Youtube comments of Emir (@irongron).

  1. 312
  2. 252
  3. 152
  4. 128
  5. 123
  6. 105
  7. 103
  8. 88
  9. 77
  10. 75
  11. 64
  12. 61
  13. 61
  14. 59
  15. 58
  16. 53
  17. 47
  18. 45
  19. 43
  20. 41
  21. Latika was a great guest, she is 💯 on point. NO disagreements with her at all. But the issue with the Oz-embassy here in Ukraine got me wound up regarding the Australian government not being "fair dinkum" (ask her what that means, not explaining it here). Let me give some context. I have Yugoslav ancestry,, grew up in Australia and am a permanent resident of Ukraine for a decade now. I retain an Australian passport and have to renew it every ten years. The last time I did that was at the embassy at Kyiv in 2021 (during co-vid). I was still living in Pokrovsk at that time, and on the 12 hour journey to Kyiv to pickup my new passport, I caught co-vid, because the embassy required a personal pickup, rather than sending in registered mail. Anyway, it really pisses me off to hear that the Aussie embassy in Kyiv is NOT re-opened. I will have to renew my passport again in 2031 & if there is no embassy in Kyiv I will have to go to Poland or w/e. Shame on them. But, finally to end on a good note, the department, DFAT, that Latika will be familiar with, were very good to me when the full scale invasion started. I registered as an Aussie expat in Ukraine (had already been here 8 years almost), and the DFAT people called me once a week to confirm my welfare. They offered my wife refugee status in Australia but we chose to politely decline. They did urge me to leave, but I explained my life and family are here in Ukraine and they rolled with it. But I am saddened that the embassy is not going to re-open here and they buried hardware they could have given us and sold off the rest. They are not being "fair dinkum"! Thanks to Latika, may she keep up the good work and keep the news honest back in Oz. 💛💙
    40
  22. 38
  23. 37
  24. 36
  25. 34
  26. 33
  27. 32
  28. 32
  29. 32
  30. 31
  31. 31
  32. 30
  33. 30
  34. 29
  35. The well known (in Ukraine) journalist Dmitry Gordon conducted an extensive interview with Igor Girkin for 3 hours and in that interview he admits to the Crimea and Donbas operations. The Crimea operations with the little green men fooled no one, it was Russian soldiers already stationed in Sevastopol. The Donbas situation was always passed off as a "local uprising" which is complete and utter nonsense, for two reasons, I was there and witnessed it first hand as it unfolded (since when do local uprisings have heavy artillery?). I'm paraphrasing but it went something like this, starting with a cleverly worded question from Dmitri Gordon - Gordon: "In 2014 you illegally crossed over the border onto the territory of Ukraine in Donbas can you elaborate or discuss this further" Girkin: "Of course, I crossed over the border with 54 (or maybe 53, I forget, watched it 5 years ago) men, we had hardly any arms and ammunition...etc etc". Once he had done it and it could not be called off, the Kremlin went all in and send more men and they got heavy weapons, some of them appropriated from a local army base with sympathisers. If you want to watch this interview and you understand Russian (otherwise use auto-subs) look for this title on YouTube (there is a comprehensive index in about the 4th comment down) "Гиркин (Стрелков). Донбасс, MH17, Гаага, ФСБ, полудохлый Путин, Сурков, Божий суд. "ГОРДОН" (2020)" Interestingly, Girkin discusses his disdain for Putin and the kremlinite oligarchs/siloviki etc greedy corruption and for Denis Pushilin, the leader of the so-called DNR!
    29
  36. 29
  37. 28
  38. 28
  39. 28
  40. 27
  41. 27
  42. 26
  43. 25
  44. 25
  45. 25
  46. 25
  47. 25
  48. 24
  49. 24
  50. 23
  51. 23
  52. 22
  53. 21
  54. 20
  55. 20
  56. 20
  57. 19
  58. 19
  59. 18
  60. 18
  61. 18
  62. 18
  63. 18
  64. 17
  65. 17
  66. 17
  67. 17
  68. 16
  69. 16
  70. THis Ruzzian Imperial identity that Mr Eristavi speaks of is key. I will say this because I can (other pundits might be more reticent) but Mark Galeotti's partner Anna Arutunyan, identifies as "Ruzzian" but her surname is dead giveaway that she has Armenian heritage. A certain RT boss called Simonyan, who is more Ruzzian than Ruzzia - again Armenian - Margarita's ancestors even escaped the Armenian genocide that Turkey perpetrated but preaches open genocide on us in Ukraine on behalf of Ruzzia. What is it with these nationalities like the 2 aforementioned Armenians who think they are "Ruzzian" ? I suppose Gary Kasparov is the same, Soviet "Ruzzian" chess player that is half Armenian and Georgian (I think) is part of this also. BUt again as Mr Eristavi states, they are not a real nationality ( well "Rus" - Russian - was a slavic nationality located in modern day Ukraine until the Muscovites stole it under Peter the Grifter in the 18th century). Ukrainian YouTuber Yaroslav "Savage Sage" recently did a video that explains how "Ruzzians" are not even real slavic people, search for - Are Ukrainians and “Russians” really the same people? - They are Finno-Turkic tribes that just got the language later on. This is true, slavic can refer to languages or etho-cultural heritage. For the so-called "Ruzzians" it's the former not the later. A decent percentage of Ruzzian men (almost 10%) have DNA of Genghis Khan in them, take a look at a bunch of pictures of Lenin or Yeltsin, you can see the Mongol in their eyes. Just saying.
    15
  71. 15
  72. 15
  73. 15
  74. 14
  75. 14
  76. Johnny FD is a character, I saw him a few months back at the Silicon Curtain event in Lyviv. I left Australia and moved to Donbas in 2014 (Ukrainian wife). I flaked it and arrived right at the time in Donbas (Makiivka) when Girkin & his bandits took over & proclaimed the so-called DNR. May wife lost that flat in 2014 and we moved to the Ukrainian side of the contact line, to a town called now called Pokrovsk - old Soviet name was "Krasnoarmiisk - i.e. Red Army (town). I bought a new flat to replace the one my wife lost in the DNR and we had to leave that last year. It's only 60km (40 miles) from the front & too risky, we have no car and if the Russians over ran it, we would have no way to escape their cruel sadism.. Now my wife & I are IDP in NW Ukraine. Haven't been home in a year and a half. I had to leave my guitars behind. I used to strum every day. Last time I picked up someone else's guitar I couldn't remember any of the songs I used to know and mis-fretted tons of notes and chords. One of a thousand reasons I hate Zealot Russians and that cretin in the Kremlin. I did think about starting some YouTube thing, but I had to leave. my spec'd up tower PC in Donbas and only have a 2009 MacBook that I want to throw out the window when I use it.. I'm just a nobody in some kind of grey zone. I could have went back to Australia, but to be honest I can't stand Australians and their petty whining about trivial BS. My wife and I believe win Ukraine and we will not leave or run away. I will live out the rest of my days here. Don't miss Australia at all. Good on ya Jake, love ya show and looking forward to your father returning to shoot the breeze with you. That was definitely an interesting show, because you re mostly doing excellent monologues (you have a great format/style) but it is a nice change to have a guest to chat with every now and then.
