him to a casual dress party, probably dressed as a napoleon. just stay with us here on our t international have next on cross talk, peter lavelle and his guests discussed the trump administration realization that americans unipolar moment has passed and what it means for us foreign policy. the look forward to talking to you all that technology should work for people. a robot must obey the orders given by human beings, except we're so shorter is that conflict with the 1st law should we live in justification. we should be very careful about personal intelligence at the point, obviously is to place a trust rather than to the area. i mean, with the artificial intelligence, we have somebody with the, with the

a robot must protect this phone, existence exist the hello and welcome to cross software. all things are considered, i'm peter level, better late than never trump secretary of state, marco rubio admits america's unipolar moment. his past, viewers of this program understood this long ago. how well this emission make comes foreign policy different will diplomacy make a comeback? the

pro. so i think from foreign policy, i'm joined by my guess, daniel as 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, an 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 roles of effect, that means you can jump anytime 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 like a secretary of state. and then on the heels of this, we have the or which seems to be the imminent destruction of the u. s. a. i d, 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 so much is happening. i think they're related uh, take it from here. daniel. 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 world is going to a major phase change uh the the, the rules of the last 35 years or so. i have 4 on the park and we're inter entering into a new era. and that era is based on multi polarity, intense international competition. uh, the, the destruction of old alliances, like, you know, nato is going to way of the warsaw pact. um so uh it's a really a dramatic change that we're the was passing through. ryan, is this all a good thing? go ahead. so i'd like to start with pointing out that i think in general, the destruction of us a id is obviously a positive thing. if alternately,

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 the 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, is a worse outcome. and, but like we were kind of saying off air 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 or, 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, warmer, 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 going to be done right, it should've 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 are also very much so because this is woodside 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 is it going back to just great power, a rivalry which has its pluses and minuses to go ahead and brisbane. a yellow gets good today with you paid around, especially after the the last time we try to disconnect it. so i agreeing to you and have the look. i think that um there's no doubt that the 35 year period of the liberalism is coming to an end. and in fact, for most 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. so the political legal sections of the political will like to come to terms of that reality. but i think it also spells the end of a $500.00 view period of liberal wisdom liberal klein deal 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, i think, fundamental changes in the way that the global economic system and open eyes. and

as a result of that, the ways in which countries interact with each other. so it is a moments as period that we're living through. and um, united that's going to rebut, arrived 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 fight tooth and i will 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 dawson. 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 to be a relief not to hear a secretary of state 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? yeah, i mean, 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, you 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. ready to shape a shape shake out. so no one knows what, right, china is,

reaction will be no one quite knows what russia's reaction well, you know, ryan is they, they, they, one of the, the, the outcomes of all of this is that the alliance system that we've 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 at least so someone like marco rubio, go ahead, right? yeah, i, but 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 only using 2 different establishment powers 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 like through the like the coping 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 need 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 or 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. i was, i filled out all the way back to the 19th century, but done, but of course, history channels on 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. yes. but

a recognition by the united states that the, the foundations of its global hegemony and its global power and are 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 crime is tantamount to a strategic phase for the west $95.00 and of course united states. this is the predominant finance here in provider of weapons into the crime. the mess that is in the middle east of the monument, and of course, the, the diminution of american primacy and asia as old driven. i think i very realist, trumpet ministration. yes, i'm already, we've worked 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. crumpling, trump wants primacy. his,

it, his administration is apparently not going to strive for the gemini. there are 2 different things, but real quick before we go to the break. yeah, look, i think he's, he's looking to look to use some of the strategy in colloquialisms he's going to matthew's territory. yeah, i'm like adult, the territory and i'm, 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 task recognition of the, of the face of, of the united states as a global head. your mom that you're out, these are about and that guys with the minds of the liberalism and the reassertion of american preponderance cybert's and okay, probably gonna 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 the, the,

the moon's the same wrong. just don't you have to shape out the application and engagement trails. when so many find themselves will support, we choose to look so common ground the of the scenes, the beginning of its history. the united states of america has officially declared

the striving for freedom and people's rights to happiness. however, in reality, having won independence, american colon is tested for the total extermination of the indigenous population of the continent. american indians were deprived of their land. local residents were driven into reservation, given the worst agricultural territories, while the best land was appropriated by white colonizers, the strongest blow to american indian tribes was the extermination of bites of native americans lived by hunting these wild animals. colonists slaughtered the bison, and in fact, made them nearly extinct. every buffalo dead is in india and gone, said colonel richard dogs, a veteran of the bloody and vicious indian wars cynically. the indigenous population was simply exterminated us army general phillips sheridan express the evidence of this policy in the infamous words. the only good india is

a dead indian. the genocide of native americans of north america lead to a demographic catastrophe. the exact number of deaths is still unknown, but the number of victims is in millions. having been a majority on the continent before the indigenous people make up less than 3 percent of the us population today. the welcome back. the cross stock were all things we considered on peter lavelle to remind you we're discussing trump's new foreign policy the, the okay, let's go back to daniel in 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 the light of what we have said already in this program that there is going, there is a transition going on from pax americana,

