back in the united states and. emergency session of the united nations security council is called ambassador chang of the republic of korea. here is secretary general craig polizei. the present situation is a serious one and it's a threat to international peace. the security council is. mr. president, in my opinion, the competent organ to deal with it. i considered the clear duty of the security council to take steps necessary to reestablish peace in that area. a vote on united states demand that the north koreans halt their aggression is carried nine to nothing with the soviet union absent back in korea, the saddest victim of the treacherous aggression by the communist north korean puppets are women and children. this is not new. these tragic can bewildered refugees are always the first fruit of wanton aggression. meanwhile, at the united nations, the security council, with the soviets still absent calls upon all its members by military aid by the korean republic, the united states delegate speaks. this is the firs

in 1949, the president of the united states of america, harry s. truman, met with the chief rabbi of the newly established state of israel, my grandfather, in the oval office. this was just a few years after each of them pleaded and campaigned for the rescue of europe's jews being slaughtered in the holocaust by the nazis. in speaking to president truman, rabbi herzog thanked him for being the first world leader to officially recognize the state of israel 11 minutes after its foundation. he spoke, rabbi herzog, of the divine providence that destined president truman to help bring about the rebirth of israel after 2,000 years of exile. witnesses of the encounter recalled tears running down president truman's cheeks. we're honored to have president truman's grandson, cliffton truman, down here with us today. when the state of israel was established in 1948, the land which the almighty promised abraham, to which moses led the israelites, the land of the bible, of milk and honey, evolved into an exquisite land of democracy. against all odds, the jewish

these products prospects will remain weak because for the united states and the european union of could be in the ukrainian state economically. solvent will multiply over time as conflicts inhibits investments and production beyond the potential for russian gains and the cannot be consequences for ukraine, europe, and the world. a long war would also have consequences for u. s. foreign policy. the ability to focus on it's all the global priorities, particularly competition with china, will remain constrained, as long as the words absorb and senior policy makers time and us military sources have the democratic presidential candidate, robert f. kennedy, who has said that this is no longer about humanitarian aid for the united states. but instead that the united states has turned this into a proxy war with russia. we have neglected many, many opportunities to settle this for peacefully. the way that we have conducted the war is bad for the client id is terrible for the, for any people. even among the current administration bite and administration, the us national security advisor jake sull

doors that are triggered by the united states. it's the only these tiny elliots benefit from it. however, china is giving incentives to this congress. it is showing them there is a possibility for economic integration between the chinese economy and these regional powers. and it's, it has present it. it's uh, for example, um, seems comfortable the initiative and how would you see kind of both the initiative can reflect on the economic welfare of the people. and when defense regional countries engage in economic integration, the chances for immediate trade conflicts between them also diminish. and this is a concept that china is presenting in the region. and i think it's very welcomed. and because the, the interest of china is in establishing peace in the region, and the interest of the united states is to keep the agent in constant turmoil. so they are the 2 different approaches and both china, of course, it's becoming more who jump on in the region. and united states also wants to stay here, do more in the region, but the approac

we are against it . and here it is important as why because the united states believes that any step e a nuclear conflict between the violent states and the russian federation is irresponsible that it is the united states of the russian federation that gives it most of all nuclear states, and therefore the united states in its policy must take into account the risks for the united states, and therefore the war of russia against ukraine can only take place within the framework that does not create this risk for the united states and its allies. to the red lines you already said that it was predicted and many people say that it was predicted even this was frankly said this will already be the cancellation of this he forgot no it will not be where a certain council of measures can to be the cancellation of the risk of a massive nuclear bombardment of ukraine not just one nuclear strike but again, we do not know how the united states will react to such a nuclear strike , because all the talk that they will respond to it by force seems to me to be quite conditional too, so that it is the p

