Stay Free - Russel Brand - October 11, 2023


Is War with China Next? Dave DeCamp from AntiWar


Episode Stats

Length

34 minutes

Words per Minute

176.05225

Word Count

6,065

Sentence Count

369

Misogynist Sentences

4

Hate Speech Sentences

5


Summary

In this episode, we're joined by Dave DeCamp, the News Editor at Anti-War News and host of the show's flagship show, "The War Room," to talk about the ongoing conflict between Ukraine and Russia in Ukraine, and how the U.S. and NATO are using it as an opportunity for profit, and to distract us from the ongoing humanitarian crisis in Ukraine. We're also joined by Russell Frieden, the founder and editor-in-chief of The War Room, to discuss why the conflict is so bloody, and why we should all be paying attention to the human toll from it. We'll cover everything you need to know about the conflict, including the facts behind the fighting, the motivations behind it, and what we can do to stop it from escalating further. We'll also talk about how the conflict has been funded by the United States, NATO, and the oil and gas companies, and look at how they're using the conflict as a business opportunity to profit off of it, including Lockheed Martin's recent $10 billion investment in a new plant on the border with Russia. And, of course, we'll talk about what's going on with the Ukraine conflict and why it's so bloody and bloody and how we should be doing more to help Ukraine. . Thank you so much for supporting us, you're making a difference, wherever you are listening to this podcast. and wherever you're listening to it. You're making an impact, and you're spreading the word about it everywhere you go. We can't wait to see what you do! - we're spreading it everywhere. - And we're celebrating the word and we're doing it, everywhere you can do it! - Thank you, everywhere we go! -- Thank you for listening, and we'll see you! Matt, Matt, Russell, and your support is so important, everywhere, everywhere else we get a chance to spread the word of this podcast and everywhere we listen to it and everywhere else. -- Matt, thank you, and thank you for being a little bit more than just that you do it, you can see it, right here, everywhere they can help us spread it everywhere, we get it, it's a good day, and everywhere they do it. Thank you. Matt and Russell, Matt and I really appreciate it, Matt is grateful for all the love and we appreciate you, wherever they can reach you, more than appreciated.


