on the, [000:00:00;00] the, [000:00:00;00] the hello and welcome to cross software. all things are considered. i'm theater, lavelle better late than never trump secretary of state, marco rubio, admits america's unipolar moment. his past, viewers over this program understood this long ago. how well this admission make

comes foreign policy different will diplomacy make a comeback? the prospecting from foreign policy? i'm joined by my guess. daniel is our in new york. he's a journalist and author a 3 books on the us constitution in nashville, we have ryan christian. he is founder and editor of the last american vagabond, as well as co founder of the independent media alliance. and in brisbane, we crossed to what we could poll. he's an adjunct professor at queensland university and technology and senior fellow at the ty, hey, institute, or a gentleman, cross talk rules of effect. that means you can jump any time you want. and i always appreciate a daniel, um, so much to talk about here. i was leading, obviously, in my introduction, i'm going to quote marco rubio right now. it's not normal for the world to have a unipolar power, remarkable coming from a secretary of state. and then on the heels of this, we have the or which seems to be the imminent destruction of the us a id at least in his current or is former incarnation. we don't know where it's

going to go from here. the point is my friend, us. so much is happening. i think they're related uh take it from here. daniel. or? yeah, i mean, i think what we're seeing is a global crash of, of neo liberalism. and it reminds me of the crash of communism in 1989 to 91. i think the water is going to a major phase change uh the, the, the rules of the last 35 years or so. i have found the park and we're inter entering into a new era. and that era is based on multi polarity, intense international competition. uh, the uh, the destruction of old alliances, like, you know, nato was going to way of the warsaw pact. um, so, uh its uh, really a dramatic change that were uh, the was passing through. ryan, is this all a good thing? go ahead. i'd like to start with pointing out that i think in general the

destruction of us id is obviously a positive thing is ultimately that is what happens to it because i think it's one of the things that is being debated, which is frustrating for a lot of us that have followed along with what has been doing is that there's some ultimate positive net positive outcome to what it does. i disagree with that. i think it's a regime change engine with some things that are done positive around it. ultimately as a cover, i would argue, but i think what i'm worried about here is that the process i think is important. and i think the way this is going is indicating to me that this is more about framing it as a positive change in order to role in what i worry is that is a worse outcome. and, but like we were kind of saying off here before i, it's a win nonetheless, to see this begin to go that step. but i think what i'm seeing a lot across the trump administration right now is taking things that we've always wanted to go away on it and framing it as a positive destruction, but really already rolling in something that i see is much worse. sort of like the digital end of this, the cdc direction, walmart, private end of that. but that's what i see happening here with mosque and the rest of this the way it's going or marco rubio taking control or merging of what the state department would or wouldn't already really was. it just seems more of

a shell game to me, but i'm going to wait and see how it plays out. but i think if it was gonna be done right, it should have been done in a way that was more transparent and not only focused on the left has been doing this the entire time. that's it. so that's just just on us. yeah, i, i agree with you because it's settling domestic political scores also very much so because this is uh, which uh, shown as being the machinations of the democratic party. they've said this very openly, so you're absolutely right. but where we go, i kind of got drawing upon what daniel had to say, which is really interesting is that, you know, when the, with the end of the cold war, the end of the soviet union, the end of the warsaw pact we had, you know, kind of a i was gonna say ideological boy, but we actually had a, a preponderance of neo liberalism around the world. i agree with daniel, 100 percent and we're not on the same frequency when it comes to many, many politics here. but it's, it's good to see that go, it's a low will be less of an ideological world. that's

a plus. but the is it going back to just great power, a rivalry which has its pluses and minuses to go ahead and brisbane a yellow good school today with you paid around, especially after the uh, the last time we tried disconnected. so i greetings to you and have the look. i think that um there's no doubt that the 35 year period of the liberalism, he's coming to an end. and in fact, full nice people, they've been watching these things closely for a number of years. it ended a little while ago. it's just taking the united states leadership, i guess, or the political legal sections of the political like come to terms of that reality . but i think it also spells the end of a 500 year period of liberal wisdom, liberal calamity, what's going on? so we've got 2 endings in a science. one is i short term ending, which is a 35 year period of a particularly intense type of west in the liberalism. but we're also seeing

