Transcription
Welcome back. We are joined again by Larry Johnson, a former CI analyst who writes on Soner 21. And I've left a link in the description. So, thank you for coming back on, Larry. It's great to see you as always.
>> Oh, always enjoy the invitation and the chance just to chat with you, you know.
>> Very good. Um I I want to talk about yeah an article you recently penned because uh well uh that is on Russia now recognizing that the Europeans are essentially preparing for more than indirect war a very direct war with Russia. Again I think this has been a long time coming for more than 12 years now. We see NATO using Ukraine as an instrument to weaken Russia as a strategic rival. Again, we've heard enough uh comments from top American officials to verify this. And um we know that in 2014, of course, the NATO backed coup was framed as a democratic revolution, but what they really did was build a huge Ukrainian proxy army while sabotaging uh the Minsk peace agreement. And since 2022, I think all of this has continued. All paths to peace have been blocked by NATO countries while at the same time announcing that you know weapons are the path to peace. So incrementally as well NATO's involvement has escalated especially when things are going bad for Ukraine and now we see NATO weapons being used the NATO intelligence NATO targeting the weapons are guided long long range at least by NATO satellites and even NATO contractors pulling the trigger. So, and well, we can say furthermore, you know, unless we are to believe that the drones that attacked St. Petersburg from the Baltic Sea did not transit through airspace or even originate in NATO territory, then you know then we can say that uh well, these attacks are now also coming from NATO at least using their territory. So, something appears to be changing in Moscow. Perhaps it's the European leader speaking ever openly about the need to break Russia, mass-produced long-range weapons to strike deeper and deeper inside Russia. I mean there's no more pretend anymore and uh something as I said appears to have changed in Moscow and Putin's speech I think was also an indication of where things are heading. I was wondering what is your take though on this speech?
Yeah. Uh I I I've learned to pay attention to Sergey Karaganov. I know he's a a mentor of your I think it's correct to describe him as a former mentor. At least you you worked with him at one point. Um and you know Sergey has always been um you know he gets dismissed by some oh he's just a political scientist but he's a very thoughtful guy and he's very good at seeing trends. Um, and so let let me pose sort of the opposite case that will reinforce where Sergey is coming from. If the Sinaloa cartel was being supplied with drones and missiles by China and Russia and as well as the intelligence for hitting coordinates inside the United States and they were able to launch attacks all along the southern border of the United States and going deep into Texas and into Arizona, New Mexico, the United States would view that as an act of war and would retaliate accordingly. They wouldn't sit there and pretend that it was just some minor border border dust stop. Well, that's exactly now where what's happening with Russia and and I think that we can see that uh let's call it the anchorage period where Putin met with Trump and there was some hope that the United States it was now the United States is engaging Russia and that there was going to be perhaps a diplomatic exit or at least something other than force. That's dead. Absolutely dead. And that has been announced as well by Sergey Lavough among others that that Ushakov Yerti Yoshikov who's a close adviser of Putin. They've all made it clear that that process is dead and uh this goes back to Sergey Kaganov's position. The West has lost its fear of Russia. They assume that we can do whatever the hell we want. We can bomb them. We can kill them. we can uh destroy schools and Russia's not going to do anything in return. And you know, and so I think Cara Gonov is he's talking a graduated escalation, but nonetheless an escalation. Step one, you start hitting these sites in hitting the factories, military sites in those countries to to let them know, no, you've now crossed the line. You've hit us, we're hitting you back. I I think and frankly that ought to be followed up by putting NATO on notice that any surveillance aircraft that are even in international airspace that are collecting information on Russia will be targeted and will be shot down that the West has got to know that they cannot continue this kind of provocation because as Sergey has pointed out if if if this continues the next step is the use of tactical nuclear weapons and that pushes the world into a whole new direction. But the I I hope there is nobody left in Russia that harbors the illusion that somehow the the West is seeking a peaceful negotiated outcome. No, absolutely not. The West wants to destroy Russia. They're intent on that. The rhetoric has become more intense. And what's really bizarre is the how the media coverage now is really portraying Russia is on its back foot. Russia's suffering. Russia's losing. Oh my god, it's And meanwhile, what's actually happening on the battlefield is Russia is moving forward in a way that has not moved forward in the four years, previous four years. uh you know in one in in 2003 they were f 2023 they were focused on Bakmoot then 2024 ADFA or may I got it may have them reversed but it was first Bakmut then ADFA or ADFKA and then Bakmoot and then 2025 Prosk so there was always like one battle that was getting all the attention and all the resources not now there are multiple battles along the line that are that are taking place and will collapse the Ukrainian line at some point. So the the war has changed in tone. That that is uh for certain.