every president of the united states has said the united states wants to prevent a nuclear iran. there has been a lot of focus with the new israeli government on the views of settlements and judicial reform. but i think -- this is -- has probably escaped a lot of peoples notice that this is probably the most hawkish israeli security cabinet israel has had when it comes to iran. some might remember one a lot of people thought israel might attack nuclear facilities a decade ago. there were people in the security cabinet that opposed it. the prime minister is not a commander-in-chief like the u.s. president. this particular security seems especially hawkish on the run. there seems to be rising -- there is a growing iranian nuclear program. does not seem to be a credible u.s. military option. these release seem very focused on this and seem more cohesive, the government is more cohesive probably than any other is really government is on being tough and willing to provide nuclear iran. let me highlight a few key points. that is where i think we are today. i think that if israel -- the

the clerk: to the congress of the united states. in accordance with section 12304-f of title 10, united states code, i am providing notice that i have authorized the secretary of defense and the secretary of homeland security with respect to the coast guard when it is not operating as a service in the department of the navy to order to active duty members in units of the selective reserve and appropriately designated individual ready reserve members without the consent of the member concerned. pursuant to 12304-a of title 10, united states code. reserve mobilizations under this authorization are not to exceed 3,000 total members at any one time of whom not more than 450 may be members of the individual ready reserve. these reserve component forces are to augment the active forces for operation atlantic resolve, to enhance the united states' ability to sustain its heightened level of presence and operations in support of united states-european command. appy of the executive -- a copy of the executive order i have issued is enclosed.

but at the same time, i understand it. secretary blinking also stated very clearly that the united states oppose any u. d. that will change of state as cool. that means the will that these days, opposing any use of force by the chinese side gives tie one. and in fact, this is not the only country, not the only one leader that is being saying that in the g 7 summit or in the e u. us summit or in other uh, some important some is the leaders always reaffirm the importance of use instability in the highest rate. and they also oppose any human data with change of status quote in this part of the world and somebody even the post the use of force . and lately, there's also a new language coming out of europe, saying that the piece instability of the power straight is an integral part of the global security and prosperity. and with all of this, i'm sure the international caution against the chinese use support or teen to an ex tie one is sufficient and we hope the international community can continue to pay attention to the chinese motivation. they'll be using force against high one. so he's very

the united states, was it a free to use an old term? the only guys like you remember, a pretty groovy place, right? i mean, they had the best of both worlds. but when, when, when we started doing what we've done with cit, go in venezuela, just as an example off the top of my head or with the deal with iran or what we're doing now with china and my god with. as you mentioned, what we did recently with russia that seems punitive, it's not, we want to be a part of the system and we're going to be equal players. know, it's what you just said. we're in a position where we can use our power to leverage it against you. and i think that's, that's the turnaround in this whole thing, professor. yep. and i think if i can venture a moment of history, it's a classic moment when an empire makes a fundamental mistake. it, we've had a ride up in the american empire and we replaced the british empire. it was a good ride up to most of the 2nd half of the 20th century and really roared forward. but it has peaked. we don't have the position we had before,

and finally, the united states is what we call the deep state.ms, he needs to work so that neither biden nor trump do not participate in the elections, because each of them carries their own risks, moreover, if biden is a candidate, but sorry , they will have to falsify the elections. uh, just in impudent. which leads to the discrediting of american state institutions , therefore, looking at the strange foreign policy of the united states of america, you want to say that against the backdrop of the internal situation, but this is just an upward success, if i may say so, but inside the situation is terrible. uh, rotten and threatening to be unpredictable through and through, but it just seems to me that the deep state is interested in preserving the biden by hook or by crook, because through the biden, the deep state holds power with an alternative to the biden, and inside democratic party is the left wing of the same robert kennedy jr. yes, the most growing growing political force in the democratic camp is the left. yes. e left neo-socialists. uh

i know by god's grace i did exactly what the constitution of the united states required of me that day i kept my oath. but let me be very respectful of the question and tell you -- look, states conduct our elections. you would never want washington, d.c., to run our elections and you would certainly never want one person in washington, d.c., to pick who wins that election. ma'am, here's what i'm explaining it to you. after there were questions in half a dozen or so states, we had reviews of the results, 60 different lawsuits that went to the courts. where there are questions, there is two ways they review. number one is you take those issues to the states for recounts. second, you take them to the courts, which we did very aggressively. there were voting irregularities that took place. you had half a dozen states that changed the rules in the name of covid, but the courts upheld those changes in virtually every instance and in every instance where they would have had any impact whatsoever, but at the end of the day when iowa certified your results and sent them to washington, d.c., whe