Transcript

00:00:00.000 Hello there, you Awakening Wonders wherever you are.
00:00:02.000 Thank you for joining us.
00:00:03.000 It's so important that you follow us and support us now because the government tried to shut down our means for making a living in an extraordinary move.
00:00:13.000 So now your support is absolutely vital.
00:00:15.000 You are part of a movement now.
00:00:17.000 There's no avoiding it.
00:00:18.000 There's no evading it.
00:00:19.000 And while we're celebrating journalism, Independence. Truth-telling. I'm excited to introduce Dave
00:00:25.000 DeCamp, the news editor at AntiWar.com and host of AntiWar News, whose content we
00:00:30.000 continually use because of his intrepid personal principles. Because remember when
00:00:36.000 journalism used to mean investigating the actions of the powerful, that we can attack the
00:00:40.000 establishment, that we can build new systems together. Dave, thank you so much for joining us.
00:00:45.000 Thanks for having me, Russell.
00:00:46.000 I'll just let you know that if you're watching this anywhere other than Rumble, we're going
00:00:49.000 to be exclusively available on Rumble now.
00:00:51.000 You want to know how you can support us?
00:00:52.000 You can support us by joining us on Rumble.
00:00:55.000 Download the app.
00:00:57.000 Get Rumble.
00:00:58.000 That's how you can support us.
00:00:59.000 They're committed to free speech.
00:01:00.000 We're committed to free speech.
00:01:02.000 And if you want to support us further, press the red button and you can support us directly.
00:01:06.000 But your attention, your consciousness and your time are so much more important than your money.
00:01:11.000 Mate, one of the things that you've been reporting on is this sort of curious story that in spite of propaganda there's been little shift in territorial control in Ukraine.
00:01:21.000 There's been incredible loss of life and it seems incredible opportunity for profit.
00:01:25.000 So what are these new revelations about there being very little in the way of territorial shift reveal?
00:01:31.000 Yeah, so Ukraine launched its big counter offensive back in June.
00:01:35.000 And, you know, there's been a lot of kind of media report with a bit of a slant trying to portray that Ukraine is gaining territory and that they are, you know, that they do have a chance of winning this thing.
00:01:47.000 And they have been gaining some very, you know, incremental areas.
00:01:50.000 But a recent report from The New York Times that looked over at all the territory that's changed hands.
00:01:55.000 This year in 2023, it showed that Russia has actually gained more territory this year.
00:02:01.000 But overall, it's a very small amount of territory.
00:02:04.000 Only 500 square miles has changed hands.
00:02:07.000 Russia gained about 300 and the Ukrainian side about 183.
00:02:13.000 So those small little areas, I mean, if you look at the map, it really shows, you know, the front lines have barely changed.
00:02:19.000 And in that time, you know, hundreds of thousands of people have likely been killed.
00:02:24.000 We don't know the casualties for sure on either side because it's kind of a strange thing that we don't know how many people are actually being killed because both sides are hiding their casualty figures.
00:02:35.000 But it's pretty clear, and from people that I trust, they believe hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians have been killed this year alone.
00:02:42.000 And lots of Russians are being killed as well.
00:02:45.000 And this is a war that the U.S.
00:02:48.000 and NATO have chosen to continue.
00:02:50.000 The really infuriating thing about this is that before the Ukrainian counteroffensive, the discord leaks came out.
00:02:57.000 And one of those leaks revealed that the U.S.
00:03:00.000 did not believe Ukraine could regain much territory.
00:03:03.000 And there was other signs, you know, officials speaking to the New York Times anonymously really kind of buried in their reports.
00:03:10.000 We're saying, yeah, we don't think that they have what it takes.
00:03:13.000 They don't have enough weapons.
00:03:14.000 Russia has really dug in.
00:03:15.000 Russia spent the last winter really strengthening their defenses.
00:03:21.000 So they knew it wouldn't be successful, and they pushed for it anyway.
00:03:24.000 Right before the counteroffensive started, Secretary of State Antony Blinken came out and gave this big speech against a ceasefire.
00:03:31.000 And he actually, he didn't just say he opposed the ceasefire, he opposed the pause in fighting.
00:03:36.000 He disparaged other countries that were calling for peace.
00:03:40.000 So this is what we're dealing with.
00:03:41.000 And now, months later, that the lines have barely moved and so many people are dead, they're determined to keep this thing going.
00:03:49.000 That's what's really, you know, they just want an open-ended conflict.
00:03:52.000 They want to turn Ukraine into this huge NATO bulwark on Russia's border.
00:03:59.000 Even in his recent address to the UN, Biden said that Russia and Russia alone can end this war.
00:04:06.000 Russia solitarily and solely are the cause of this war.
00:04:11.000 And as you point out, even to talk of peace is regarded as a kind of militaristic heresy.