It's been so many fictions all along. I mean I remember when Russia first went in the main talking point was yeah not just unprovoked but this full-scale invasion even though the Russians were talking to Sinski about finding a peaceful solution on the first day of the attack. uh was already in March of 2022 the first articles came out that well Russia's already losing it's running out of missiles within the next uh two to five days or something. Uh then we had the Nordstream issue. Oh yes uh they blew up their own pipeline. Then we had the invasion of Kursk which was oh this is definitely um you know turning the tide now Russia is losing. uh every time NATO escalates with a new weapon, it's all it's a it's a game changer.
>> Yeah.
>> I mean, we listen to this for more than four years now that the war that now the Ukrainians are winning. Now they're winning. It's getting more and more uh you absurd every time. But again, the the goal is always the same is to prolong the war, keep it going. And uh you know, officially the language is well, we we just want Ukraine to negotiate from a position of peace. we want to force Putin into the negotiation table even though it's the Europeans who are not who refuse to talk to the Russians. It's quite absurd. I mean anyone paying attention would know that this is absurd but uh you know it's um yeah the propaganda is really dialed up and they think that I'm following these talking points is somehow very patriotic even though as you said we're heading now towards not just not just war but such a war could very easily escalate into a war with the use of tactical nuclear weapons. Uh I did notice in Putin's speech he did refer to operation um Barbarosa the 1949 sorry 1941 uh why do you think this historical comparison is uh so important?
Well, uh, the point uh, the point Putin was making and so he did this was an address on Tuesday the 23rd, the day after the, uh, I guess the 84th anniversary or 85th anniversary of the invasion of the Soviet Union by Russia. and he was addressing uh the cadets, graduates of military and intelligence and police institutions and and in making that he was you know he was noting that right now Russia is o the the west is making no attempts to hide its intent to go to war with Russia. They're not I mean they're openly talking about that within two to three years we're going to attack Russia and Putin's point was just very simple. Uh we've been there before. We we the Russian people have been there before. We know what we we know what it means to face this kind of threat. And while the the Soviet Union was not prepared for to re to repel that invasion in 1941, the message I took from Putin was we're we're more than prepared. We know it's coming and we're going to deal with it. Uh so he was that was really I you know I think he put a a notice put a put out a red flag that the west should see that uh you're you're getting ready to enter a hot zone and if you if you follow this the result will be the same as what happened to Germany and its European allies that attacked the Soviets ultimately and were ultimately defeated. But this time, Russia is not going to sit back and wait to be attacked. Uh once once it becomes clear that the the West is intent on following through on this threat, Russia is going to take steps to defend itself. That was that was the clear message I took away from that that speech.
Yeah, this is an important part of that is if Russia thinks it's going to be attacked, it will not wait for the opponent to attack. I think something like this was mentioned in one of the biographies of Putin as well that is he learned early on if uh if you know a fight is unavoidable make sure you throw the first punch. I would argue that uh this is one of the uh reasons as well why they invaded in February of 2022.
Indeed.
>> Exactly. Exactly. I agree because in November of 2021, you know, the US and Ukraine they started they signed this charter on strategic partnership and at that point one of the top advisers to the former French president made the point that this signing of this charter uh made it convinced the Russians that they would either have to attack or be attacked. So this is really yeah the straw that broke the camel's back and why would they wait for an attack on Crimea or Donbas? So they went in and uh yeah, but uh uh but but how but but this is is this what the Europeans are waiting for then? Uh when they talk about the you know we have to prepare for a future war with Russia, is that a Russian retaliation they're talking about? Because if they really think that Russia's going to attack Europe, they would need at least to outline what the objective would be. What exactly would be the purpose of attacking Europe? I can only say one purpose. I mean, unless you believe in this fairy tales of restoring the Soviet Union, but the only purpose would be to restore its deterrent, but is then the goal to go to war.
