anything other than an unmitigated disaster? garland nixon. now reminder r t dot com has you covered for the days. big developments. plenty, there are besides the keep you informed, entertained on engage. check it out. when you come good by the the welcome across the bull horns, were all things considered on peter lavelle who would have thought greenwood would be close to the top of the drum foreign policy agenda? summer, calling it the new imperialism with a copy of this includes looting america's allies. also what is behind you on must

war on europe to discuss these issues and more, i'm joined by my guess, george w. l. e. in budapest, he's a pod cast or, and the guy goal which be found on youtube and locals and assemble. we have that a serial a model. he is a historian and political commentator by gentlemen cross that grows in effect, that means can jump anytime you want. and i always appreciate it. all right, let's kick this off with george george. i mean, considering all the things we've heard from the truck like incoming trump administration, particularly greenland, and that's kind of a rubric for a much more boisterous, a anomalous approach to foreign policy than we've seen. particularly since the new polar moment. i guess you could argue that there is no real differences this way. it's being framed right now, but you know, it, it does kind of harking back to great power politics, which critics of the bike administration is a where's all the real is. and we need more realism in american foreign policy. well, this is part of realism. it's not like it, but it is kind of

a return to that george. i agree and style it, and i think of the consequences will probably be um, noteworthy. i'm a trump has always had a sudden hankering for great power politics. i think he's, he has looked for as a model. this was the 19th century imperialism, image great powers, acquire new territory, acquiring new spheres of influence, so that they regard subordinate powers as are required to follow the lead of the great powers. and essentially, this means that it's the national interest, prevail, well, the, and we will try that model and the, you know, it's been, it has been the dominant models since the world war 2. but particularly so since the end of the cold war, which is these, the system of global alliances with global alliance is driven by the,

the logical dicks us. so suddenly we have this a little bit late with coldwell and bottle was we're going to fight this, the spread of communism and everybody, all the countries of the world have to be school shoved into this some alliance irrespective what it, what their interest because they need to be in waging this more games, communism since the end of the call. well, it's been about the values. it's been about the democracies versus the all storage area and uh, regimes. and what that means is that the country is live off on the outside of permanent place, for instance. i mean it's, it's, it comes with it because this is a logical alliance, being led by the united states is a problem. and then the threat. and of course, it's a very real spread because it's in the name of this, these principles of freedom and democracy and united states laid alliance wages, sanctions, wages, uh, when your actual actual was bombing, color revolutions,

terrorist actions all in the name of the democracy, subtract it's certainly not going back to an old uh model. hey, we are a great bout. we have a real interest. we're going to pursue our interest. but the corolla, re of that is that when we recognize all the great 1000 we recognize their interest . and we don't wanna mess with that, but with that those, you know what, what binds us do all the great bows. that's what mattresses, let me deliver. it doesn't the fixed cost. so i think this, it may be, it will end up in exactly the same part, but uh at the moment that he needs it very much, a different emphasis on the part of trump in the, the, in the, in the, in the, the nitty gritty isn't the detail studied because it hits greenland, it's canada, it's the panama, and i mean these are not enemies of the united states. okay. there's no audiological spin. there obviously is. george's pointed out here. so, i mean, if,

you know, you look at countries like russia, china, india, because of their strengths and relative strength of the world. so you can't, you can't move them, they're, they're kind of, you know, you missed out on that. okay. you didn't dismember russia for, for the, for looting. and so if you can't loot of the other great powers and is george rightly points out, that means that you recognize them is great powers that's cut best progress. let's progress in my book. okay. but if you're, if you're not a great power and you're in the spirit of the american spirit of influence. well, like i said in a program last week, if you're not sitting at the table, that means you're on the menu to leak. i think you're right about that i'd, i'd add one thing as it for which is that the thing about the united states is that even when it pretends to follow an ideological russian, all right. it still also is doing view politics all the time of available to kind,