00:04:22.000 I wonder what you think the significance is of Lockheed Martin, for example, announcing profit opportunities for up to $10 billion and what the likely motivations of this war are if we're not seeing significant territorial shift and the counteroffensive didn't succeed.
00:04:41.000 What does this tell us about the motivations?
00:04:44.000 Well, yeah, there's certainly a profit motive here.
00:04:47.000 I mean, the US and the UK actually recently, according to a report from the Telegraph, the British are apparently out of weapons to send to Ukraine.
00:04:57.000 But by dumping all of these weapons in there, you know, this gives the arms makers like Lockheed Martin, like Raytheon, you know, they're replenishing all these stockpiles.
00:05:06.000 You have all the Eastern European countries, especially Poland,
00:05:10.000 really increasing their military budget.
00:05:13.000 I mean, it's a total boon for them.
00:05:15.000 And sometimes, they're very candid about it.
00:05:19.000 If you remember Alexei Reznikov, who was Zelensky's defense minister, who was recently fired,
00:05:26.000 he said, I invite all the Western defense contractors to test their weapons in Ukraine.
00:05:32.000 You know, he opened his country as a testing ground for weapons.
00:05:36.000 There's recently a report in the Wall Street Journal that said Ukraine is one giant arms fair.
00:05:42.000 And it was talking about how specifically Lockheed Martin, you know, when it comes to the weapons makers in the US and the UK, the heavy hitters is always Lockheed Martin and Raytheon.
00:05:51.000 Of course, there's others, BAE Systems and Northrop Grumman.
00:05:55.000 But Lockheed Martin and Raytheon, or they call them RTX now, they're really making money.
00:06:00.000 And the HIMARS rocket systems that the U.S.
00:06:03.000 has given Ukraine, they're in hot demand now.
00:06:06.000 They were made by Lockheed Martin.
00:06:07.000 The Stinger anti-aircraft missiles, those are the ones that could fire off their shoulder.
00:06:11.000 They were obsolete.
00:06:13.000 They stopped making them in the 90s.
00:06:15.000 And now, all of a sudden, there's a hot demand for them.
00:06:17.000 And they're starting to make them again.
00:06:19.000 They're calling in engineers who worked in like the 80s, like old guys that are retired to help get the Production going.
00:06:24.000 So it's very clear.
00:06:26.000 And who's running this thing is Biden's defense secretary, Lloyd Austin, who came from the board of Raytheon.
00:06:33.000 Literally his job before running the Pentagon was at Raytheon.
00:06:35.000 So it's very obvious that this is a big part of this whole thing is the money to be made on these weapons and it's complete corruption and cronyism.
00:06:44.000 I'm astonished to see that sort of the nostalgia craze for the 80s and 90s has reached actual militarism that it's like sort of speak and spell and Simon Says war weaponry from Tomy and MB Games like the kind of nostalgia craze that you see in our sort of love of serials like Lucky Charms has extended to Bazookas.
00:07:07.000 What a terrifying and extraordinary situation.
00:07:09.000 When you said that the Ukraine is like an arms fair I was reminded of the a Spanish civil wars potential function as a kind of trial
00:07:19.000 for the subsequent global war i.e. in particular that the fascists were supported by
00:07:27.000 Nazi weaponry particularly from the air and stuff. Seems to me that these kind of practices
00:07:35.000 have always been available.
00:07:37.000 The idea that military technology is piloted in potentially lesser conflicts prior to is staggering to consider given that Russia are one of the combatant nations.
00:07:50.000 Even bigger conflicts, even involving China potentially when you talk about what's going on with Taiwan and perhaps we'll touch on that in a minute.
00:07:57.000 But for a moment, This is intended in no way to disparage the people of Ukraine whose suffering should be paramount in all of our thoughts and in particular with our advocacy for and even demands for peace.
00:08:10.000 But Ukraine is understood to be a pretty corrupt country when it comes to politics, which country isn't?
00:08:17.000 So, when the United States acknowledge that they're aware of corruption in Ukraine, why are they so willing to afford a corrupt government the potential for corruption on this scale?
00:08:33.000 Yeah, I mean, it's a big question because Ukraine was always notorious for its corruption, you know, in the years leading up to Russia's invasion when they used to ask Biden, you know, when is Ukraine going to be brought into NATO?
00:08:44.000 And he said, well, like they got to work on corruption, which is something to hear coming from Biden, considering after the coup in 2014 that his son Hunter got a job on the state on the board of a Ukrainian natural gas company.
00:08:57.000 So I always have to point that out.
00:08:59.000 You know, Biden shouldn't really be talking about corruption.
00:09:02.000 But anyway, it was well known.
00:09:05.000 And when this thing first started, when Russia first invaded and they started pouring these billions of dollars in weapons into Ukraine, and it's not just weapons, they also give them what they call direct budgetary aid, which is money, billions of dollars that they give to the government to pay Government salaries to pay for government services.
00:09:25.000 They're actually subsidizing small businesses as well.