Well, I I don't know if you saw Putin issued a response to the Germans the other day that was just scathing and and sarcasm. uh like the the bottom line message was why would we want to invade you and then have to be responsible for a group of transvestite transgender blue-haired weirdos? What what do we gain from that? Sorry, we don't need that. We don't want that. You can have it. That was his basic message to him. And it was um you know it went on it was like I was recall like eight or nine points. I thought it was it was actually brilliant of him how he presented it because it was entertaining but it was uh but it was also you know to the point. Uh so but Russia's Russia has to step back and look at the these attacks that Ukraine are carrying out are not being carried out because Ukraine's got the expertise to do it. And the concern is you've had Ukrainian officials just of late talk about building a nuclear warhead. And there is a report out of uh uh a YouTuber by the name of Borikman. uh you know sometimes his reporting has been quite accurate sometimes you know questionable but uh he claims that a ship a recent arrival of a British ship in Odessa carried uh these yellow barrels that look to be as containing radioactive material. Uh I'm sure Russia is now all over that. Uh but uh it you know you can't put it past the Brits of trying to do something at that absolute crazy that they would uh run that risk. This is uh you know there they are poking the bear. They are they it's like they think that they can throw a punch at Russia and Russia is not going to react. Uh and I maintain that is a dangerous dangerous assumption. Uh Russia's been slow to anger, but you know once once their their dander is up, they are most formidable.
Well, one can understand though why well especially the British because they appear to be with the Germans among the most aggressive one in this war. But uh you one one can understand though because they essentially uh designed a proxy war uh almost in the dream scenario during the cold war that is to have the Ukrainians and Russians kill each other on mass and the west would stand on the sideline and that's essentially what's been created here though it's a war where the Europeans have said well we have to bring this war to Russian territory which they now have but Europe is a safe zone so all the industrial production all the missiles and drones which they advertise that they're producing to attack Russia with all of this is within European or EU territories and British territory. So this can't be touched by the Russians and essentially the Russians accepted this rule of the game that is the NATO countries can now launch longrange missiles and drones deep into Russia and Russia is allowed to touch NATO territory. I mean this isn't sustainable especially now that it's becoming so much more open and larger scale and also as you said the clear indication of intent that is to to fight a war once Russia has been weakened.
Um, but uh I was wondering how do you see Putin's changed over time because last year he was all about diplomacy anchorage all of this. Now we don't hear much about diplomacy anymore. The the main speeches they're about war that is uh you know we we will achieve our objectives. We have the military power. Uh yes, they have kept their arms opened or or door open for diplomacy, but they quite obviously do not believe that will go anywhere.
>> Yeah. Yeah. No, he's uh I think he's been I don't want to say forced as if it's against his will, but he you know he is cognizant of what the political pressures are and whatever his personal desires for trying to avoid conflict, try to avoid escalation. I think he's recognizes it's reached a point now where the demands of the Russian public are such that they want stronger action. Um the you know they want uh you know decisive strikes against Kiev up to and including killing Zelensky, killing Syrsky, killing the top leaderships. I mean, you know, the reality is senior Russian officials and generals have been assassinated all along and there sort of this attitude is time for payback, but not just payback. This uh you got to cut the guts out of this thing and make it make it so that the Europeans also pay a cost. So that that's why I say you know when you listen to people like uh Medvedev uh you know he's u you know I I think his views are more in line with the majority of Russians than that of Putin. And so Putin Putin in a way is paying a little bit of catchup. Now I don't deny that the military strategy is not being set by Putin. It's being set by Gerasimov. But again, it's up to, you know, the the Russians have not asked me how to fight this war, and I'm not sure my advice would be all that salient. But I I think I think we've now reached a stage where the Europeans are going to be will must pay a price for enabling this violence. Otherwise it will they will continue to escalate it to a point that it will lead to a a a nuclear strike and and that's the danger that you know in a the efforts in efforts to avoid it Russia is taking the very actions that will actually make it more possible.