but i agree with george that some sort of difference is, might be occurring something important. and like, you know, then you have last about what happens to the smaller power slide. your point, peter's, if i understand you correctly, of that, at least the, recognizing that more or less the eclipse the outside way policy. and that in it says, could have a stabilizing effect. right? sure, if, for instance, the united states had recognized russia as a full great power of its own national security interest in 2021. maybe they would not have seen the escalation of new crane more. right? that's a very concrete thing that i think is 2, that would be a plus, but here is a problem i see and i have would leave it at that for now, which is the, the issue is united states for i think more than a 100 to us as being the way they define the speed of influence and that's a separate issue. there might that states as a state, and i think it's the only one on the planet. i'm sure it's the only one that

defines the climate as it's fear of influence, right? so to get a system, the national break powers of national interest sort of respect each other, right? you get a month to pull up balance, you would have the united states would have to learn to think of its feel of influence as not to drop. that is one thing, right? they would have to think, ok, china has some asians fields in phones. russia has been your pre income asians feel, for instance, somewhere. and we have, well, it would be once again, the monroe doctrine, right. they have lived in america, maybe they have going on to buy, not the don't think that's all business. what happens in australia, for example, right. and that would have to happen. so united states would have to turn itself into a region that has them on them. not that right now, the united states is trying to be a little bit of heads and one. and is it combines that with a new hope massage, a even more router. so there's not from national interest is the info pay bed,

right? there's no way to edit. it's early days here. i mean, i mean this whole thing about greenland and in canada, in panama, me a can also just be a bread and circus as employee for the, for the mag a base. okay, so you and i've talked a great lengthening. geo politics is in play when it comes to a manual extraction. that's very much part of is in today's world here. but, you know, in george, i mean, what we've been hearing about the rules base order and all those countries, particularly when we think about ukraine, all those countries that sent their military equipment to ukraine. okay. and now you've helped me and had it says, but i think we're good at, you know, thank you very much, but we're going to take greenland. i mean, all these countries they believed in the rules based order as the american sphere of influence allowed this left to go there. american allies that are left to naked in defense, let somebody you, they, there's nothing they can do about it. and we'll talk about the fact was leadership

of europe in the 2nd half of the program. but i mean, in the americans that are l, i so not disarmed themselves in front of brochure or china, but they've disarmed themselves in front of the united states. so let's, let's try it. i mean, and what, what has happened here is that these allies have indeed abjectly follow this uh, in the united states, orders and help us do this uh, a war, but had nothing to do with their own national interest. and of course, they should always have known that at some point the united states is going to raise all kinds of issues about it and relating to their own national interest. and so what the, what the united states has done now, this thing, well, you know, we have these global alliances. well, that's very nice. but what do we get out of these a global alliances? we are, you know, people are impoverish. we don't live as well as the europeans, and why do we live as well as the europeans? what? because we spend so much money on the system of alliances. and so we can say, well,

you know, you're gonna have to spend a lot more money on your own, this alliance, and you're still in place. you're going to have to stop doing all of these things that are harming our industry. is, you know, with just the george this is, this is not a request. so it's, it's, it's not a request. so they don't, they, they are going to denmark and saying, well, you know, we'd, we'd like greenland and not them like what it will say. we have a, you know, basically you can have it as an america sable we wanted. so we're going to have it because we, we run this alliance. and, you know, we think that this is vital to our national interest. some of these vital to our security, and therefore what's, why do our security is you of admitted yourselves is vital to your secure just so we just got to take and, and, i mean, and that's not even a how much of an argument that they can put up against the attorney does, this is the argument that we're all equals as democracy, but when it comes to geo political interests or our interest will always trump