00:09:28.000 There was a recent report on 60 Minutes, and they talked to a lady who ran a knitwear company.
00:09:33.000 She was showing off her sweaters that were subsidized by the American taxpayer.
00:09:38.000 So there's all sorts of other ways that they're spending in this notoriously corrupt country.
00:09:44.000 And they kind of downplayed that for a while in the beginning of this war, and the media went along with it, but it kind of became impossible to keep hiding this.
00:09:53.000 Recently, Zelensky sacked six of deputy defense ministers.
00:09:56.000 That's all the deputy defense ministers.
00:09:58.000 He fired them over these Reports that they were, you know, buying things at inflated prices and then obviously the implication there is that they were skimming off the top.
00:10:09.000 So if all six of them just, they just got fired in September and this war has been going on for a year and a half, you know, how much have they been skimming this whole time?
00:10:18.000 And, you know, just the fact that they are doing this with all this corruption, I think it goes to show that they're just determined to keep this proxy war Going, it doesn't really matter.
00:10:29.000 And there was recently a leaked document, strategy document from the State Department.
00:10:36.000 And it was kind of their long term plans for Ukraine.
00:10:38.000 And it was all about how they got to root out corruption, how corruption is this huge problem.
00:10:43.000 So they are much more concerned about it than they're letting on.
00:10:46.000 And it said that they're willing to maybe leverage some of the economic aid, but not the military aid.
00:10:51.000 That doesn't matter.
00:10:52.000 Even though, of course, there's the risk of these rockets being sold to all sorts of people.
00:10:56.000 You know, they could end up all over the world, but it just doesn't matter.
00:11:00.000 They just want to keep this thing going.
00:11:01.000 Yeah, it's extraordinary.
00:11:03.000 Isn't it possible that the recent changes with the House Speaker will mean a delay for this additional $24 billion of funding?
00:11:15.000 Is that possible?
00:11:16.000 Is that good?
00:11:18.000 Is it valuable in any way?
00:11:20.000 Yeah, so it's really kind of interesting what's going on here.
00:11:23.000 So Biden wants another $24 billion to spend on this war, and it has the majority of support in Congress still.
00:11:30.000 But over in the House, there is a decent amount of Republicans who are opposed.
00:11:35.000 They don't want to give more money to Ukraine.
00:11:38.000 And because of that, Kevin McCarthy was forced to strip Ukraine aid from this short-term funding bill that they just passed to keep the government funded.
00:11:47.000 And Matt Gaetz, who is a Republican from Florida who launched the effort against McCarthy, he's been very good on Ukraine.
00:11:54.000 He has opposed it from the beginning.
00:11:57.000 And he launched the effort to oust McCarthy after accusing him of making a secret deal to bring the Ukraine to the floor for a vote.
00:12:05.000 So now there's going to be a new house speaker election that's expected to be next week.
00:12:09.000 And in that time, they can't do any legislative action or at least From what I understand, a lot of this stuff is very confusing and there's a lot of procedural stuff they can do.
00:12:19.000 But it's definitely disrupting things.
00:12:21.000 And the one of the House speakers, one of the Republicans who has announced that he will be running for House Speaker is Jim Jordan.
00:12:29.000 And he's voted against all the Ukraine stuff the whole time.
00:12:31.000 So this is significant.
00:12:33.000 I was kind of more pessimistic For a while saying, you know, they're all going to support it.
00:12:37.000 They're going to keep this thing going.
00:12:39.000 But what's happening here is not insignificant.
00:12:41.000 If the house speaker, the third person, the third, the house speaker is the third highest level official in the U.S.
00:12:49.000 government.
00:12:50.000 They're second in line to the presidency.
00:12:51.000 If the, you know, behind the vice president, if something happens to the president, if the president dies or something.
00:12:57.000 So having a house speaker that's opposed to this proxy war would be very significant.
00:13:02.000 Now, Biden gave a speech the other day and at the end he said something, well, he didn't give a speech, he was talking to some reporters, but at the end he said something like, you know, there's other ways we could get the money, but I'm not going to talk about that right now.
00:13:13.000 So unfortunately there probably is other ways that they could keep this thing going.
00:13:18.000 I wonder if you ever have time to inquire why reporting that is this specific and oppositional isn't found within the legacy media.
00:13:30.000 What do you think is the importance of independent media when it comes to proposing counter-narratives?
00:13:36.000 How dangerous do you think it is to present these kind of stories?
00:13:41.000 I know people in our sphere that say that this is the subject that will get you cancelled, this is the subject that will get you shut down.
00:13:50.000 Other people think it's Big Pharma.
00:13:52.000 But certainly there are interests that seem marshal to assure that the legacy media maintains
00:14:00.000 simply a position of simple amplification of the message of, let's call it the establishment,