Well, one can understand though the restraint of Putin because if they now begin to hit back against the NATO country as uh you know Marut not to take him too seriously but would argue then you know the response would be absolutely fierce but you know these people seem to think this is a computer game of some sort or at least that there's proper escalation control that they can do this and if the Russians retaliate then they will be able to manage this. I I just don't I don't think anyone's going to be able to control the escalation once the Russians finally retaliate.
But uh >> yeah, >> the whole idea is, you know, the Russians do not dare until they do dare as they did in 2022. And then then it's completely unprovoked and this is the time to stand up, you know, against the new Hitler. It's, you know, we we we know what the script will look like after the Russian retaliation, which is why it's quite dangerous. Uh but what do you see being the thinking here on the European side though? Because let's be honest, the Europeans they yes they are declaring the intent but they hardly have the capabilities. So well not yet. If the Russians wait much longer then they might have more capabilities.
Yeah that you use the word there thinking implying that the Europeans are thinking. We've engaged in a rational thought process. I for the life of me don't know what they are thinking because it's so illogical that you know you step back and say okay whether I'm Germany or Poland or France or the United Kingdom do I need to pay more for oil and natural gas or do I need to pay less is it better for my country if I pay less well in the world of logic it's better if you pay less but the choice in particular with The Germans says, "No, no, no. We want to we're going to cut off all ties with Russia, who supplies cheap oil and gas. Uh, we will stand by and do nothing while the United States blows up the Nordstream pipeline, compelling us as Europeans that we now must buy more expensive liquid natural gas from the United States. And in fact, we're going to ban any kind of economic interaction with Russia, which is going to weaken our economies, cause u recessions, cause inflation, cause higher unemployment. And you're going and you're doing this consciously. They're doing this. They're choosing to do this. And and then on top of it, say, "Oh, yeah. And then we're going to take on Russia and we're going to fight it and defeat it." And you're going, let me see if I got this straight. You you like the UK, you can't even fill a football stadium with your army. It's so small. Your once leading edge prowess in the world of maritime operations, that's gone. That's history. Germany with these factories that once turned out, you know, some of the most leading edge military equipment are shuttered and you're many of your factory jobs are now going overseas to the United States or other places. So here here is Europe. Uh you know they remind me of uh you know think back to when you were in high school or the whatever you call the education before you go to college and there are the sports teams and the guy who was the star soccer player football player on that team you know when they're 18 17 18 strong veral quite athletic. Well, now he's 60 years old. He weighs twice what he did back then, can barely run, but in his mind still thinks he's that 17, 18 year old football player. That's Europe. They still think that there's this military power that dominated the 19th century, and they're not. They're a they're a hollowed-out shell of of a of a continent where their military power has been, you know, is is really inconsequential. They're they're they're in the, you know, if you're going to take them to a dog show, they're the they're in the Chihuahua class. And yet they're wanting to take on Germany, who's in the Rottweiler class. Sorry,
>> Russia. I mean, yeah, Russia, not Germany, my mistake, but Russ Russia's in I was saying Rottweiler Germany, but now Russia is the Rottweiler class. I mean, they're this big dog. Uh Europe, a bunch of yappy little dogs that, you know, they they have no significant economic resources. They've lost their industrial edge. They're not doing anything that's on the leading edge of science and technology. They're not leading in spa. I mean, there's not a single sector you can point to where Europe you go yeah this is the future can lie with them you know they're they're living on a legacy.
Yeah. Now I've been trying to make sense of the European position as well because I always make the point that I think that yeah the Russians are fighting an existential war. The Ukrainians as well I think to a large extent they're also this can also end Ukraine. So they also have a reason to fear an existential threat. So they're they both make sense. The Americans, you know, they wanted to well they started this to knock out a key rival. It didn't work. They hand it over to the outsource it to the Europeans. Also makes sense, but the Europeans really really don't make much sense. And you know, one could try to engage people in this political leadership in in discussions to dig out what to find out what exactly is the logic here. what what do you want to achieve? How do you intend to achieve it based on your resources? But there if you look across all the countries in the EU, they they just the politicians, the media, they only communicate in cliches, these emotional slogans, anything that deviates from it is censored. I mean, there's a massive cost for anyone breaking with the narrative of the group. one gets impression there's a mass psychosis forming and uh if one would argue well if we if our territories are used to strike against Russia wouldn't that push the Russians to retaliate possibly you know resulting nuclear war ah that's putinist you know because in any c any word of caution sounds like one wants to restrain the attacks on Russia and that means you're with the Russians So, and no one can dissent. I mean, the idea that we have freedom of speech, dialogue, discussion, it's it's nonsense. There's none of the sort in Europe now. It's uh it's a looney bin. And uh there there's no there's no other objectives now than defeating Russia. All of this talk about, you know, they put forward some plans about, you know, opening diplomacy with Russia, but you know, the set conditions, which essentially is for Russia to capitulate first. It's but beyond the hatred of Russia though do do you think yeah it's the you hinted towards the inability or its lack of place in the world. It doesn't have I mean it doesn't have the role it it did in the past anymore. It doesn't really have a clear economic future. The partnership with the US is going away. Is this just desperation you think that well reflecting a wider problem?