yours because we work you. okay. i mean, you, they think you already mentioned, you know, you can have this a lot of your logical driven alliance and then you come to your politics. the united states will probably want both at the same time, which of course, the short changing your allies because, but i, but i thought we were all these holes in this line. well, no, it's not true. it never has been true take, you know, i mean one other way you could look at it is that what do you opinions have done, right? especially after the cold war ended off to the late 19 eighties. and that's a long time, they've had a long time to think about this and it didn't, the big mistake. one big mistake through pins have made if they have disregard the fundamental or from your list, jill politics, which is don't think so much about other states intentions or what they say about the intentions. think about the capabilities and it is they have looked at

the u. s. in terms of capabilities and at most in terms of capabilities. the motive understood immediately is that the biggest threat is obviously the us and cost um, much more dependent on it in every way and, and it has over $50.00 large military. right. and what do we do? we just give a, an example of those capabilities, the destruction of the north stream pipeline. a brilliant stance, the capability of conducting all sorts of black ops is very much something that is move in the american awesome. all right. so if they are only extra to due diligence, right? instead of just listening to narratives, narratives, narratives, and talking to talk before that seems united states is inherent, the extremely dangerous state is may now say over here on your side as long as you will pay us into what we want. but what if that changes? it's one date and your politics view politics since the end of the quote was shows

that they've never considered this problem and now they pull it out. but yeah, been, i mean, george, me a country like denmark and say, but we've done everything. you said, you know, we join the european union, we join nato, we sent a couple of you halls full of 19 forties at vintage weapons to ukraine. we did everything we could, but that's a good enough basic george. no, it's not a good enough that precisely because the united states can then declare, well, yeah, but, you know, we have really a vital national interest and of the, you know, you already accepted that you are a complete a subordinate to us and therefore, you know, you're going to have to do what we say on a note of subordination. i'm going to jump in here gentlemen, we're going to go to a short break. and after that short break, we'll continue our discussion about some real nice. stay with our team, the show room. just don't need

to shape out the application and engagement equals the trails. when so many find themselves will support. we choose to look for the common ground . the the is the launch of the special military operations mold. in 13000 far less than the race of joining the ukraine military we williams, lot of things are good enough to stop growing up. i mean, you need for 2 of us doing the work on you, the surely couldn't was just william wills get what you my friend built for the fine you is fine. yeah. the some of the but yeah the that the at the end of what it is i

didn't know the fornia state. okay. mental breakdown, skin stuff, talk as long as any minus. let me read a couple of dining. come see fun. sues the show and music on some of the back of the if cisco on top of the field of worship means it is us, that'd be good to see a guy and use that as a deal to for the supervisor. or should i play my florida? she knew was like you strong so then the whistle instead of the physical and that's the welcome back to the cost of bull arms were all things are considered on people about alright patel eclipse. switch gears you, you wrote in a remarkable and wallet article, but i don't always like long ones, but i liked this one because it was a kept harping a way it what i believe. and this is one of the things my one time in the article is musk is demolishing western new leads. they. they brought it upon themselves.

it's an excellent piece. i suggest all of our viewers take a look at it. it's of the r t website. i think why do they deserve it? and why is the line must doing this to let me start the 1st question? vitals they deserve it because i don't know why exactly is doing it. i haven't guess. so why does it deserve it? i do know that been cause precisely what we've been talking about. the 1st of all the show. they have themselves immediate at themselves, didn't you? did it themselves of power the new to themselves of leverage. and they have also be aged and nobody that has cost them or respect and fumbled reasons. if you look at the german case, we've talked about it before, but it is such a striking example. if somebody blows up your vital info, start to and you just smite, you are done. that's a hit. so no respect left for you. you look at britain and of course of what they

call the special relationship, but just basically again, relentless submission to the ever america was from then be it broadly prosecuting julia massage for years and making basic things really to them the only the system in the public eye in the process or math. so if you participating in the gaza genocide, so you have all of these powers in europe, then it has been begging for american attention support and has accepted all sorts of american. i'll return as a new mediation and now have a big american, all the guard, the biggest and the would actually was. so has not only the deal president trump was sort of the unofficial vice president and more right. and he is starting to let them feed it, so i don't agree with everything must fist not at all or right fact to me, but the underline frank, but he's just illustrating to them what they've done to themselves. that is just