if united states were able to pass a comprehensive immigration reform that would allow legal process for those seeking opportunities in that state you would be far better able to reduce the government to meaningful cooperate on narcotics and law enforcement issues. in its engagement with the government the u.s. should prioritize shutting down pharmacies that sell fentanyl and fentanyl laced drugs and the dismantling of drug trafficking networks and seizures and more effective press to get tarrio action. rather than designating criminal groups and supporting organizations united states should intensify border inspections that requires adequate resourcing. u.s. customs and border protection's impersonal or legal ports of entry as well as developing packages of leverage such as indictment for denial against officials who sabotage the rule of law in mexico and facilitate activities. the united states should adopt whole of government approach when it comes to fentanyl smuggling operating a wide range of u.s. -- including the department of state to support u.s. law enforcement. because the

. >> ladies and gentlemen, please stand for the presentation of the colors by the united states capitol police ceremony unit and singing of our national anthem. >> forward march. >> present. ♪ o say can you see by the dawn's early light. what so proudly we hail. at the twilight's last gleaming. whose bright stripes and bright stars. through the perilous fight. oer the ramparts we watched. were so gallantly streaming. and the rockets red glare. the bombs bursting in air. gave proof through the night that our flag was still there. o say does that our "star-spangled banner" yet wave . or the land of the free. and the heme -- home of the brave. ♪♪ , march. >> ladies and gentlemen remain standing offered by chaplain kibben. chaplain kibben: would you pray with me, we lift up our voices to you, god of our country. god of we pause today to give testimony to how far you have brought us, from a bloody bridge on a sunday in selma, to decades of life of service arrive with brutal resistance, john lewis has stayed forever on your path. the silence of violent rod chasing those who would strive like

is a huge ally when the goals coincide, but the united states also has a huge restrictions on political actions when the goals do not coincide with this, one has to live somehow and now it turns out that the united states, for a variety of reasons, does not see that ukraine should quickly become a member of nato. while european politicians, european countries, even france they are more inclined to give ukraine a more specific offer to ukraine. and when we talk about this series of reasons, it is precisely the attitude of the russian federation to the risks on the part of the russian federation as a country if in a negative scenario, where exactly does the american side have to bear the main burden in the military costs of the confrontation with the russian federation, and on the other hand, european countries, which are also trying to conduct their own policy , hoping that during the escalation, again, the main burden will fall on the united states states and then we understand that then the slow approach of the americans is now, well, actually dominant. he just restrains thes

the united states can be continued for a long time, for example, to turn their states.raine is pleased with the current leadership, which cannot take a single full-fledged free step beyond a rare one. an exception for which they are often flown, as they say from the united states , they cannot enter, and without detente , the united states first of all protects the business interests of its large corporations, and besides, the united states protects its security, and security is absolute security. they see it in ensuring a military presence in all regions of the world and deterring the military through all their potential competitors, and here. unfortunately, it must be recognized that in the new national security strategy that was adopted under the biden, russia, along with china, with which we stand back to back, is seen as a strategic competitor and threat to the rule-based order that the united states of america today promote international politics. and what do they mean by rule-based order, these supposedly rules are developed in a narrow circle of allies who will

the united states is guided by the most vile vicious interests. at the clinton foundation when hillary clinton was secretary of state bill clinton went to sweden to persuade telecom equipment makers erickson to donate $750,000 to the clinton foundation, and then a couple of weeks later hillary repealed a certain law on erics that would otherwise have been used against companies, it turns out the principle, if you don’t pay, you won’t go, there is a corruption element. in past. we blamed. in russia, china, mexico, in the usa, the level of corruption is enormous now, a decisive moment, we live in such an important time in the history of mankind as the period after the end of the second world war when the new world order was created , i believe that we are now witnessing the birth of a new international order . it will not be controlled by the united states, it will not be dominated by them. that is why the united states continues to to pump weapons into ukraine, to be honest, i was surprised by the restrained reaction from russia . i think it's time