fundamental changes in the way that the global economic system is old and i is. and as a result of that, the way in which countries interact with each other. so it is a moments as period that we're living through. and um, you know, and that's going to rebut, arrives for quite some time because there's a whole bunch of vested interest. so don't want to let go and i'm, and i will 5 to some the aisle of course to hang onto what i had. and um, and the struggle in a sense is going to continue for a little while get before the da simple. yes, me there cuz no one likes to give up power in this. the new neo liberalism is a powerful if not toxic for say it will not give up easily as well. but daniel, i mean, you know, i mentioned great power politics. okay. for me they'll be a relief not to hear a secretary say, or we're only doing this for democracy around the world data. i think we're all tired of all of that. okay. um. but then on the other side of the ledger is a drum says he's going to take a greenland in panama. okay. i mean,

not for democratic reasons either for just pure national self is now a national interest here. i mean, that's the flip side of it, isn't it daniel? or? yeah, i mean the, the, the us, you know, polarity is not unprecedented. we saw a british u unit polarity for 99 year period from the 1815 to 1914. and then that collapsed. and we all know what happened next. a trump. ready is know these, he's like, he's seized themselves a copper and he's picking fights with the, with minor parties that he certainly can win. i mean, it's no big deal for the us to steam roll over canada, or mexico or, or panama or denmark for that matter. but the point is that the, the old pieces for. busy when you're parked in a very dramatic fashion and no one knows how it. ready shape

a shape shake out. so no one knows what rock china is, reaction will be no one quite knows what russia's reaction well, you know, ryan, it, they, they, they, one of the, the, the outcomes of all of this is that the alliance system that we have been in place . it's been in place since the 2nd world war will start to unravel. i think certainly, it's already been mentioned that nato may find its fate, is that it doesn't. us doesn't need nato the way it did before, because it's not an ideological conflict according to it least. so someone like mark a rubio, go ahead, right? yeah, i mean, i think it's worth considering that this there's might be more global collaboration on, on certain directions that we see then then the not even a lot of these different things like i, i definitely agree with what, what, what both of the panels are saying in the context of what seems to be changing. but again, i would like to argue that i really worry about how that is. you know, whether it's the change is that even a positive change when you're really using 2 different establishment powers, a fight over who controls or live,

you know that that's what i kinda see happening. but i worry that there's more collaboration on the like during the, like the cold with 19 era which is not really done. we saw a lot of global collaboration on things that really concerned a lot of people that were going the direction of more of a world power. and i worry that that might be in a ways what some of these are going in the direction of, even though it does seem to be more, you know, trump taking for his own interest or for the united states interest or the government. but if you look at it on a grander scale, like what we're looking at with canada, and i mean even the, even panama included or, or mexico, you're talking about something that's been discussed for a long time, north american union dynamic, you know, coming off the conversation of something like the european union, it's the same kind of idea. and i think this is going to a very clearly away from the idea of freedom and liberty. and i think that was the problem. is that because we're seeing things go away that we argue are obviously bad. that is tricking a lot of americans into feeling like we're going in a positive direction toward freedom. when i see all of the direction they're taking as dramatically the other direction, even if we're seeing positive things come down and again,

we'll see what comes up underneath that. that's how i kind of see it right now. but i see these things as positive steps, but if they're simply rolling out like the fed goes away and it's simply a private stable coin, cvc, dynamic, and that's not a positive change. that's how i see it as yeah, but more work i think also the end of the word sovereignty is really important here . and you know, pursuing a sovereignty policy. the like trump appears to be doing that. it also encourages other countries to do exactly the same thing. i mean, i'd be getting to thinking in this is early days, but i wonder if you know, the, the, the ideas about international law in cooperation of the 2nd half of the 20th century is going to be forgotten. we're going to go right back to the 19th century, go ahead. warwick. it was, i pulled out all the way back to the 19th century, but done, but of course, history channel. and ron a little bit, i think one of the things that we are saying and is that, um, it is, is not necessarily a complete pretended right politics yet. but