Well, there's actually a reality that's going to descend on Europe within the next two to three weeks and this is the fallout from the shutdown of the the Persian Gulf and the clo you know Iran closing off the strait of Hormuz. So right there has been a dramatic loss of of five significant I'll call them commodities but they are inputs into the global economy. at least 20% of the oil, 25% of the liquid natural gas, 25 to 30% of the sulfur and urea which go for fertilizer and over 40% of the helium which is used for making computer chips among other things. Well, right now with the on the oil front, the the United States is is within two weeks will essentially have run out of having a reserve supply of diesel and aviation fuel. So, they they won't have enough oil, the the heavy or sour crude that's required to make diesel and aviation fuel. it'll be sort of week to week depending upon what they can receive because the United States is already a net importer of that. Well, the same the same for Europe. Europe is a net importer of all of oil of all classes of oil and they the shortages that are going to come will affect the economies dramatically. They're already sort of barely bumping along, staying, you know, maybe slightly above zero. But we're talking now that it'll be recession if not depression territory. And oddly enough, Donald Trump talked about this two weeks ago at the G7. and when and that was I think that helped explain why he signed the deal because he recognized in four weeks you know we could be running on zero as far as the kind of crude oil that's needed to produce diesel and aviation fuel. So like Europe Europe is in a worse situation than the United States because United States at least has some independent is independent produces enough of the light oil that is used to produce gasoline but and it's been sh has actually been shipping some of that to Europe as well but Europe doesn't have that and it's it's on the issue of the heavy crude the the mid the middle distillates that's part of the oil from which you get diesel and aviation fuel. And that is a critical that's going to be a critical shortage here. And we're not talking months, we're talking weeks. So, you know, we're going to have a dramatic different differently looking world probably by July 15.
>> Yeah. Not a great time for Europe to engage in a direct war with the world's largest nuclear power. it seem um
>> who also who also has ample supplies of oil and gas.
>> Yeah. Well, that's the big irony here that the the assumption by the Europeans that they would you know, if they just cut all the ties with Russia, then the Russian economy would for collapse relatively shortly. I I still make the point on the as soon as this they announced initially these sanctions, I was making the point that this is going to fail because I you know I worked in Moscow. I worked on a um you know on an on a program or initiative or department that worked on this whole shift of Russia's economy from the west to the east. That's what I mostly work on as well. And I knew that the Russians had made essentially their their economy bulletproof. They were they were shifting their economy quickly to the east and any sanctions would only be used as an opportunity to intensify this process.
So I knew that the Russians could diversify away from Europe but Europe couldn't diversify away from Russia.
But uh whenever I made this point I was told well that undermines trust in the in public support in the in the sanctions. So that's a pro-Russian comment. and that makes you a Putinist. So this is the level of debate we have in Europe and it's it is beyond ridiculous. But anyways, my point is uh yeah the all of this cheap Russian gas and oil which used to go to Europe now goes to Asia and as the Germans have begun to experience uh their companies are following the Russian gas. When that gas goes to China, the German company packs up and go there as well. So it's stupid on a lot of levels.
Um, I did want to ask about the Marco Rubio in Anchorage though. He made the point now that well what happened in Anchorage wasn't really a deal. It was more, you know, discussing formats. Something that the Kremlin did not care much for.