and the united states has to deal with them in those terms. but there's no one in moscow or beijing zembla thinking of like, gee, what does what does the three pure problem mean for us? because the prospect of conflict between russia and china know is remote at this point. what i find fascinating about argument, rob, is that there isn't really agreement yet that hear in the strategic community about the fundamental question you raise which is do we have tri polar problem or do we have to bipolar? i noticed that sig hecker, the who, of course, ran los alamos national lab and then was at stanford for many years, said in the same piece this morning, i don't see russia and china getting together on nuclear strategies. i see this as two bipolar. on the other hand, we've got a china and russia who have about a relationship with no limits they've done military exercises together, not nuclear exercises, but military exercises. they both clearly see an advantage in being our antagonist. could you imagine a situation in which they put together a common

they couldn't, they weren't strong enough and the united states was dominant. but with the new millennium, with a sanctions against the iran, for example, you're quite right. this began to break down. countries wanted a little of the benefit for themselves. they to want to always have the dollar be the intermediary. one of the biggest things that made that happened was saudi arabia, which agreed to be paid for its oil as the biggest oil producer in the world $1000000.00 . and they might make everybody need to hold dollars to keep dollars in reserve, etc. when all of this change is in the new century, the last 20 years, because not only did countries become big enough and rich enough lead by trying to to begin to say seriously, we want our own currency to be part of the deal. even europe got the your rowe. yeah. into the little bit after the year. 2004. what really did it and you, you were right. quite right. brick pointed is when the united states changed its policies from being the dominant country and the world, making sure that its currency was everywhere av

and it was not glass, but it brought enormous benefits to the united states. very simple to explain. we bring goods and services from around the world here, french, wine, japanese cars, whatever it is. and we give them an exchange little green pieces of paper that costs nothing to make. if they need dollars, they accept those pieces of paper. we get the benefit of real product. mm hm. and a paper and then the make it worse since the paper doesn't give them anything, no interest. they lend the paper back to the american government, helping to fund the deficits and they get an interest from the united states for holding those dollars. this is a wonderful benefit multiplied to the united states, but it makes every other country jealous, they want that they don't want to be on the wrong end of that kind of deal. they want it in for most of the 20th century. they couldn't, they weren't strong enough and the united states was dominant. but with the new millennium, with a sanctions against the iran, for example, you're quite right. this began to break down. countries

[cheers and applause] i have the great honor as united states senator of champion lithuania and other baltic states to join nato in 2004, wasn't i brilliant doing that? but all kidding aside, think about how it's changed things. think about what's happened. now over the last few days as president of the united states, i had the honor of participating in the historic nato summit hosted by legitimate a winy where we welcomed -- lithuania where we welcomed nato's most recent ally, finland. and we hope to bring sweden in as soon as possible. [applause] president erred want kept his -- erdogan kept his word. we've witnessed your historic journey and i'm proud to call lithuania friend, partner and ally. ally, ally. [applause] soon nato will be the 32nd freestanding -- 32 freestanding members, standing together to defend our people and our territory. beyond all the rest, bound by democratic values to make us strong, and by our sacred oath, and it is a sacred oath, an attack against one is an attack against all because each member of nato knows that the strength of our people and the power of

i think it's a fair question to ask like, where's the concern for the united states in show -- unitedtates and that? >> that's not my concern. tucker, i've heard that routine from you before, but that's not my concern. i'm running for president of the united states because i think this country is in a lot of trouble. i think joe biden has weakened america at home and abroad. and as president of the united states, we're going to restore law and order in our cities. we're going to secure our border. we're going to get this economy moving again and we're going to make sure that we have men and women on our courts at every level that will stand for the right to life and defend all the god given liberties enshrined in our constitution. anybody that says that we can't be the leader of the free world and solve our problems at home has a pretty small view of the greatest nation on earth. we can do both. and as president of the united states, we will secure our border, we will support our military. we will revive our economy and stand by our values and we will also lead the world for freedom u