the reality right now. why is he doing that? i don't know, but at times i think i haven't given them enough credit as it were for is own ideological drive. but i'm coming to stand up must actually has a fairly consistent and fairly important ideology to what he does. right. and it's and that you want to do that. i don't see it at all, but i think he acts out of the number of convictions as it were. right. mistaken. this guy that converts on spot. that is. yeah, well also in the, there's always an element of self interest, which we always have to be very careful about. he didn't get rich. he didn't, he didn't have his path to his richard richard who have gone through state contracts in many cases. okay. i, you know, i think he's a genius, a great person of his time, but he had a lot of help to george intake is absolutely right. if you have no read self

respect, why should you expect people to anyone do respect? you know that that's right. but the, the attack on mosque as a reach the levels of hysteria in your up and there. and you have to think that it is easy. ology, i mean, this is the 1st time in a long time, in which a 1000000000, there are the, you know, an influential now publisher doesn't subscribe to the kind of fashionable, liberally just the global as the victim. you know, he's not a george soros, he's not a bill gates, he's those guys to a very different um, a logical world view living. this is the trump in view of this is the or button view. and this goes episode, outrage on, on the path of the people who being run the e u. a. so this thinking of all sorts of ways of we'd have to do something about him, you know, and so feed them whether it's of my crown or whether it showed sort of, it's

a who's off on the line or what she's sick now. but you know, whoever is in charge of the european commission, we have to do something about him. and then you only media, you know, right? the music long think pieces of us, of the t poses to the freedom and democracy. but it was at 1st thing in the arguments against him was the oh my god, he is allowed, hate and hate speech and discrimination and anti semitism and racism to thrive on uh on twitter or x. even though they never really presented any evidence of those any, or even rise in all of these things. now, some of the arguments has changed. so he's, he's using a twitter x and some very nefarious way, which we don't know. he's switched to change the algorithms even though they have no idea what algorithm is this. so it can be switched. it's in order to promote his own brand, he's up to promote his own twigs of what he only is done. he is allowed free speech

. he has written them free speech this way. so that's what he, that he, you know, you said it was, i mean it's not the effect on these obviously there, there was some of the restrictions on speech this, but it's, it's a huge improvement on what all the time when twits a really was censoring, want to switch a really, it was just input removing, you know, content that they just didn't agree with. so it's entirely a positive. he's agree, advanced the cause of free speech is getting attacked for it. and franklin's serious actually is a hit the reaction, the hypocrisy. i mean, politicians are fair game for criticism. ok, i don't understand the, um, bridge that is coming out of europe being these are very beta type people here. but i mean, we have it, you know, the term isn't used very often, but mean we have forced resume, change going on and gaza using genocide of the west is behind the dissolution of the syrian state. um, um the the my dawn of february 2014 forest museum changer. i'm telling him of

meddling, western meddling all around the world. but when he won musk right. say, oh he's, he's hurting my feelings. in an interview with a, with a office visions, hardy, in germany, everyone thinks the sky is falling. i mean, again, why would you respect people that have such a thin skin? and the only thing they can cling to is an ideology explain their, their electrons are rejecting left, right and center at 8. 0, i think that's why the odds to hyper sensitive because their position but in their own societies has become so weak, right? the, the way in which mosque has supported the of the party in germany assisting extreme clarity of this phenomenon. the ice t is fairly strong, right? it has since 18 to 20 percent in the policy. and the whole strategy of the establishment parties of such additional parties is to freeze it out. never the