    13
  77. 13
  78. 13
  79. 13
  80. 13
  81. 13
  82. 13
  83. 13
  84. 13
  85. 12
  86. 12
  87. 12
  88. 12
  89. 11
  90. 11
  91. The next time Captain Hendrix is back on, I'd like to know what he thinks of Admiral James Foggo's assertion that it was a mistake (in hindsight) for the USN to reduce its presence in the Black Sea after the end of the Cold War & Soviet Union collapsed. Admiral Foggo has been saying that the USN "needs to get back in there" - of course it can't do that now due to the Montreux convention - but get back in there ASAP when the conditions permit. Even in late Soviet times, there was a lot of action in the Black Sea, I doubt anyone besides myself, the host and Captain Hendrix would be aware of the "Black Sea shouldering incident" in 1988, the hilarious thing is, if that happened now everyone would be screaming "OMG WW3 OMG ESCALATION", but back then it was not so hysterical. President Ronald Reagan's "peace through strength" in action, and it worked. from Wikipedia "1988 Black Sea bumping incident" "The Black Sea bumping incident of 12 February 1988 occurred when American cruiser USS Yorktown tried to exercise the right of innocent passage through Soviet territorial waters in the Black Sea during the Cold War. The cruiser was bumped by the Soviet frigate Bezzavetny with the intention of pushing Yorktown into international waters. This incident also involved the destroyer USS Caron, sailing in company with USS Yorktown and claiming the right of innocent passage, which was intentionally shouldered by a Soviet Mirka-class frigate SKR-6. Yorktown reported minor damage to its hull, with no holing or risk of flooding. Caron was undamaged."
    11
  92. 11
  93. 11
  94. 10
  95. 10
  96. 10
  97. 10
  98. 10
  99. 10
  100. 10
  101. 10
  102. 9
  103. 9
  104. 9
  105. 9
  106. 9
  107. 9
  108. 9
  109. 9
  110. 9
  111. Great conversation as always Pyotr, I love your show mate, but I have to push back on something Mr. Foreman said and your reaction to it. Mr. Foreman stated that a breakup of Russia would make the breakup of Yugoslavia "look like a children's picnic", you had a chuckle at that. Before I go on, Mr. Foreman is not the only one saying that Colonel Phillip Ingram says something similar - "It would look like a Sunday school picnic". I get what they are trying to convey, but it really irks me. I'll explain why. My ancestry is the former Yugoslavia, father Bosnian, mother Serbian. What happened there was horrific as Mr. Foreman stated. My father's side of the family were ethnically cleansed from a town called Bosanski Novi, it's now in Republika Srpska and is renamed "Novi Grad". They can never go back and are all over the world as refugee's in Australia, Canada and the USA (I grew up in Australia). MY mother's Serbian side is living their lives as normal in Beograd (Belgrade). What happened there was not funny and it was not a 'school picnic". Arkan's paramilitaries (the Tigers) used to go into Bosnian villages and cut the hearts of out peoples chests. The Serbs (who are Russian lapdogs) were just as barbaric as their Russian masters. Lastly, my mother's Serbian side of the family disowned me when I moved to Ukraine, says all you need to know about Serbs. 😥 Anyway no hard feelings mate, but next time someone says that don't laugh, I beg of you. In Ukraine we all want to see Russia as it exists fall apart, it's a tall ask and highly unlikely, but we live in hope. As long as Russia exists in its current form it will be a threat to us here. Cheers!
    9
  112. 8
  113. 8
  114. 8
  115. 8
  116. 8
  117. 8
  118. 8
  119. 8
  120. 8
  121. 8
  122. 8
  123. 8
  124. 7
  125. 7
  126. 7
  127. 7
  128. 7
  129. 7
  130. 7
  131. 7
  132. At the 6:40 min mark Lesia mentions the "...division between West and East Ukraine that has to be acknowledged...". Indeed, but there is more nuance, especially to the Eastern part. A common myth is that the eastern part is all Russian speaking. There's maps that generalise the demographics of language so much it is misleading. When I loved to Ukraine a decade ago, I lived in Donetska Oblast (am IDP in West Ukraine now). Yes all the big towns, like my home town of Pokrovsk, or even Donetsk City or the sister city next to it Makiivka, where my Ukrainian wife had a flat that we lost to the so-called DNR - they spoke Russian, BUT, here's the but...lots of the small villages in between these places, even the ones around Pokrovsk, people there spoke Ukrainian mostly, NOT Russian! But the vatniks will pull out those maps and say "All of Eastern Ukraine is Russian speaking" - this is just complete and utter nonsense. But hardly anyone, who doesn't live here would know that. Also recently on a trip to Zakarpatia to a town only 5km from the Romanian border, as far West as you can get in Ukraine, the maid that changed our sheets in our room, I thanked her in Ukrainian "Duzhe djakuyu" and she replied "Pazhalsta" (i.e. the Russian word for "budlaska", she spoke a kinda of mixture of both languages called "Surzhyk"). As Lesia pointed out Ukraine could have been better with the facts and messaging, it just got lost in all the noise peddled by the Kremlin and their vatnik stooges in the west.
