. that's a critical words, words matter when you're dealing with russians and russian policy. this is an x, the central issue in russia is committed the national survival of russia to this conflict. and they are not going to deal. they are not going to draw it away. anything less that achieving the outcomes that they have articulated,

which is no nato membership, the militarization of ukraine di notification to be trained anything less than that is a strategic defeat for russia. therefore, unacceptable to russia, in the less needs to understand that in pushing russia to this good, remember this conflict didn't begin in february 22. this conflict began well prior to 2014, but it, it took a detroit form in 2014, and russia has been seeking to avoid this conflict that entire time. what do you think permits one was? what do you think the bench to was? what do you think the rushing the effort to of to ensure us to get to main street in this, of all over the effort to avoid this very situation. but the west refused to cooperate. the west refused to negotiate in russia now is fully committed, fully committed to achieving the outcome. it says must take place for russia to survive. this is an extra central struggle. that's why i think any talk of

negotiate should freeze cease fire is a non starter because it would be russia basically say we lost it versus not losing their winning on every phase of this conflict, militarily, economically, politically, well, either gave a tenderly saying that again, so many people in the west of failed to understand because they're not told, is that this is an ex, essential threat for russia. but for nato, this is a choice. this is a craving choice rush. it does not threaten nato's security, but nato threatens russia security. david in salt lake city as well. i think russia definitely does the threatened native security today. we didn't do so before the war. that's, that was, it was created is made. so is attacking russian territory. that is a threat is russia attacking nato territory? no, it is, it is not the same thing. you can't, they,

you can't pair the to keep going and salt lake city. yeah, you're absolutely right. so nato is being the aggressor here. you know, it's been a fairly demonizes that as the dresser. this was not enough for vote progression. this was the most provoked more that i've ever seen in our history. and you know, cause want to pc said 15 years trying to negotiate a peaceful solution to the excess that fell through out of date on ukraine in every day since every day since the day after the war. russia has a peace terms that were mostly reasonable and would create the situation for just the last new piece. you know, the real solution is, is on. it's on the negotiating table. you know, we need to, us need to negotiate, uh, kind of a new and talk with, with russian artist the dates on it and taught where the us and russia, because strategic partners to support the peace and stability throughout the world . but especially in europe, and we can do that by reading to uh, you know,

getting the war on terms. so russia, pulling back all us troops, 20000 us troops and eastern europe, withdrawing all of our nuclear weapons from, from europe, wisdom reciprocal, reciprocal concessions on the russian side. and then restoring full diplomatic and traits last week we should have a free trade treaty with, with russia. we should have a, you know, totally engagement. we should, we should give them a sphere of influence. and you know, all the former soviet republics, except for the baltic states and immature uh, they can give us your thoughts, it in, in western uh, the western hemisphere. but uh, i think uh, the advantages of hope you're is the community is a champion apiece. uh president trump is a chair going to be is these pick some, some neo cons? some very good want to america 1st in service, but also some new cons that don't want peace. and i think he's going to get very frustrated with those new context. and he's going to twist their arms and make them agreed, you know, accepts terms that are acceptable to, to moscow. yeah. well,

i had a jack in san francisco. i think they died from day one. uh the uh, the, the deep state or the bureaucratic state. the permanent state, they are going to turn ukraine into donald trump's biggest nightmare. and we already see it happening because jack with the ideas that david just a numerator on our, our good ideas, i couldn't disagree. cope with being peach for doing any of them. jack. yeah, well you know, uh, this is not just the conflict in ukraine. uh, i wrote an article in january 22 before the hot war began entitled 10 reasons why the us, they want russia to invade ukraine. there's a lot to be game for the empire by initiating, continuing this war. you know, before the war uh us was losing, as well as with the nato. well, now they've totally, you know, captured, recaptured nato again. and one of the main objectives of the war. i think was to

draw russia out of western europe economically. and the us to, uh, you know, penetrate into europe and take over the energy we in some of the other industries. well, the u. s. a. empire has been totally successful in mount objective. there's other objectives as well involved with is. busy not just defeating russia on the ground, and that's one reason why i think they're going to continue this conflict in some shape or other even under trump. well, i mean it, it, yeah, i think this is going to be with us all for a very long time. it's interesting, jack, what you said, i mean the united states is very kind to its allies, isn't it? i mean, they destroy its energy infrastructure. it wrap it in place and sag nation, and this is all because you're a member of nato. it's really remarkable. scott: i'll bet you i'm not a really a betting man, but whatever outcome there is, it's good to go back to the diplomatic notes that russia sent to the united states