the dominican republic, all this is what churchill would call in europe soft, knocking out the united statesnational security. this it was considered just perfectly er, natural to put things in order. independent sovereign states, because the model and likeness that was fit for the next ruler of the white house, but now, of course, and the united states is facing serious resistance in latin america, these countries are striving for their independence and participation, for example, brazil in brix and this is the clearest example of this . and of course, brazil is forced to take into account the opinion of the united states on but the states of latin america want to diversify their foreign policy as well. and argentina as well as venezuela a and although the usa would like to see this whole region as its backyard, they are no longer all power hygienists there , the list of states that are in the basin dependence of the usa can be continued for a long time, for example, with the baltic states. yes, for example, ukraine is pleased with the current leadership, which cannot take a single full-fle

and the united states has to deal with them in those terms. but there's no one in moscow or beijing zembla thinking of like, gee, what does what does the three pure problem mean for us? because the prospect of conflict between russia and china know is remote at this point. what i find fascinating about argument, rob, is that there isn't really agreement yet that hear in the strategic community about the fundamental question you raise which is do we have tri polar problem or do we have to bipolar? i noticed that sig hecker, the who, of course, ran los alamos national lab and then was at stanford for many years, said in the same piece this morning, i don't see russia and china getting together on nuclear strategies. i see this as two bipolar. on the other hand, we've got a china and russia who have about a relationship with no limits they've done military exercises together, not nuclear exercises, but military exercises. they both clearly see an advantage in being our antagonist. could you imagine a situation in which they put together a common

and the interest of the united states is to keep the region in constant turmoil. so they are the 2 different approaches and both china, of course, it's becoming more huge a mon, in the region and united it's also wants to stay here, do more in the region, but a fortress are different. and i think i the, because the saw these have a vision now and the economic vision and they are preparing themselves for the era posts or era. and they want to establish an economic hub in inside the area. creat industrial cities create technological cities in, inside the it'd be one of the examples that i heard recently. that's all data is building a c, t a and attracting a, it's a technological city and attracting software developers and game developers to come to sort of the of, it'd be on the look online games and people may underestimate this, but the future. and if you, if you see where are we heading to, into the digits in words, this could be a main hub in the region for software development and also for gaming development, for example, which will. and then each saw the end, i

as we reported here, a trade deal for reach between the united states. a pardon me, the united arab emirates and china, and it was carried out in chinese cohen, c with the coordination of the french energy for think about that. and then in april reports thing with india's central bank about conducting transactions in indian world, please. among the countries involved in those talks are the mom leaves me in mar, russia, and also the united kingdom, germany, and who zailynn. so these are not literal countries, but they're going along now with other countries that wouldn't traditionally be making these are richard wolf. what do you make of that professor? that not only are we seeing suddenly african nations, america, latin american countries, like we said, with lula and argentina coming forward and asking for a change in the system. but that we're also seeing countries like new zealand. and if in great britain, i think we want to be invited to this dance before it gets away from us, it seems to be what's going on now. absolutely, i mean, in the past and bypa

uh, the united states economies to be precise. and so as long conflict would mean that the global economic growth would slow down. if this conflict goes on even longer, that would mean that the united states global priorities would essentially be suppressed and the conflict would absorb its military resources and its energy on a list have also mentioned the bilateral relations between russia and the united states. and they have said that it is very much unlikely for them to get any better if the conflict can see use. they've also mentioned the prospect. so negotiate a follow on to the new start treaty, which is set to expire in 2026. these products prospects will remain weak because for the united states and the european union of could be in the ukrainian state, economically. solvent will multiply over time as conflicts, inhibits investment and production beyond the potential for russian gains and the economy consequences for ukraine, europe, and the world. a long war would also have consequences for u. s. foreign policy. the abil