    7
  133. 7
  134. 7
  135. 7
  136. 7
  137. 7
  138. 7
  139. 6
  140. 6
  141. 6
  142. 6
  143. 6
  144. 6
  145. 6
  146. 6
  147. 6
  148. 6
  149. 6
  150. 6
  151. 6
  152. 6
  153. 6
  154. 6
  155. 5
  156. 5
  157. 5
  158. 5
  159. 5
  160. 5
  161. 5
  162. 5
  163. 5
  164. 5
  165. 5
  166. 5
  167. 5
  168. 5
  169. 5
  170. 5
  171. 5
  172. 5
  173. 5
  174. 5
  175. 5
  176. 5
  177. 5
  178. 5
  179. 5
  180. 5
  181. 5
  182. 5
  183. 5
  184. Same here. John should have her back to talk about the other issues she works with down the track. I've lived in Ukraine for alsmot a decade and a lot of the BS that well intentioned news and radio and podcadts really jumps out at me, becasue I know what's what, compared to someone who isnt from ehre. An example was today I listed to Geopilotics Decanted as it regularly features Miucheal Koffman who's very good with teh mil rundowns and the host Dimitri Alperovitch, whom I hav e a lot fo respect for, he means well and is not a propagandfist. but tofday he said that he thinks there is now ay Russia would do such a thing as blow up the fam and he thinks it wsa pobsbly sn scvcidernt ot a mistsake, he was totally excluding tyhe glaringly obvious suvh as, the stops being closed to fiull the fdam, wy ? That this conincided with tyhe offensive kicking off to thrart it....very siuspicious anfd he said the excuse all the Russian mouthpieces p'edlde now "why would Russia take out the Crimean water supply" it is not in their interests and makes no sense to tzke it out. BUt he fails to take into account their reckless modus operandi and also that, they KNOW they are going to loe Crimea and we wll reclai m it, and are factoring in that in their reasoning for wrecking the peninsula as much as possible for when we take it back. IT's toaly something that they would do and have demonstarted in Ukraine sincer day one. THey don't give a f**k about anzything, even their own men!!!......SO it was very dissappointing to ehar Dmitri go down the path of making excuses for RUssia! BUt thats ok, it wont turn me off listenign to Geoplitics Decanted. It's good stuff, esp co Koffman is a regular@ !
    5
  185. 5
  186. 5
  187. 5
  188. 4
  189. 4
  190. 4
  191. 4
  192. 4
  193. 4
  194. 4
  195. 4
  196. 4
  197. 4
  198. 4
  199. 4
  200. 4
  201. 4
  202. 4
  203. 4
  204. 4
  205. 4
  206. 4
  207. 4
  208. 4
  209. 4
  210. 4
  211. 4
  212. 4
  213. 4
  214. 4
  215. 4
  216. 4
  217. 4
  218. 4
  219. 4
  220. 4
  221. 4
  222. 4
  223. 4
  224. 4
  225. 4
  226. 4
  227. 4
  228. 4
  229. I spent a lot of time arguing with ruZzians trolls how have "appropriated" Korolyov, like everything in their culture. They would claim he was "Russian" but in all his documents he would put for question "Natsionalnist" (Nationality), "Ukrayinets" (Ukrainian). I have visited the Korolyov home in Zhitomir where he was born and the museum across the road. (The ruZZians attacked the town, it's near Kyiv)). I recommend the book by James Harford "Korolev: How one man masterminded the Soviet drive to beat America to the moon" (because it was the Soviet period he uses the Russian transliterations for everything). At 6:45 Yaroslav mentions "wrong scissions by the Communist party", one major F up, Brezhnev's cancellation of the N1 manned lunar launch vehicle (Soviet "Saturn V") in 1974. They had 2 flight ready launch vehicles ready to go, on the pad, at Tyuratam (vehicle's 8L & 9L - L= "Luniy" - moon) that would have proven the concept, but they where ordered scrapped, after 4 launch failures. N1 had a large cluster of 30 engines in the first stage (Block A), smaller & cheaper than the 5 huge Rocketdyne F-1 Engines on the US Saturn V. It's no co-incidence Elon Musk's "Spaceship" launch vehicle uses a large cluster of 33 engines it its first stage. He's what you call in Russian "ochen skupoy chelovek" ("very stingy (or cheap) man", just like the Soviet Communist's cheapness). The "N" in N1 means "nossitel" = carrier. After victory here in this war I reckon you could pitch the idea of a Korolyov movie to President Zelensky;s TV production company and he'd do it as a serious thing after the burden of war leadership drains the comic out of him (Yaroslav should tweet the President on Twitter and plant the seed of the idea in him!!!). I could talk about Korolyov in detail all day, best SC episode for me ever!!!!
    4
  230. 4
  231. 4
  232. 4
  233. 4
  234. 4
  235. 4
  236. 4
  237. 4
  238. 4
  239. 4
  240. 4
  241. 3
  242. 3
  243. 3
  244. 3
  245. 3
  246. 3
  247. 3
  248. 3
  249. 3
  250. 3
  251. 3
  252. 3
  253. 3
  254. 3
  255. 3
  256. 3
  257. 3
  258. 3
  259. 3
  260. 3
  261. 3
  262. 3
  263. 3
  264. 3
  265. 3
  266. 3
  267. 3
  268. 3
  269. 3
  270. 3
  271. 3
  272. 3
  273. 3
  274. 3
  275. 3
  276. 3
  277. 3
  278. 3
  279. 3
  280. 3
  281. 3
  282. 3
  283. 3
  284. 3
  285. 3
  286. 3
  287. 3
  288. 3
  289. 3
  290. 3
  291. 3
  292. 3
  293. 3
  294. 3
  295. 3
  296. 3
  297. 3
  298. 3
  299. 3
  300. 3
  301. 3
  302. 3
  303. 3
  304. 3
  305. 3
  306. 3
  307. 3
  308. 3
  309. 3
  310. 3
  311. 3
  312. 3
  313. 3
  314. 3
  315. 3
  316. 3
  317. 3
  318. 3
  319. 2
  320. 2
  321. 2
  322. 2
  323. 2
  324. 2
  325. 2
  326. 2
  327. 2
  328. 2
  329. 2
  330. 2
  331. 2
  332. 2
  333. 2
  334. 2
  335. 2
  336. 2
  337. 2
  338. 2
  339. 2
  340. 2
  341. 2
  342. 2
  343. 2
  344. 2
  345.  @deanejoyce5393  Cool, 'cos if you're an associate of Johnathon, your "street cred" is rock solid. Mate I tried in the past years before the re-invasion, on a liive radio net/podcast of mostly "conspiracy nutters", you know "tankies" and "vatniks" who hate the "NATO pentagon cabal" but benefit from the freedoms that cabal gives them to bad mouth Ukraine & be Kremlin mouthpieces without fear. I did many podcasts. The host, Chuck Ochelli was good enough to not be a Putin boot licker like all his alt-media colleagues. But in the end no matter how much I demonstrated the history of violence going back 500 years or more by Muscovy and later the Russian empire, pre 1948, you still had d-heads calling in going with the "poor Russia, victim of NATO" BS. Even if you brought up "so who provoked the wars before 1948, was that NATO expansion" (very sarcastically), these frackin' morons would just repeat the Kremlin BS! I've even got a better story than all the above, Chuck got a job at TNT live radio in Queensland Australia for 60K a year. TNT is funded by that fair dinkum drongo and putin boot licker Mike Ryan (not to be confused with Maj Gen Mick Ryan). Anyway Chuck invited me to talk about Ukraine on his debut night there and the next day TNT contacted Chuck to have a Zoom meeting regarding "content issues". The upshot is they said I was never to be invited on a guest again and they told him to change his tone about Ukraine and Russia. Being a somewhat man of honour he declined to be forced to be a Putin boot licker and propagandist and within few days Mike Ryan and TNT sacked him. He didn't een last a week. Talk about disgusting and if you check the TNT website they brag about being "honest" with news. What a bunch of f'in wankers. Propaganda dirtbags peddling Kremlin BS. I just grew tired of wasting my time.