a recognition by the united states that the, the foundations of its global hegemony and its global power along the way. and therefore, it's going to have to recalibrate its position, at least in the short term, whether that is a short term recalibration that leads to a long time system of change. whether it's really an attempt to re group is another question altogether. the recognition, i think that the debacle, the new crying is tantamount to a strategic phase for the west nitro and of course, united states. this is the dominant finance here in provider of weapons into the crime. the mess that is in the middle east of the mind. and of course the, the diminution of american privacy in asia as old driven, i think i very realist, trumpet ministration. here's my more and we weren't before we go to the break. let me just ask you a quick question here. and because you know, we bad need about the term had gemini, but you know,

privacy is not the same thing. company. trump, once primacy isn't ministration is apparently not going to stripe or the gemini. there are 2 different things, but real quick before we go to the break. a. yeah, look, i think he's, he's looking to, um, it looks to use some a strategy in colloquialisms he's going to matthew's territory. yeah, i'm like adult, the territory and um, and that's the 1st thing that he's going to do. and clearly he's doing that model read of that is that in part it's a types of recognition of the, of the face of, of the united states as a global pendulum on the iraq. these are about and that guys with the demise of the liberalism and the reassertion of american preponderance cybert's and okay, you're probably going to end up this part of the program on pondering some of the discuss it in the 2nd half you gentlemen, i'm going to jump in we're going to go to a short break, and after that your break. we'll continue our discussion on transform policy stay

without doing the same wrong. just don't shape house after kids and engagement equals betrayals. when so many find themselves worlds of parts. we choose to look for common ground, the the wireless nissan girl. that little gift gives the surface so used to say combining. so that's to combine the video on

the phone with a different blue and you mean to continue to, to, for this to them to the symbol of these choice. although we'll see a 4 bits of me, the pin on the and all the loading on the it seemed to by the oh, don't allow because we design the same time between the easy to to we the time the

is the launch of the special military operation. mold in $13000.00 far less than the race of joining the ukrainian miller tre. williams. lot of things are good enough to stop growing up. i mean, you need for 2 of us doing to the, the hope any of them going to surely cuz we will just get my friend built for the fine you is fine. yeah. the, the but if the, yeah, the that the surgeon at the end of what it is, i didn't know that you know for your state. okay. its mental breakdowns because of the size of the minus sign and date of birth, dinah come see, font sues. the shiny, i'm the cons to not of us fighting back a full on the if cisco on top of the field of worship glove means it is us, that'd be good to see a guy and use that as a beautiful the supervisor of good or should i play my florida,

she knew was like you strong enough. listen to the physical and that's the welcome back. across stock were all things are considered. i'm peter lavelle to remind you we're discussing trumps new foreign policy. the . okay, let's go back to daniel and new york and i'm talking to the title of this program is tax americana. and the reason why i put that there is because it seems that in light of what we have said already in this program that there is going, there is a transition going on for impacts america to tax america. that trumpet has is amazing, affinity for a tear of taxes. he's doesn't push sanction so much. but i mean that's still in the, in the, in the cards. it's kind of, i'm trying to uh, break bread here with ryan because you know, these tools here can be very much, you know, associated with the behavior of me. will liberalism, it may not be

a spouse to say it might be all a g, but it looks for the same outcomes. daniel. oh, i don't think it does. i disagree with that. i think that i'm that neo liberalism strove for a new world order under us of gemini. and i think a trump is a, is a bringing in a new system based on national ecos as his, his, uh, his, his, um, tariffs, uh. where is that a good? is that a good thing? national eagle ism, is that a good thing? no, it's not a good thing at all. it's, it's a, it's a very bad things. beggars i, neighbor policies are precisely the same as the same type we saw in the early thirty's. i mean it's, it's, it's one thing of trump imposes tariffs. but if every other country imposes patterson retaliation, then world trade goes to 0 very, very fast. and,