and then all of this work culminated in 1980 with the publication of "a people's history of the united stateshich really provides a groundbreaking rethinking of the entire history of the united from the bottom up, a perspective that radically rethinks the way that our history is taught. amy: i want to say when i saw the two of you, anthony arnove and haley pessin, on the stage of town hall, it really was a beautiful sight. you have a generation between you. and haley, i'm wondering if you can talk about how you discovered howard zinn's writing and how you came to co-edit this book. >> i discovered howard zinn as a high school student. so i was lucky to have "a people's history of the united states" as one of the books that we read. and i really read it voraciously in a way that a textbook had ever really grabbed my attention. this one was very much a breath of fresh air because i was an activist. and it was a book that began with christopher columbus, but really unpacked his actual legacy, in his own words, through his diaries showing that rather than the brave explorer that we were all taugh

does everyone like it in the united states that the united states is waging a war in europe ? hair and again, it seems to me that this is exactly the view from the russian side the federation was like oh, well , they won't do anything at all 100%. yes, that is, we will quickly go through with ukraine and further on there, like the baltic countries, because they are not able to coordinate their actions in any way, but they are able, and returning to the united states and our strategic partner and in general, their er-er, what can we give them a-er, the strategy of the united states er-er is not to return crimea yes, of course, that is, the strategy is to have er-er in this region not even balance but to have stability, but the strategy in therefore, on the one hand, to close europe from the russian federation, on the other hand, to weaken the russian federation so much that it would no longer influence the processes, but everything was still strategic. well, i don't know any partner of china, so that it would be possible to influence china, including and in this way, because fo

army were deeply in the interests of the united states. and in our interests, of course, that ukraine not only survived but also won this war and became a member of nato, we understand that we are in a state of war, in fact , a beastly war, extremely difficult, and the west is somehow trying not to get involved in the second one because we can also see certain trends, there is a feeling that strategically, russia can no longer offer anything to achieve this or that victory. it can only prolong the war, and this is where history feels. how long can they prolong the war? because putin pretends to be ready to wage an almost century-long war against ukraine against the west and so on , of course the question of resources well, we understand that russian resources and ukrainian resources are one thing, but the resources of, for example, the euro-atlantic community and putin's resources are not comparable things so dear post how long can putin try to continue the war since putin is losing this war he is ready to fight it until someone stops him f

israel today pursuing policies the united states find very hard to support.t also in its policy towards the palestinians, particularly in the west bank. that is a cause of great friction between between the two countries. there is an expectation the united states would use this aid as leverage which i think is a bad idea overall and it would be much better for israel and the united states if we had a maturing of our relationship. and a reduction in dependency on aid which israel doesn't need anymore. the relationship with the united states has long been based on the appreciation of shared democratic values. if we are in a situation where this bill might pass, do you think this might cause the united states to reassess its relationship with israel? i do think there will inevitably be a reassessment. whether it is formal reassessment by the administration. if israel is going to go the way of turkey or hungary and become an illegal democracy, that will have a profound effect on support israel enjoys, particularly amongst liberal americans, particularly amongst j

however, after the coming to power of ronald, reagan eighty-first united states.gain began to actively restrict the soviet energy sector through the provision of loans for gas projects. the same french considered the ussr a reliable partner and provided loans at seven and eight percent per annum, although western borrowers were given courts no less than under. yes, and among reagan's advisers were less bellicose , who believed that imposing restrictions on beneficial cooperation between the soviet union and europe would lead to significant conflict between the united states and european countries and the latter simply refuse to comply with the requirements of the united states, but the imposition of martial law in poland in 1981 allowed reagan to impose large-scale sanctions against the ussr, including a ban on the supply of oil and gas equipment for the urengoy gas pipeline. in the second year, germany france great britain italy declares us sanctions illegal and resumes deliveries of oil and gas equipment to the ussr washington failed to convince its european all

they are enriching the united states of america. we need to keep them here, and we need to give them the security and sense of permanency that is essential for them to continue to flourish. they can't have jobs, they can't put their children in schools, they can't keep housing if they are in limbo. so as a practical matter, we must move. we should have done it last session. we have the opportunity now. ity an obligation -- it's an obligation. let's vote on this amendment to enable our afghan allies to stay in this country as they deserve and need to do. thank you, mr. president. mr. coons: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from delaware. mr. coons: mr. president, just about two years ago, roughly 76,000 afghans, those who served alongside american forces during two decades of conflict and their families, were evacuated here to the united states on military planes and given two years of humanitarian patrol. -- humanitarian parole. the biden administration worked to extend that parole, but we have to ask ourselves to w