    2
  346. 2
  347. 2
  348. 2
  349. 2
  350. 2
  351. 2
  352. 2
  353. 2
  354. 2
  355. 2
  356. 2
  357. 2
  358. 2
  359. 2
  360. 2
  361. 2
  362. 2
  363. 2
  364. 2
  365. 2
  366. 2
  367. Great discussion with Professor Grunewald, she briefly touched on the aircraft industry, as part of her general outline. I can do a value add comment for her here, as my personal studies going back to the late 80's was Soviet Aerospace. Susan mentioned the freedom some "camps" had (like the Germans building the 2nd tallest university in Moscow) plus also how late some were held (as late as 1955). These 2 points are very closely related to the prison "workplaces" (they were more like workplaces than camps) for aerospace workers, called "Sharashkas" - from the wikipedia article "Sharashka" - Sharashkas (singular: Russian: шара́шка, [ʂɐˈraʂkə]; sometimes sharaga, sharazhka) were secret research and development laboratories operating from 1930 to the 1950s within the Soviet Gulag labor camp system. So, the famous Ukrainian rocket scientist Sergey Korolyov, worked at one of these "Sharashkas". He was saved rom the normal GULAG' camp system by Andrey Tupolev, (the designer of the Tu-95 Bear , Tu-22 Blinder, Tu-26 now 22M Backfire etc). Also rocket engine designer Glushko was saved by Tupolev et. al.. These "Sharashkas" was how the USSR beat American into space in 1957 with Sputnik and 1961 with Vostok (Yuri Gagarin)". Anyway the main point is the many German rocket scientists and V2 technicians who were held in these "Sharashkas" were not let go until mostly 1955 as far as I can determine. The best, well researched source for this (there's many others) is a book by author James Harford called - Korolev: How one man masterminded the Soviet drive to beat America to the moon
    2
  368. 2
  369. 2
  370. I re-watched this viideo oj James discussing many interesting topics for the second time and it hasn't dated at asll, still worth watching again for sue He also mentioned the 1997 Moscow founding document with NATO in regards to the bogus "poor Russia victim of NATO" BS peddled by Mearsheimer et al. here is a summasry of the text, if I put a link the comment willl get zzpped. The document explicitly staees "NATO and Russia do not consider each other as adversaries;" so it makes you wonder, did Tsar Putin ever read this and note that very important point ? Yeltsin obviously was aware of it, seems his chosen successor was not.... Founding Act on Mutual Relations, Cooperation and Security between NATO and the Russian Federation 1. The "Founding Act on Mutual Relations, Cooperation and Security between NATO and the Russian Federation" was approved by the North Atlantic Council on 16 May 1997. It is the product of four months of intensive negotiations between Secretary General Solana and Russian Foreign Minister Primakov. The Secretary General, the Heads of State and Government of the North Atlantic Alliance and the President of the Russian Federation will sign the document in Paris on 27 May. The NATO - Russia Founding Act reflects the changing security environment in Europe, an environment in which the confrontation of the Cold War has been replaced by the promise of closer cooperation among former adversaries. It reflects in particular the practice of consultation and cooperation established between the Alliance and Russia over the last few years, the most remarkable example being the participation of Russian troops alongside those of NATO and other partner countries in IFOR/SFOR. NATO and Russia do not consider each other as adversaries; the Founding Act is the expression of an enduring commitment, undertaken at the highest political level, to build together a lasting and inclusive peace in the Euro-Atlantic area. 2. The new security partnership between NATO and Russia will be one step among others which are being taken to build a stable, peaceful and undivided Europe. It will allow the Alliance and Russia to forge a closer relationship. This is in the interest, not only of NATO and Russia, but also of all states in the Euro-Atlantic area. 3.The Founding Act, as agreed with the Russian side, has four sections. It begins with a preamble which establishes the context for the stable and enduring partnership we want to build. It states the reasons why NATO and Russia believe that it is in their shared interest to cooperate more broadly and intensively. It highlights the profound transformation that the Alliance has undergone since the end of the Cold War, through reductions of conventional and nuclear forces, through a revision of its strategic concept, through its new missions such as peacekeeping, and through its support for security cooperation throughout Europe, in particular within the framework of Partnership for Peace. It also refers to the transformation Russia is undergoing, its force reductions - which will continue -, the withdrawal of Russian forces from Central and Eastern Europe, the revision of Russia's military doctrine, and its participation in the multinational operation in Bosnia-Herzegovina. 4. Section I details the principles on which the NATO - Russia partnership will be based. These include commitments to norms of international behaviour as reflected in the UN Charter and OSCE documents, as well as more explicit commitments such as respecting states' sovereignty, independence and right to choose the means to ensure their security, and the peaceful settlement of disputes. Both sides commit themselves to strengthening the OSCE with the aim of creating a common space of security and stability in Europe. 5. Section II creates a new forum: the NATO - Russia Permanent Joint Council (PJC). This will be the venue for consultations, cooperation and - wherever possible - consensus building between the Alliance and Russia. The PJC will: hold regular consultations on a broad range of political or security related matters; based on these consultations, develop joint initiatives on which NATO and Russia would agree to speak or act in parallel; once consensus has been reached, make joint decisions, if appropriate, and take joint action on a case-by-case basis. Such joint actions may include peacekeeping operations under the authority of the UN Security Council or the responsibility of the OSCE. 6. Section III details a broad range of topics on which NATO and Russia can consult and perhaps cooperate, including preventing and settling conflicts, peacekeeping, preventing proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and exchanging information on security and defence policies and forces. Conversion of defence industries, defence related environmental issues, and civil emergency preparedness are other areas for consultation and possible cooperation spelled out in this section. 7. Section IV covers military issues. In this section, the members of NATO reiterate their statement of 10 December 1996 that they have no intention, no plan and no reason to deploy nuclear weapons on the territory of new members, nor any need to change any aspects of NATO's nuclear posture or nuclear policy - and do not foresee any future need to do so. NATO also reiterates its 14 March 1997 Statement indicating that in the current and foreseeable security environment, NATO plans to carry out its collective defence and other missions by ensuring the necessary interoperability, integration and capability for reinforcement rather than by additional permanent stationing of substantial combat forces. Accordingly, the Alliance will have to rely on adequate infrastructure to allow for reinforcement if necessary. 8. NATO and Russia commit themselves in the same section to pursuing promptly the work relating to the adaptation of the treaty governing conventional forces in Europe (CFE), in order to further reduce the levels of Treaty Limited Equipment. This commitment will be pursued in the ongoing negotiations on CFE adaptation in Vienna and will help to achieve a result that reflects the changed security environment in Europe since the Treaty was adopted in 1990. Finally, Section IV provides mechanisms to foster closer military-to-military cooperation between NATO and Russia, including by creating military liaison missions on both sides. 8Both sides have agreed that nothing in this document restricts or impedes the ability of either side to decide independently. It does not provide NATO or Russia at any stage with a right of veto over the actions of the other. The provisions of the NATO-Russia Founding Act can also not be used as a means to disadvantage the interests of other states. 9 The NATO-Russia Founding Act does not subordinate NATO to any other organisation, and it can in no way diminish the political or military effectiveness of the Alliance, including its ability to meet its security commitment to current and future members. NATO and Russia will work together on a broad spectrum of tasks in the Permanent Joint Council, which will, however, remain clearly separate from the North Atlantic Council - NATO's own decision-making body. The Founding Act with Russia has been negotiated and will be concluded on its own merits; it is not meant as a compensation. It does not delay, limit or dilute NATO's opening for the accession of new members, and it will not relegate any new NATO member to second class status.