No. Well, it's just, you know, Rubio is is an incompetent. you know, his his job as a secretary of state, national security adviser, at least to use the mo the last one to really occupy that role was Henry Kissinger. And well, Henry Kissinger may have been a war criminal. You there's no denying the man had intellect and thought in terms in strategic terms. Sometimes he was a devious evil bastard. There's no doubt about that. But uh you know he recogn you know his telling Nixon okay we're going to go to China we're going to reestablish relationships with communist China something you Nixon if you fought against communism your entire you made your career on that and we're doing that because we want to weaken the Soviet Union and we want to make sure that we split China off from that branch of communism and help the Chinese develop a if you will, a dependence upon us in the west. So there there was clear strategic thinking behind this. Well, here's Rubio just like, you know, well, you know, he he views Russia does not recognize the critical role that Russia is now playing in the creation of a new international, economic, political, and military order. this is coming into fruition the war just as the the Russia's decision to attack Ukraine because of the impending attack from from the west to preempt that just as that accelerated the growth of bricks as an economic power the US and Israeli attack on Iran on Iran's subsequent, if you will, defeat of the the US and and Israeli attack in in part because of support received from both Russia and China, significant support that range from just not not just financial aid, weapons systems, ammunition, intelligence and we saw a recent report that the back seater, the the colonel who was flying in the backseat of the F-15 that got shot down south of Isfahan back in April. U that he reported seeing these drones, this drone pack and I don't recall if he said it was attacking his ship or whatever, but it was moving as one. It looked like a jellyfish, but it was moving in a coordinated fashion. Well, that came from China. There there's no other country in the world that does that like China does. The Chinese also provided missiles. The Pepe Escobar and I learned from our Pakistani source that during some of the retaliatory strikes against Israel and the United States and the use of Chinese missiles that there were Pakistani technicians, military technicians trained by the Chinese sitting with the Iranians helping them launch and use these weapon systems which destroyed critical infrastructure for the United States in both Bahrain and Kuwait and at Al-Sati Moaf Alti air base in Jordan. So, so what what you're seeing now emerge is this new international military. It's going to be a security organization. It's going to be an economic organization and it is an it's literally an alternative to this US dominated post World War II hegemonic enterprise. And that's what the United States and Europe I sure fully comprehend what's happening but it's happening. And no matter how much they they complain about it or say that it's not real or say that it's weak, they can say all that they want. The fact of the matter is it is happening and you look at the growth rate for China you know they set up this alternative to swift it's called SIPS cross-border interbank payment system CIPS you know swift is an an you know it's an analog it's like using a buggy whip because it's email you know it's like I'm bank A and you're bank B and I say dear Glenn I'm sending you this wire transfer please affect it and credit it to this account and so I send it to you but it goes into your spam folder and you don't find it for 3 days okay but eventually it would get through that was SIPS it's digital immediately transfer here assets move number of banks signing up for that have increased I think the number is like 26 in the last month so the point of all this is Europe is becoming increasingly irrelevant there no you know They're not a huge market in in terms of the rest of the world. They have been considered a potentially profitable one. Although I will note the Chinese are making tremendous inroads in Europe with their electric vehicles. They're cheaper than Tesla. They're better in many aspects. They have better features. And the Europeans don't have an answer to it.
>> Yeah. No, they don't like it, but they don't know what to do. They keep referring to China as a threat because of it. It's which makes it very difficult because they can't defend their position. I mean, if you want to argue that China's a threat, a country that hadn't hasn't been in a war in more than four decades and somehow the threat defined as a military threat derives from its electric vehicles being exported to Europe.