i see this debate seeing very little disagreement on this house floor is that we as the united states of america, we, as the u.s. congress, the house of representatives, believes in the tenets. the state of israel is not a racist state or apartheid state and the united states will be a staunch partner and supporter of israel. mr. speaker, not only do i urge my colleagues to support this, but i urge my colleagues to stand up against bullying, against those who would say things that are not true, those that would denounce or use words that are hateful in their rhetoric, that undermine the very essence of the nation of israel and undermine the freedoms that this country stands for. it is with great honor that i am able to author this and stand before the american public and to reaffirm on the 75th anniversary of the state of israel for a nation that is divinely inspired. and with i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from new york is now recognized. mr. meeks: i yield to the gentlelady from north carolina. mr. mann: -- ms. meng: i rise in those in s

every president of the united states have said the united states will act to prevent a nuclear iran that it seems we're getting very close to that very eventuality. also, obviously much of -- that has been a lot of focus with this new israeli government on views of settlements, obviously, as we see today with judicial reform, but i think this has escaped a lot of people's notice, that this is probably the most hawkish israeli security cabinet israel has had when it comes to iran. some might remember when a lot of people thought israel let attack iranian nuclear facilities about a decade ago, a little over a decade ago, that there were folks in the security cabinet that opposed it. the prime minister is not a commander-in-chief like the u.s. president. for major operations, you need the support of the security cabinet. and this particular security cabinet, seems especially hawkish on iran. there seems to be raising, growing iranian nuclear program on the verge of becoming a nuclear threshold state, doesn't seem to be a credible u.s. military option. and the israelis seem very focused on t

and this intelligence data was used by the united states of america starting in 1946 . is especially painful for us , because in 1946, in the summer of 1946, not all soviet units even reached home, but they really worked against us and worked very seriously and prepared very serious operations. he gave them intelligence he gave them the network. e, sleeping, which was. well, the soviet union's spy network was all about intelligence. it was very interesting, the united states of america is the largest gelin operation, as you and i know, this is an operation. hermes and the operation, respectively, the jungle, whose absence was carried out in the baltic states, is an operation. which began to be carried out already in the forty-sixth year of 46, at that time, the soviet troops finally cleared the baltic states from those remnants of the german dynastic formations that were there, and this is it the worst thing, that is, people who declared that they were allies of the soviet union, the goals were financed. and the nazi battalions and nazi intelligence. it really was very

united states actually may combine in every single category of their uh, unit 3, material. read them new size to be themselves, be them. thanks be then what have you. you can take a look at the speed with which russia or original weights and updates is nuclear submarine forces right now in how many sheets of rush approaches as bills. now, you know, it's a strong issue and there you go. so it's a little cold. so obviously as usual and now they expected rush up to, you know, basically, tumble or you know, cromwell, within a month or 2. they are evidently people that don't understand what the real economy is. they cannot know any final thoughts or perhaps predictions on how the course of this conflict and ukraine is going to play out over the next. i don't know, let's say this year to i paid for it. as of this, may i see it being cassandra? first, of course i cannot know. possibly i don't have enough information. only people who have information about all there are me to do political thought in rush of general style from the books places you'd be able to get near or around the

haiti dominican republic all this is what churchill called in europe would be soft, inciting the united statesactly what was an object of national security. it was considered just perfectly, uh, natural to clean up. independent sovereign states, because the model and likeness that was fit for the next ruler of the white house, but now, of course, and the united states is facing serious resistance in latin america, these countries are striving for their independence and participation, for example, brazil in brix and this is the brightest example. and of course, brazil is forced to take into account the opinion of the united states on latin american state wants to diversify its foreign policy also argentina and venezuela a and although the us would like to see the whole region as its backyard, it is no longer. there , all the powerful list of states to the extent that the rest of the dependence of the united states can be continued for a long time, for example, to turn them. yes, for example, ukraine is the current leadership, which cannot take a single full-fledged free step beyond the rhythm.