    2
  371. 2
  372. 2
  373. 2
  374. 2
  375. 2
  376. 2
  377. 2
  378. 2
  379. 2
  380. 2
  381. 2
  382. 2
  383. 2
  384. 2
  385. 2
  386. 2
  387. 2
  388. 2
  389. 2
  390. 2
  391. 2
  392. 2
  393. 2
  394. 2
  395. 2
  396. 2
  397. 2
  398. 2
  399. 2
  400. 2
  401. 2
  402. 2
  403. 2
  404. 2
  405. 2
  406. 2
  407. 2
  408. 2
  409. 2
  410. 2
  411. 2
  412. 2
  413. 2
  414. 2
  415. 2
  416. 2
  417. 2
  418. 2
  419. 2
  420. 2
  421. 2
  422. 2
  423. 2
  424. 2
  425. 2
  426. 2
  427. 2
  428. 2
  429. 2
  430. 2
  431. 2
  432. 2
  433. 2
  434. 2
  435. 2
  436. 2
  437. 2
  438. 2
  439. 2
  440. 2
  441. 2
  442. 2
  443. 2
  444. 2
  445. 2
  446. 2
  447. 2
  448. 2
  449. 2
  450. 2
  451. 2
  452. 2
  453. 2
  454. 2
  455. 2
  456. 2
  457. 2
  458. 2
  459. 2
  460. 2
  461. 2
  462. 2
  463. 2
  464. 2
  465. 2
  466. 2
  467. 1
  468. 1
  469. 1
  470. 1
  471. 1
  472. 1
  473. 1
  474. 1
  475. 1
  476. 1
  477. 1
  478. 1
  479. 1
  480. 1
  481. 1
  482. 1
  483. 1
  484. 1
  485. 1
  486. 1
  487. 1
  488. 1
  489. 1
  490. 1
  491. 1
  492. 1
  493. 1
  494. 1
  495. 1
  496. 1
  497. 1
  498. 1
  499. 1
  500. 1
  501. 1
  502. 1
  503. 1
  504. 1
  505. 1
  506. 1
  507. 1
  508. 1
  509. 1
  510. 1
  511. 1
  512. 1
  513. 1
  514. 1
  515. 1
  516. 1
  517. 1
  518. 1
  519. 1
  520. 1
  521. 1
  522. 1
  523. 1
  524. 1
  525. 1
  526. 1
  527. 1
  528. 1
  529. 1
  530. 1
  531.  @adams5414  Denys Shmyhal Prime Minister of Ukraine Hun Sen Prime Minister of Cambodia Ralph Gonsalves Prime Minister of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Roosevelt Skerrit Prime Minister of Dominica Lee Hsien Loong Prime Minister of Singapore Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum Prime Minister of United Arab Emirates Frank Bainimarama Prime Minister of Fiji Sheikh Hasina Prime Minister of Bangladesh Keith Mitchell Prime Minister of Grenada Abdoulkader Kamil Mohamed Prime Minister of Djibouti Edi Rama Prime Minister of Albania Kokhir Rasulzoda Prime Minister of Tajikistan Xavier Bettel Prime Minister of Luxembourg Prayut Chan-o-cha Prime Minister of Thailand Gaston Browne Prime Minister of Antigua and Barbuda Stefan Löfven Prime Minister of Sweden Carlos Agostinho do Rosário Prime Minister of Mozambique Timothy Harris Prime Minister of Saint Kitts and Nevis Saara Kuugongelwa Prime Minister of Namibia Keith Rowley Prime Minister of Trinidad and Tobago Justin Trudeau Prime Minister of Canada Kassim Majaliwa Prime Minister of Tanzania António Costa Prime Minister of Portugal Andrew Holness Prime Minister of Jamaica Ulisses Correia e Silva Prime Minister of Cape Verde Francisco Pascual Obama Asue Prime Minister of Equatorial Guinea Andrej Plenković Prime Minister of Croatia Abdulla Aripov Prime Minister of Uzbekistan Pravind Jugnauth Prime Minister of Mauritius Édouard Ngirente Prime Minister of Rwanda Jacinda Ardern Prime Minister of New Zealand Katrín Jakobsdóttir Prime Minister of Iceland Andrej Babiš Prime Minister of Czech Republic Mateusz Morawiecki Prime Minister of Poland Abiy Ahmed Prime Minister of Ethiopia Nikol Pashinyan Prime Minister of Armenia Mia Mottley Prime Minister of Barbados Pedro Sánchez Prime Minister of Spain Christian Ntsay Prime Minister of Madagascar Moustafa Madbouly Prime Minister of Egypt Taur Matan Ruak Prime Minister of East Timor Lotay Tshering Prime Minister of Bhutan Jorge Bom Jesus Prime Minister of São Tomé and Príncipe Joseph Ngute Prime Minister of Cameroon Krišjānis Kariņš Prime Minister of Latvia Christophe Joseph Marie Dabiré Prime Minister of Burkina Faso Askar Mamin Prime Minister of Kazakhstan Manasseh Sogavare Prime Minister of Solomon Islands James Marape Prime Minister of Papua New Guinea Mette Frederiksen Prime Minister of Denmark Kyriakos Mitsotakis Prime Minister of Greece Keir Starmer Prime Minister of United Kingdom Abdalla Hamdok Prime Minister of Sudan Kausea Natano Prime Minister of Tuvalu Ali Asadov Prime Minister of Azerbaijan Pohiva Tuʻiʻonetoa Prime Minister of Tonga Sabah Al-Khalid Al-Sabah Prime Minister of Kuwait Mahinda Rajapaksa Prime Minister of Sri Lanka Sanna Marin Prime Minister of Finland Manuel Marrero Cruz Prime Minister of Cuba Robert Abela Prime Minister of Malta Khalid bin Khalifa bin Abdul Aziz Al Thani Prime Minister of Qatar Nuno Gomes Nabiam Prime Minister of Guinea-Bissau Janez Janša Prime Minister of Slovenia Bob Loughman Prime Minister of Vanuatu Mustafa Al-Kadhimi Prime Minister of Iraq Moeketsi Majoro Prime Minister of Lesotho Alain-Guillaume Bunyoni Prime Minister of Burundi Micheál Martin Taoiseach Jean Castex Prime Minister of France Rose Christiane Raponda Prime Minister of Gabon Mark Phillips Prime Minister of Guyana Mohamed Ould Bilal Prime Minister of Mauritania Zoran Zaev Prime Minister of North Macedonia Mohamed Hussein Roble Prime Minister of Somalia Victoire Tomegah Dogbé Prime Minister of Togo Alexander De Croo Prime Minister of Belgium Bisher Khasawneh Prime Minister of Jordan Salman bin Hamad Al Khalifa Prime Minister of Bahrain Johnny Briceño Prime Minister of Belize Ingrida Šimonytė Prime Minister of Lithuania Zdravko Krivokapić Prime Minister of Montenegro Florin Cîțu Prime Minister of Romania Kaja Kallas Prime Minister of Estonia Luvsannamsrain Oyun-Erdene Prime Minister of Mongolia Abdul Hamid al-Dabaib Prime Minister of Libya Patrick Achi Prime Minister of Ivory Coast Albin Kurti Prime Minister of Kosovo Phankham Viphavanh Prime Minister of Laos Ouhoumoudou Mahamadou Prime Minister of Niger Phạm Minh Chính Prime Minister of Vietnam Albert Pahimi Padacké