and with that comes a serious economic contraction. so, so trump is, you know, he's, he's bring in a new order and questionable a, but that's not a good new order. well, um, okay, um, i can absolutely see where you're coming from here. but brian, um, as we're speaking right now, um, uh columbia, panama, mexico, and canada. ever taking the ne is trump on to something as well. i mean, obviously if we're just talking about whether or not he wins in his political dynamic, then he's, then he's gaining. but ultimately, this is of, i think, a negative thing, whether we're talking about the way the world sees the united states policy or, but whether we're just for whether the united states is in any way what he pretends to be to the world. right? i mean, it's, it's just as imperialism, make it imperialism. the way of carrying this out wasn't through tariffs or not. it's, it's belligerent in my opinion. and again, go back to the point that i think this is about like, like you, it's interesting. you've, you talked about like the old dynamic, a new world order, new liberalism, but you know, in comparison to what he's doing today. but i,

frankly think it's just kind of the merging of all this stuff. that's i, this is going in that direction of a global power, but not, i mean, it's hard to see it when you think it through, through trump only as this nationalistic kind of, you know, america 1st, but that's not really what their policies are. when you look at a broader dynamic look at the what that mean, i don't see much deviation between buy in terms of policy when it comes to foreign policy for ukraine, for israel. and i think quite frankly, we're seeing a lot kind of just break down in that very basically us government throwing all of its agendas out for the interest of other foreign policy agenda as far as real, for example. and so if we're talking about the parents, we're talking about the new canada mexico dynamic, we're watching things implode, things that have destroyed previous bipartisan or just, you know, any both democrat and republican administrations from before that we're trying to accomplish. or just the basic idea of the rules based order that is completely collapse because of their foreign policy. that's not in america's interest. even right now, what trop is doing. you can argue there is interest and resources and an x, y, and z. but as you were pointing out, the terrace are only going to begin to cause more international problems for both

countries, even though you see some beginning to take the knee as you put it. i think it's only got a spin out further when other countries react, and so i see in the negative in all of this other than imperialism for job. yeah, i mean, why are we getting you in? we could really, we can figure out this entire conversation in the sense that trump wants to have a fortress western hemisphere. i mean with being clued so apparently uh, greenland here it looks like, you know, he, he wants a power block. okay. and right is absolutely right. i mean, as we speak right now, um these railey prime minister is visiting the united states. we'll see if marco rubio is approach to the world. you know, when he was on making kelly what's going on with you with a id that may all be a side show the in, in new cycle time, considering the vested interest that the bite and ministration and apparently will

find out the trumpet and ministration has with the genocide going on and gaza a look. i don't think that there is a tiger and strategy at this point in time. i think that there is a kind of here and a saw switch, i guess some others have described here is a form of nationalism or an actual egoism. but what we say is a whole bunch of, of initiatives or actions that you know, i say to satisfy particular constituencies. and also i say to create a particular emotional responses from the political bice and, but that's largely about heated the volume. and so we don't have that kind of here in strategy in relation to ukraine, promises of solving that in 24 hours. not withstanding the fact that it was a bully campaign, how terribly have amounted to nothing at this point in time. and i'm not convinced that there is actually a meaningful strategy at all to bring back more to a meaningful clause. that's certainly nice strategy and

a license stabilizing the middle east and on and believes that there is a strategy in the license or the asian pacific ava. old areas of alignment is a consolidation loan, which is around the um, the back yard, so to speak. and an assertion of regional, i'm sorry, i have a negative. so did quite clearly not in the same league. you know, it's a pretty easy thing to do as the terrace. the reality is, is that you lot of sides not on the wheels. the, the, the big stick that at once the in i am and, and that's mainly because the united states contribute to not more than 15 percent of global will trade today, which is the, i'm from 20 percent on the 6. he is a guy, frankly, it is just less important, relatively speaking, and sort of has less impact in terms of with policies brooks nations i able to adjust, should they, they a 100 percent tariff imposed on them within all of this to my 2 and