to tax america. trumpet has this 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. me will liberalism, it may not be a spouse to say you might be ology, but it looks for the same outcomes daniel as well. what else it gets as i disagree with that? i think that um that uh, 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 ego. just 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 problem at all. 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 trop imposes tariffs, but of every other country imposes terrorists and which allegation 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 bringing 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, who are 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 birth. 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 naked, imperialism. the way of carrying this out wasn't the parents or not. it's gets belligerent in my opinion. and again, go back to the point that i think this is about like like he was, it's interesting you, you talked about like the old, like 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. it's, i, this is going in that direction of a global tower. but not, i mean, it's hard to see it when you think 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 insurance policy when it comes to foreign policy for ukraine for is real. 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 candidate mixed with that. and if we're watching things

implode, things that have destroyed previous bipartisan or just, you know, any both democrat and republican administration 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 or trump is doing. you can argue there's interest and resources and an x, y, and z. but as you were pointing out, the parents 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 and all of this a other than imperialism for jeff. yeah, i mean, why don't we get me, 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, it was being clued, so apparently a greenland here. it looks like, you know, he, he wants a power block. okay. and ryan is absolutely right. i mean, as we speak right now,

um the israeli prime minister is visiting the united states will see if marco rubio is approach to the world. the know what he was on making kelly whats going on with you with a id that may all be a side show the and in new cycle time, considering the vested interest that the binding ministration and apparently will find out the trumpet administration 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 um, you know, i say to satisfy particular constituencies and also say to create 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 hob, hopefully 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 in relation to stabilizing the middle east and on, and believes that there is a strategy in the license or the asia pacific. eva, all the areas of alignment is a consolidation loan which is around the back yard, so to speak. and an assertion of regional, i'm sorry i have a neighbor's so did quite clearly not in the same league. you know, it's a pretty easy thing to do as a terrace. the reality is, is that you lot of sides my own, the wheels, the, the, the big stick that it once the, in i and, and that's mainly because the united states contributes not more than 15 percent of

global. we'll trade today, which is the, i'm from 20 percent, and the 60 is a guy. frankly, it is just less important, relatively speaking, and sort of has less impact in terms of with policies brakes, nations i able to adjust, should they be a 100 percent territory imposed on them with the and all of this to my 2 and a half to 3 is to fully compound sites. so the last of the us, my, the us in the main tom will type of 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 have comes from the rest of the world. you know, when you've been living on devices of i 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 american. i are using the why once the that's just the reality in 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 a 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. this 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 talk about things like this, you use phrases like trumps approach. trump is a highly erratic individual. yeah. i think is a really a med tech. there's a certain kind of lodge 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 a new crane rather than, than tapping it down. this is a and that of course, the middle east. i mean, i mean that yahoo is now trumps both. somehow he is the, he is the trump whisper. and so, 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 just, i 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 that as you pointed out or are not in the, i mean, you could say for instance, greenland and minerals that meet or either resources, there's a renter's for america that might be positive for short term gain, or maybe long term gain, but ultimately it's,

i think it's 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 will this to be frank, that, that people like ben gear and smoke church. and some of the more radical people are openly talking about which is the stabilisation of 4 countries. weaponized migration. these, these are with statements by then just so that's clear. but so thinking about how these things like, even 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 huge of continue trump, then through poland for through israel sent weapons back to ukraine. that just happened, so it just seems to be even challenging is 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 of that. and given what we've heard from

daniel and ryan, is there a coherent strategy here? go ahead 35 seconds. this is my kind of human strategy. it's um, it's a series of emotionally driven reactions to changes in the world that a 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 um, a world that was dramatically different and where the united states side of the penny. oh, that's not along with. okay. yeah, 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 r t c a next time. remember across the

the, the, the wireless news from google. well just give it to us or just so used to combine into, say, combining. so that's them to combine the new one in the blue and you mean those 2 pieces to quote for to, for this to them to the stuff that we need from somebody at least choice. although we see a 4 digit pin on the and all the loading on the it seems to by the oh,

don't allow because this doesn't still we don't design based on size. the season may as easy to, to read the time. the take a fresh look around is a life kaleidoscopic, isn't just a shifted reality distortion by tell us to do vision with no real opinions. fixtures, design to simplify will confuse really once a better wills and is it just because it shows you fractured images, present it is, but can you see through their illusion going underground?

can the fall of probably a 1000007 people, 7, maybe a 1000000 a but i think all of them i think i'll be re settled in areas where they can live a beautiful life and not be worried about dying every day. the us present, unveils a shocking plan to force all the us. it is from their lands and take control of the enclave. out of country on our own is to be does the strip sparkled by the spine. while the palestinian ambassador to the un rejects terms planned to relocate godson's era of nations, condemn the proposal and urge for creation of an independent state of palestine. and a trump signs a direct him to bring back his maximum pressure crusade against the.