>> Yeah, it's quite extraordinary. I it was interesting what you mentioned about Kissinger though because as you said he's one who you know should take credit for breaking the Chinese off the Soviet Union in the late '70s but um not yet well in the '70s but in 2014 Kissinger you know he wrote some interesting articles he was making the point that neither this is after the NATO countries toppled the government in Kiev that neither NATO or the Russians should use Ukraine as a front against the other. It should be a bridge. And he also was quite critical of the how the western countries rhetoric was essentially about defeating Russia instead of finding a formula for having a common security structure for example. Anyways, I think this is important because he had discussions with Trump in 2016 before Trump Trump took the presidency and I'm sure he was kind of communicating his own ideas about what to do this time which is you know you see this huge Eurasian giant forming of Russia and China in an economic terms Russia is now the junior partner. So, you know, reach out to the smaller one, play on its insecurities, and try to bring it over to our side of the ledger, which makes a lot of sense. Uh, but you know, what happened? Well, you had the Russia gate hoax. Trump was a Russian agent. This was kind of the the logic because you can't say that it's a good idea to get along with Russia. I mean this is how still the Europeans talk though not just the ridiculous people on social media but it's the politicians the journalists this is still the thinking so it doesn't bode well in terms of yeah the wider strategic thinking which we now need but yeah my last question was Russia strikes Europe in retaliation to restore it the turns what does the United States do United States may want to re jump into it, but they won't be able to. You know what what the war with Iran has exposed or the limitations of US military power? Because you have to step back and say, okay, what what are we going to do? Um uh you know, is our naval force can do we have a naval force that we can send our aircraft carriers up into the Baltic Sea, for example, or into the Black Sea? No, we can't. So you have to the the aircraft carriers really are of no use in a military assault on Russia. So that leaves ground troops. We don't have ground troops. We got 470,000 to to quote invade Russia. So there's we we don't we cannot pose a credible ground threat to Russia or or if we did if we were proposing doing that just the time that would be required to assemble that force in Poland or in Romania in locations where they could go across the border. The Russians in the era of drones, short range and intermediate range ballistic missiles would target and destroy those encampments. So that leaves air power and you know again what we're running up against now is the until the strait of Hormuz is open and the oil the 20% of oil that disappeared from the market is back on the market and that's going to be months maybe a year or so. then there's not going to be enough aviation fuel to sustain the kind of combat operation that would be required against Russia and at the same time the you know the United States calculation that it could engage in attacks on Russia and that its own continental locations would be free. No, no, no, no. As Russia's deployed the Burevestnik atomic cruise missile, Russia will this time would not hesitate to strike sites in the United States. I mean, this is an absolute worst case scenario, nightmare scenario. The the reality is the United States has limited military assets. They're very expensive, but we don't have depth, strategic depth with any of them. And um what what they've discovered again with Iran that you know Iran does not have the kind of missile defense systems that Russia does and Iran survived what the United States unleashed on it. And I I would say that the Russia carries more potential counterweight that they're able to respond in greater levels of violence to the United States or the Europeans than than Iran could to Israel or the United States in the recent war. So no, it'd be a recipe for for suicide in my view.
Well, it does appear that yeah, we are moving towards suicide in Europe at least. That is if you hear the hawks now in Moscow and their voices grow louder every day and they get more and more people on their side. The argument is essentially go for full mobilization, you know, kill Zelensky, destroy the entire government district in Kiev and while you're at it, go after all the European plants that build weapons that are used to attack Russia. And if something goes wrong, reach for the tactical nukes. And
>> so and again, what's holding all of these hawks back is Putin and this is the man which the European leaders most of all want to get rid of.
>> Yeah. Yeah.
>> Because because he is Hitler. I mean, you couldn't make this up. This is it's so bizarre. But but there is, as you said, there is no logic anymore. It's just
>> Yeah. It it it's pure insanity. Pure insanity. And but you know the they may get what they want and they won't like what they get. So hey, let me let me leave you. I got unrelated to this, but we'll call it breaking news. I have I have confirmed that the United States the the the central command through the joint chiefs of staff have issued the order for us all those remember all those US military forces that were being deployed into the bases in the Persian Gulf and in Jordan and in Israel. The order is now they've been issued the order come home. So, you're going to start seeing all of that combat aircraft withdrawn. All the personnel, 82nd Airborne, they're going to be withdrawn. It, you know, it took more than a month to deploy them and it's going to take more than a month to redeploy them. But the point is, now that this order to redeploy has been issued, the the chances of the United States re-engaging Iran militarily have been reduced significantly.
Well, on those good notes or good news, and there's not much of that recently, you know, we can wrap it up. Hopefully, you know, why not pack up the military bases in Europe as well, send them home and perhaps then the Europeans become a little bit less cocky and we discover diplomacy.
But
>> yeah, that's for the future at least.
>> From your mouth to God's ears.
>> Well, thanks again, Larry. It's always great to speak with you.
>> All right, Glenn, take care. Bye-bye.