and to nato uh, in december before the february of 2022. because that's the roadmap. and they're going to refer back to it. i bet you anything they're going to do that, scott. and i think you're a 100 percent correct. of the, you know, at the time russian submitted these draft treaties to nato, into the united states. so they were marked in the western circles is unrealistic of what is russia think they're doing? because the perception was the rush was operate from a position of weakness today. i don't think anybody's thinks that russia's operating from a position of weight this had these draft documents suddenly become an extraordinarily well thought out pieces of diplomacy that could create a european security framework that couldn't gender the kind of stability that was spoken of that has a western sphere of influence, a russians fear of life, influence and not a of, in the 2 sides, not being

a conflict. but here's the problem. nato does the rush is a threat in russia. it is a threat that because russia threatened the state of but because nato has defined its very existence as being predicated on a need to confront russia existentially. therefore, the failure to defeat russia has led to a situation where data is in danger of collapsing. you know, you speak of the united states coming in and disrupting of the european economies and take it over. good. congratulations, america you did. did the united states predict the rise of a alternative for doing sled in the fact that if it lands and it's heavy, not a trajectory of victory? jeremy withdrawal from the you, which means jeremy with drugs have data, that's not what the united states wanted. did they predict the parliamentary outcome in france now that protest tried to avoid, but he kept his government, the government's collapsing now of pro peace,

the sympathetic russian parliament might come in the united states and predict that europe is evolving, collapsing, redefining itself. and so that's the only reason why these russian draft it is, may not be viable anymore, because they were drafted with a strong unified you're in mind, i don't think the europe exists anymore, and i don't think it's going to exist. so there's going to have to be of russia in the united states or to this out. i think europe is based on the 5 itself. i absolutely agree here. you know, it's interesting, scott, the, you know, they, they, they, they, you had all the variables, the sanctions and the oil embargo, all days. they had all of these things figured out except for, oh, democracy. they didn't take that into account and now it's coming at a blow black. i'm blowing back at them, david, you know, where is mac and all of this? i'm really quite bewildered. ok. the trump ran on this very openly. okay.

i don't think anybody to agree or i'll solve within 24 hours. okay. that that was campaign high per billy. but you know, where is maggie in this forum policy, i'm getting a little worried. go ahead and salt lake city as well. trip isn't it? is made a few really good goods, you know, it's all scabbard guys and some other folks like that that i think you're going to give them some good advice. and most notably, journeyman, i mean, judy vance is very vocal opponent of the war. and ukraine is, he was wanted to end it yesterday, and he's, he's going to be a visual and drugs here. i'm telling them to, you know, to be, to all kill lots ridiculous, you know, con proposals for, for ceasefire. peace with russia. so, you know, in my opinion, you should have sent judy bands to be that special ed boy to negotiate the, the rest of the parentheses, freeman. and by the way, this, this needs to be a us rush or a piece for you pray and does not need to be involved. us represents the praise

interest and zalinski is out a lot of the piece piece uh, negotiations with uh, the russian federation. so he is proven to be uh, you know, not a reliable part of a piece. a truck is, is, or israel. i am a part of for bees. uh, fine of course is a joke. uh, he spent 10 minutes in the last 3 years talking about new credit and basically is reading out our position or opposition to rushes invasion which is essentially kind of a pre emptive invasion to roll back on the, you know, went through all expansion and can you create and restore your brand to it's a peaceful but for state and federal law for state status a pre made onto. so i still hopeful, but the more i've heard about the kellogg plan, the more discouraged i am in terms of an immediate solution. well, as i experience, as i said in my and at the end of my introduction, the slaughter continues. gentlemen, i really appreciated very thoughtful program and that's all the time we have one. i

think my guess in washington, dc, salt lake city and in san francisco. and of course, i want to thank our viewers for watching us here are the see next time and remember prospect the, the insulating people into disgusted with what's going on with that. sending huge amounts of money into the lensky in terms of weapons to kill russians when actually, we're taking money away from people that have been one of the big things in the tell you that i know about domestically. is that doing, covering labor government have taken one and a half 1000000000 pounds away from the

the, of the many places in the world's way to seal on the divide between the 2 oceans and what he might not think it's what does this, hey, and what's his northern, our phone goes vision and the 2 knows that us national park. and today's we know the was a supplement from taking a deep side into some beach because of the strange civil hours the sound of the new orleans call roaming on the las vegas cyber truck. explosion according to local police, including both suspects involved being military service as we continue on the

back of events, this change the yeah. so by the time comes to an end off, he examines the legacy the us presidents nice behind on the stand off at the south korean president residents between investigators on these military dogs pools . these officials to cool attempts to arrest him ever failed martial. little bit the hello as good.