Prime Minister of Chad Jean-Michel Sama Lukonde Prime Minister of the Democratic Republic of the Congo Stefan Yanev Prime Minister of Bulgaria Anatole Collinet Makosso Prime Minister of Republic of the Congo Kim Boo-kyum Prime Minister of South Korea Robinah Nabbanja Prime Minister of Uganda Henri-Marie Dondra Prime Minister of Central African Republic Aymen Benabderrahmane Prime Minister of Algeria Sher Bahadur Deuba Prime Minister of Nepal Cleopas Dlamini Prime Minister of Eswatini Ariel Henry Prime Minister of Haiti Phillip Pierre Prime Minister of Saint Lucia Ismail Sabri Yaakob Prime Minister of Malaysia Philip "Brave" Davis Prime Minister of The Bahamas Fumio Kishida Prime Minister of Japan Mohamed Béavogui Prime Minister of Guinea Mirtha Vásquez Prime Minister of Peru Aziz Akhannouch Prime Minister of Morocco Najla Bouden Prime Minister of Tunisia Jonas Gahr Støre Prime Minister of Norway
    1
  532. 1
  533. 1
  534. 1
  535. 1
  536. 1
  537. 1
  538. 1
  539. 1
  540. 1
  541. 1
  542. 1
  543. 1
  544. 1
  545. 1
  546. 1
  547. 1
  548. 1
  549. 1
  550. 1
  551. Regarding that early 2003 period Georgie spoke of, and how you mentioned it gave an insight into Putin;'s true nature early on, in 2000 not long after he came in, 6 months or whatnot, Putin banned a puppet show called "Kukliy" (it literally just means "Puppets"). This really was an indicator of what was to manifest in worse and worse displays of Soviet authoritarianism and dictatorship typical of his KGB roots.I remember reading at the time that this show used to make Putin livid with rage, He hated it as it mocked him regularly. haha. From an article about the shows demise.... "High-ranking officials have grumbled about the puppet show for years, but former president Boris Yeltsin, a frequent target of the show himself, always refused to allow it to be persecuted. In 1995, Russia's prosecutor-general launched a criminal investigation against Kukly for "insulting" the president. But most politicians rallied to support the program, and the prosecutor was fired in disgrace. Today, however, the political environment is radically different. Unlike his predecessor, Mr. Putin has never been a defender of the media. He has accused some journalists of being "traitors." Russian media outlets are under intense pressure to support the Kremlin. Several outlets, including NTV, have been caught in a crackdown. NTV is the only independent television channel with a national audience. It is also the only channel that refuses to follow the Kremlin's official line on the war in Chechnya and other issues. Its parent company, Media-MOST, was the target of a raid on May 11 by heavily armed police commandos wearing masks. The channel described the raid as an attempt to intimidate it into obedience."  .....and thus ended Kukliy......
    1
  552. 1
  553. 1
  554. 1
  555. 1
  556. 1
  557. 1
  558. 1
  559. 1
  560. 1
  561. 1
  562. 1
  563. 1
  564. 1
  565. 1
  566. 1
  567. 1
  568. 1
  569. 1
  570. 1
  571. 1
  572. 1
  573. 1
  574. 1
  575. 1
  576. 1
  577. 1
  578. 1
  579. 1
  580. 1
  581. 1
  582. 1
  583. 1
  584. 1
  585. 1
  586. 1
  587. 1
  588. 1
  589. 1
  590. 1
  591. 1
  592. 1
  593. 1
  594. 1
  595. 1
  596. 1
  597. 1
  598. 1
  599. 1
  600. 1
  601. 1
  602. 1
  603. 1
  604. 1
  605. 1
  606. 1
  607. 1
  608. 1
  609. 1
  610. 1
  611. 1
  612. 1
  613. 1
  614. 1
  615. 1
  616. 1
  617. 1
  618. 1
  619. 1
  620. 1
  621. 1
  622. 1
  623. 1
  624. 1
  625. 1
  626. 1
  627. 1
  628. 1
  629. 1
  630. 1
  631. 1
  632. 1
  633. 1
  634. 1
  635. 1
  636. 1
  637. 1
  638. When you asked Mr Kutelia why did the ruZZian's stop and not go all the way to Tblisi, I knew abut their crap logistics which played a part, but there had to be more to it and, even with crap logistics the ruZZian's keep going. It was when Mr Kutelia pointed out that the Bush Administration sent some logistics for the Georgians and made a "significant" intervention that sent a message, that things became clear to me. Fast forward to 2014 and then we have "do nothing" Obama and "do nothing" Cameron in charge in the USA and the UK. Now this brings to mind VP Cheney, who back in the 90's. vehemently opposed the removal of nuclear weapons from Ukraine,, but he was over ridden by Bush Senior (Clinton went on to finalise that folly, but credit to him, after the 2022 re-invasion, he was so shocked, he apologised publicly for making a huge mistake). From the article - Deceit, Dread, and Disbelief: The Story of How Ukraine Lost Its Nuclear Arsenal - "In his memoirs and later interviews, Brent Scowcroft noted that then Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney vigorously opposed the removal of nuclear weapons from the newly independent states at Russia’s periphery. Though most of their personal papers on the subject remain classified, a memo to the National Security Advisor from March 1992 demonstrated that these disputes did not disappear. National Security Council staffer David Gompert titled it “Why We Must be Adamant about De-nuclearizing Ukraine.” He noted three major counterarguments: Ukrainian nuclear weapons will not threaten the U.S. as Russian nuclear weapons do, for the simple reason that Ukraine, unlike Russia, is not a serious potential adversary. It might even prove advantageous to us to see Russian power checked—and Russian nuclear weapons deterred—by a Ukraine with a minimal deterrent. In any case, we hurt ourselves with the Ukrainians by insisting that they be stripped of nuclear weapons while we legitimize those of their powerful neighbor."