a half to 3 is to fully comp insights to the loss of the us market. the us in the main tom will take the training for 5 and 10 years and possibly even longer to adjust to a loss of the industrial machinery, the robotics, and not to mention the rule materials that comes from the rest of the world. you know, when you bring living on devices of via use for the last 3540 years and you come to the realization that at some point a really call them the names real things. it's a bit of a shopping realization of the world doesn't need the american are using the why once the that's just the reality, daniel, this new approach. and i think all of us would agree. it's a, it's in its formative stage right now, or maybe it's just the one off they wanted to go after this agency. and ned could follow, which would be great in my opinion. but daniel, they've been given the trajectory, at least this is, is trumps approach making the world more or less safe. oh, it's making us far less safe. i mean, 1st of all, number one,

i mean you have to where you're told with things like this, you use phrases like trumps approach. trump is a highly erratic individual. yeah. i mean, is a really a med tech. uh, there's a certain kind of lodge but in what he's doing, but he has not thought this out fully, and he's gonna get in big trouble very, very soon. the just stabilizing effects are profound. i mean, i think the, you know, the, the, the, the weakening of nato will have dramatic fx throughout the region, concepts. so it might actually feed the war up and ukraine rather than the tamping it's out. this is a and that, of course, the middle east. i mean, i mean that yahoo is now trumps both of them. how he is the he is the trump whisper

. and so uh, so essentially he's running the entire middle east as a proxy for the us. and that is pretty extraordinary. and that does not. ready a more peaceful region, obviously. right, i'd like to point out though that i go ahead and go ahead, jump in. i'd just like to point out that i think that it's, it's worth considering. and it's, i'm of the opinion that it's possible you go the way around, right? the idea that we're watching all of these things, but as you pointed out, are, are not in the, i mean, you can say for instance, greenland and minerals to meet or either resources. there is of interest for america that might be positive for short term gain or maybe long term gain. but ultimately it's, i think like i said, in that positive and a lot of different reasons that are imploding, a lot of things for a long term american interest. and i think that that benefits is real and a lot of ways and that's more abstract. i think for some people, unless you understand some long term policy, that they will just to be frank, that, that people like ben barons motor and some of the more radical people are openly talking about, which is the stabilisation of 4 countries. weaponized migration. these bigger with statements by them, just so that's clear. but so thinking about how these things like people with nato

. i think you could argue that these things benefit what they're trying to accomplish in the world. and let's not forget that even the promises of the ending funding for ukraine or israel for that matter, both have been broken even recently, despite the pause, even though they what is really age of continue. trump then through poland for through israel set weapons back to you create that just happen. so it just seems to be even challenging us on promises to his base. i think i see all of this is in the interest of at least 4 and countries as opposed to united states. but i would say israel, i think that's worth considering a war waco of last 40 seconds. go to you that you've given what we've heard from daniel and ryan, is there a coherent strategy here? go ahead 35 seconds. so there's no kind of here in the strategy. it's um, it's a series of emotionally driven reactions to changes in the world that the trump is coming to grips with. it is a function of a deep side of displacement, anxiety from a country, and a man who has experienced

a world that was dramatically different. and where the united states that have a pinnacle that's no longer the case it's, it's quite fascinating the, the, the, the new administration is inherent in a world very, very different than the 1st administration of trump. it's really quite fascinating . and i guess we'll all agree, we'll see where it all goes it's, it's very difficult to keep track of what's going on here. i want to thank my, i guess in a natural new york and in brisbane. and of course, i want to thank our viewers for watching us here at our to see you next time. remember, across 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 who really wants a better wills, and is it just as a chosen for you. fractured images, presented as 1st. can you see through their illusion going underground? can the russian states never as i've started as i'm going to be no sense community invest ingles, all sense enough in the system must be the one else holes. question about this, even though we will then in the european union, the kremlin machine, the state on the russians,

putting as what's the ortiz for next, even our video agency, roughly all the band on youtube tv services. for what question did you say able to assist you on the brother machine for the picture such as your dog with the machine? should you lift this vehicle? is it the economic model? have new with a different experiment to you? if it doesn't fix it?

fix officer with the concept. ok, even though is the new model of the old server, it's a compliance i'm doing which comes up developing bio chemical weapons inside. you can use the solution, you know, way from cheaper to use the white glove service, the customer. but he's because of a sudden the, this is how they shut down the lowest russian office of a single mills in group. a large scale network of coal centers that scammed hundreds of millions of dollars. tens of thousands of people in