less frightened jeremy usually you pick correlations and this thing never, never go, let's move these guys and mosque is disturbing that strategy. and they're so afraid of him because he could perhaps push the off into a place where that doesn't work anymore. and why is that? so not item because of must. but because people, as you say, absolutely committed, be dissatisfied. if politics as usual. now personally, i would like to see bargain smashed to profit from that not the favorite cost of my old like the, but that isn't the issue here that's there. but i think what you're saying and, and you know, a, your political opinions are your own. and i respect a bit, given your position, we would have a little bit more competition. all right, good. that, no, that's the whole lot of these people just because i don't want to have competition . as of course, i have consistently argued and several pieces of freedom that ideas to prohibit the if they are completely misguided, you know,

because that's not f of the solution. definitely not. so i agree, we just need much more competition and, but you see in your business attempt at capitalization and to send it to or you can call extremely centers and want versus the liberal, essentially as a really right. and they consider everything modeling that disturbs that and everything that they themselves to some but as or even among themselves, to disturb, we like to and so disturb outcomes, political outcomes, that's not modeling, that's ok. see georgia, c, romania, or c, g. every bird to force us basically said, you know what, we did it in romania if you have to redo it in germany too. right. so they have absolutely no respect for the was themselves. they have no respect for the wholesome says, and then they have nothing to stand on fighting back against musk. so what if musk is mad doing so are you and you already corrupting the political system,

they feel constant menu probations, thoughts? well, i mean, george, you know, you've, you had the, the labor party meddling in the american election. i mean, they, the, you know, the, we went, we talked about that in great length there, but that's okay. right? i mean, again, you know, they're like, good terrorist and bad terraces, good meddling. there's bad meddling. this is like law favor against trump. i don't understand what you're talking about. what do you mean a good terrorist or a bad terrorists? don't have the best they. i mean, it gets to the point where they just go into the realm of just the logic and they want to pay wise any kind of conversation because we're more virtuous than you are . and that's why they have no case at all. after decades of a lead um recruitment to really take over by the united states of europe. this is what you get the it is what you get. and of course this is what george sar austin,

bill gays i've been doing for years. i mean, in terms of meddling, i mean, we know source engaged, they from newspapers, they fund the own media outlets. they found things tags they found in g o's been pro to and must test twitter. ok, exactly, and that's it. that goes over there for years. and years has been this web of, uh, you know, these are, these are operations and they have being used precisely full on, you know, the color revolutions in this a to read. mentioned, you know, romania and hungry everywhere else. well, and no one ever said anything about the mosque, where is it? that's what we have, and most consistently is upfront about it. i mean, he is here, he has his views, he's very outspoken. he doesn't actually act somewhere in the background. give a surreptitious. there's a no one really even those. i mean, you always have to point out how to evasive george soros has influence is of the

list all the different organizations that he has created and that he is bank roll them all the influence they have. and of course, the moment you do that outcomes to scream, you know, being on to submit a, that's a conspiracy theory. but with mosque at least you've gone to the conspiracy there, there he is. he just expresses these views and then he moves onto another topic. i mean, it's like, you know, one minute he was talking about the h one, b visas, getting very agitated valdez. then he's moved on to the issue of the grooming games in the u. k. very accurate about that. now he's moved on to the fall of the l. a. files. if somebody was just, you know, he has strong views, uses this back into an advocate which they really hate him for. i mean, there's a lot of policy differences we don't now obviously don't have time for that, but you need any, what they hate him for is that he's a free agent. and neo liberalism, no individual has that except for he loves musk for some reason. in the he's such an anomaly and he came up through a system that suppressed opinions wanted

a unit, a uniform belief, and in this man just goes on his own platform and says, what he thinks is one of the very few. sorry, we run out of time we, i want to take my guess in budapest and assemble. and of course i want to thank of yours are watching us the largest the next time. remember across apples, the the take a fresh look around his life. kaleidoscopic isn't just a shifted reality distortion by power to division with no real opinions.

fixtures designed to simplify will confuse really once a better wills, and is it just as a chosen few fractured images presented as 1st. can you see through their illusion going underground? can the

good good. i think those on that that's good. yeah. you're good. yeah. i think we took the same glass that the biggest truck hit by the yeah. i was like, they're gonna see it.