    1
  639. 1
  640. 1
  641. 1
  642. 1
  643. 1
  644. 1
  645. 1
  646. 1
  647. 1
  648. 1
  649. 1
  650.  @timthetiny7538  We've got nuclear reactors here and nothing has been "sold" on the "black market" all these decades. It had nothing to do with the "black market", that's what clueless journalists and fools like you thought. It was about abiding by the START treaty - As the Soviet Union began to collapse, the George H.W. Bush Administration sought to preserve the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START), which promised to decrease the world’s strategic nuclear weapons stockpiles by 80 percent. After nearly a decade of negotiations, it was signed by the United States and the Soviet Union in 1991. But with the USSR about to shatter into five sovereign countries, how would this two-party deal endure? Later that month, America’s first ambassador to the Russian Federation, Robert Strauss, wrote to Washington about the hysteria caused by reports of Yeltsin considering a nuclear strike on Ukraine. The situation was “made worse,” the emissary wrote, by the new president “acknowledging he had discussed the possibility with military experts.” In his memoirs and later interviews, Brent Scowcroft noted that then Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney vigorously opposed the removal of nuclear weapons from the newly independent states at Russia’s periphery. Though most of their personal papers on the subject remain classified, a memo to the National Security Advisor from March 1992 demonstrated that these disputes did not disappear. National Security Council staffer David Gompert titled it “Why We Must be Adamant about De-nuclearizing Ukraine.” He noted three major counterarguments: Ukrainian nuclear weapons will not threaten the U.S. as Russian nuclear weapons do, for the simple reason that Ukraine, unlike Russia, is not a serious potential adversary. It might even prove advantageous to us to see Russian power checked—and Russian nuclear weapons deterred—by a Ukraine with a minimal deterrent. In any case, we hurt ourselves with the Ukrainians by insisting that they be stripped of nuclear weapons while we legitimize those of their powerful neighbor. Gompert dismissed these objections, and the Bush administration continued on its path. The document, however, bears witness to the persistent debate that unfolded within the administration. - no mention whatsoever of your "black market" nonsense.
    1
  651. 1
  652. 1
  653. 1
  654. 1
  655. 1
  656. 1
  657. 1
  658. 1
  659. 1
  660. 1
  661. 1
  662. 1
  663. 1
  664. 1
  665. 1
  666. 1
  667. 1
  668. 1
  669. 1
  670. 1
  671. 1
  672. 1
  673. So the BRICS summit was really the "RICS summit". I think we can lure the North Koreans to defect to us by droning them tons of Choco Pies with a note in Korean to surrender to Ukraine if they want more. I am not being flippant, it might actually work. Google this headline below.... North Korean soldier who defected has been granted Choco Pies for life — a snack Kim Jong Un hates With the West v Eastern Ukraine thing, I've lived here for a decade, my wife and I have been displaced twice & lost 2 homes in Donetsk Oblast (Makiivka in 2014 and Pokrovsk). For starters, there were a lot of people with bad attitudes to Ukraine even back in 2014 when I was in the DNR in Makiivka, re-integrating these people will not be a walk in the park. Some are just ambivalent, even one of my wife's own cousins & friends still stuck there. I'd like my Pokrovsk home back TBH. But I am not Ukrainian , only a permanent resident. A lot of the soldiers are just tired and want the war to stop, other's think the fight must go on. Rotation is a huge problem. Look, everyone, all the pundits on our side say the same thing (even Jake) - "A pause will let Russia re-arm and try again". - but maybe it's time to see it the other way around, maybe our tired soldiers who are sick of fighting need a pause and Ukraine can re-arm and be ready. It really should be up to the heroes and defenders here doing the fighting not those of us sitting at home. Anyway that's my 2c worth based on being here a decade mostly near the war zone.
    1
  674. 1
  675. 1
  676. 1
  677. 1
  678. 1
  679. 1
  680. 1
  681. 1
  682. 1
  683. 1
  684. 1
  685. 1
  686. 1
  687. 1
  688. 1
  689. 1
  690. 1
  691. 1
  692. 1
  693. 1
  694. 1
  695. 1
  696. 1
  697. 1
  698. 1
  699. 1
  700. 1
  701. 1
  702. 1
  703. 1
  704. 1
  705. 1
  706. 1
  707. 1
  708. 1
  709. 1
  710. 1
  711. 1
  712. 1
  713. 1
  714. 1
  715. 1
  716. 1
  717. 1
  718. 1
  719. 1
  720. 1
  721. This is a test, my reply got shadow banned, so let's see if it sticks a comment. It's very interesting you did a Brazil run down this time. You brought up Ukraine and Lula's comeback in your great mini-doco, so I won't repeat what you already stated but do a value add for your listeners. Before 2022 interrupted everything, Brazil had a very decent relationship with Ukraine in many aspects of friendship and trade. For instance, pretty much well all the imported players for my football team Shakhtar Donetsk were Brazilian. But to your question of can Brazil become a big player, imho, it could have done that a decade ago and still may have the opportunity in the future. One little known fact is that Ukraine was co-operating with Brazil on its space programme up until 2015. in Fact when Lula was President during his first tenure back in the first decade of the 2000's, he presided over a programme to buy and launch the Ukrainian made "Tsyklon" (Cyclone) launch vehicle, a medium lift rocket that could put 5 tonnes to LEO. Unfortunately due to shenanigans on both sides this project fell through. I can't paste the link (comment gets zapped) but just google the SpaceNews article title - Brazil Pulling Out of Ukrainian Launcher Project - "RIO DE JANEIRO – The Brazilian government is ending a decade-long project to operate Ukraine’s Cyclone-4 rocket from Brazilian territory following a government review that found too many open questions about its cost and future market success, the deputy chief of the Brazilian Space Agency (AEB) said. It remains unclear whether the decision will force Brazil to pay Ukraine any financial penalties for a unilateral cancellation of a bilateral agreement. Over the years, the work to build a launch facility for Ukraine’s Cyclone at Brazil’s Alcantara spaceport has suffered multiple stops and starts as one side or the other fell short on its financial obligations to the effort."
    1
  722. 1
  723. 1
  724. 1
  725. 1
  726. 1
  727. 1
  728. 1
  729. 1
  730. 1
  731. 1
  732. 1
  733. 1
  734. 1
  735. 1
  736. 1
  737. 1
  738. 1
  739. 1
  740. 1
  741. 1
  742. 1
  743. 1
  744. 1
  745. 1
  746. 1
  747. 1
  748. 1
  749. 1
  750. 1
  751. 1
  752. 1
  753. 1
  754. 1
  755. 1
  756. 1
  757. 1
  758. 1
  759. I think Tsar Putin definitely decided to invade after he couldn't get the DNR & LNR into some kind of Federated Ukraine as Trojan horse wreckers via the bogus Minsk Agreements. Putin has said publicly he decided to enact the plan to retake Crimea after Euromaidan, but his decision to eventually take Crimea goes all the way back to 1999 when NATO bombed Serbia and helped Kosovo's independence. I remember seeing an interview years ago (I can't find it, it's buried by recent events) were he got angry with a bunch of journalists asking him if US meddling in Syria to topple Assad was the reason he decided to take Crimea and he got really annoyed with them and told them all to shut up and then said something like "none of you have any idea, it was not Syria it was Yugoslavia, it was what NATO did to Yugoslavia, that's when I decided Crimea would have to be taken in the future".(something like that, was a long time ago) He also mentioned it to Sholz when he visited Moscow in Feb 2022 just before the invasion.  from "EXPLAINER: Putin’s Balkan narrative argument for Ukraine war" by The Associated Press "“But all of us were witnesses to the war in Europe that NATO unleashed against Yugoslavia,” Putin said. He recalled that it was a major military operation involving bombing strikes against a European capital, Belgrade. “It did happen. Without any sanctions by the U.N. Security Council. It is a very sad example, but it is a hard fact,” Putin said. He has argued that by intervening in Kosovo, the West created a precedent with longstanding consequences."
    1
  760. 1
  761. 1
  762. 1
  763. 1
  764. 1
  765. 1
  766. 1
  767. 1
  768. 1
  769. 1
  770. 1
  771. 1
  772. 1
  773. 1
  774. 1
  775. 1
  776. 1
  777. 1
  778. 1
  779. 1
  780. 1
  781. 1
  782. 1
  783. 1
  784. 1
  785. 1
  786. 1
  787. 1
  788. 1
  789. 1
  790. 1
  791. 1
  792. 1
  793. 1
  794. 1
  795. 1
  796. 1
  797. 1
  798. 1
  799. 1
  800. 1
  801. 1
  802. 1
  803. 1
  804. 1
  805. 1
  806. 1
  807. 1
  808. 1
  809. 1
  810. 1
  811. 1
  812. 1
  813. 1
  814. 1
  815. 1
  816. 1
  817.  @martinoneill5804  The plans to take back Crimea have been around since Yetlsin's time. Yeltsin prevented the nationalists in Russia to do so because, If Crimea can leave Ukraine then it would have set a precedent to allow Chechniya to leave Russia. I saw an interview almost ten years ago, where a bunch of journalists kept asking Putin, was it the American meddling in Syria that made him decide to take Crimea. and he got angry with them all and told them, to shut up and he said (paraphrasing) - "don't you all know anything ? I wasn't Syria, it was Yugoslavia, that's when I made the decision to take back Crimea", that means he made the decision in 1999 and waited for the right time. That was well before Sochi, so the joining NATO issue had nothing whatsoever to do with Crimea in 2014. That's just BS. I have heard Matlock in interviews and he says a lot of things that are really problematic. Like most people who only spent time in Moscow, he has a pro-Russian bias. Kissinger was wrong about Ukraine and changed his mind, he was wrong about the idiotic notion of a "chat". Chatting to Putin does not achieve anything. ok ? DI all the endless chatting by Merkel or Macron have with Putin achieve anything ? No. Matlock and Kissinger obviously never saw that interview in 2015 that I saw or they wouldn't have been talking such nonsense about a chat. Putin was never serious about the NATO thing, he wanted to jump the queue and be admitted ahead of what he thought was insignificant countries, without due process as was mentioned in the interview. I have lived in Ukraine for a decade, how many years did Matlock and Kissinger spend here ? Zero.
    1
  818. 1
  819. 1
  820. 1
  821. 1
  822. 1
  823. 1
  824. 1
  825. 1
  826. 1
  827. 1
  828. What Mr McNair stated at the 7:35 min mark jumped out at me, regarding Africa - "...when we talk to China we get an airport, when the talk to the US e get a lecture..". I am not endorsing Xi's China, f**k his CCP China, but it illustrates a very important point. So... for two years here in Ukraine we've been getting lectures from the US administration about what we can and can't do, due to their "escalation management" BS, that has cost us a victory early on (by not giving us everything we have gotten now, back then). The longer this incrementalism went on the less chance we have had for a clear cut victory. That is obvious. That's the military side of things, but when it comes to economics and the re-build side of things,, oh boy are we on for a lot of lectures. They still won't just hand over the 300 billion odd of ruzzian money, that is clearly required as reparations for what they have done to us here. I am about to lose my home in Pokrovsk and all we are getting us more lectures on long range strikes, and whatever other gaslighting they can throw at us, due to their fear of a ruzzian defeat and the consequences that may ensue. What are they afraid of ? When the Soviet Union broke up, there we're 40,000 nuclear devices here (yes 40,000 it's not a typo, google it) and the wold community dealt with that ok. Why are they worried about a piddling 7,000 ruzzian nukes ? The world community will deal with that too. Don't give us a lecture, just give us what we. need to win. We love our American friends, we don't want ruzzia or China, we just want freedom, like our American friends enjoy.
    1
  829. 1
  830. 1
  831. 1
  832. 1
  833. 1