00:14:07.000 or normalising the agenda of the establishment, whether that's the advance of authoritarianism,
00:14:12.000 the advance of potentially unnecessary wars.
00:14:16.000 How is it that you get your information?
00:14:18.000 Why is it that this information is kept out of the mainstream and how do you feel about
00:14:24.000 it morally and personally?
00:14:26.000 Yeah, so what's interesting is that the truth is out there.
00:14:32.000 The truth, you know, you can read between the lines of the mainstream media.
00:14:36.000 You know, it's what they're saying is factual, but not truthful necessarily.
00:14:41.000 And a lot of times, and you know, what a big part of my job is, is reading these reports from the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Times over in London, and You know, a lot of times buried in those reports are the kernels of truth, like the fact that they didn't think the counteroffensive would succeed.
00:14:59.000 They would have a story about something completely unrelated, related to Ukraine, and then buried in there, you see a Ukrainian official say, we don't have the weapons to do this counteroffensive.
00:15:09.000 We can't do this.
00:15:11.000 And the media goes along with the narrative, even though they might be reporting on factual things.
00:15:17.000 It's about narrative control.
00:15:19.000 And you see that with the unprovoked invasion claim, which is one of the, you know, they're trying to change language.
00:15:26.000 They're trying to say it's unprovoked, even though everything's provoked.
00:15:30.000 I mean, murder is provoked generally, unless somebody is a sociopath, but it's always provoked.
00:15:36.000 And recently, Jens Stoltenberg, the head of NATO, he said, He basically said Putin invaded because he didn't want NATO in Ukraine.
00:15:44.000 And that's the head of NATO.
00:15:45.000 And they accuse us that the accusation that we always get is that we're on Putin's payroll or that we're, you know, working for Russia or working for China is the new big one now.
00:15:55.000 And it's just complete nonsense.
00:15:57.000 You know, we're us at Antiwar.com.
00:15:59.000 You know, we're Americans who care about our country and our people and don't want our government out there, you know, causing more destruction around the world.
00:16:07.000 That's our priority.
00:16:09.000 And we've talked about these things long before it happens.
00:16:13.000 You know, I haven't been doing it very long.
00:16:15.000 I started working full-time in 2019, but the website antiwar.com has been around since 1995.
00:16:20.000 They were writing about warning against meddling in Ukraine in the early 2000s.
00:16:25.000 So, we're on top of this stuff.
00:16:28.000 And then when a big thing happens like the invasion, You know, continuing what we do, we get accused of being Russian stooges or whatever, just because the narrative has completely shifted.
00:16:39.000 You know, COVID kind of ended.
00:16:41.000 It didn't end.
00:16:42.000 But, you know, the Ukraine war became the big thing as soon as Russia invaded and anybody speaking out against it got hit with this label.
00:16:49.000 And thankfully, things have changed just because of the reality of what's going on in the U.S.
00:16:55.000 And this war is dragging on.
00:16:57.000 And what are the results that we're seeing?
00:16:59.000 It's just a stalemate and death and destruction.
00:17:02.000 And it's just horrific.
00:17:03.000 So more people are questioning and polls are showing that the opposition is growing, thankfully.
00:17:08.000 It's odd, because that's such a predictable outcome, and indeed, as you said, the reporting on antiwar.com, which I recommend all of you use and follow if you want to be well informed on this issue, has been saying, well, Ukrainian war, hold on, that could be complicated.
00:17:22.000 What about the 2014 coup?
00:17:23.000 What about the infringement of NATO on former Soviet Union territories?
00:17:28.000 And when you report on that stuff, when you don't comply, when you don't follow their preferred line, you're right, they do reach for extraordinary slurs, and this one that Like, you could be a Putin apologist or a Chinese stooge.
00:17:41.000 I don't even know that that actually is how things work.
00:17:45.000 Like, the Chinese government would, like, approach... I mean, I have no idea what they had to say.
00:17:50.000 If the Chinese government or Putin, especially with what I've been through, said, listen, we're prepared to give you some support, I'd go, well, let's talk terms.
00:17:59.000 What are you saying?
00:18:00.000 You know, like, I don't think that the world works like that.
00:18:02.000 I think that what's far more common is that the sort of there's a set of converging interests between legacy media and the state that are ideological but certainly financial the way that they are funded the pundits that they use it's such a sort of collaborative porous immersive and
00:18:23.000 Sort of interlocked network of interests that the sort of simplistic Name-calling that you're a Putin apologist.
00:18:32.000 That's outrageous.
00:18:34.000 I watched for example recently Hillary Clinton talking to Jen Psaki on something called inside with Jen Psaki and I thought well, that is what it is It is inside.
00:18:43.000 It's inside the system amplifying its message and they talked about like, you know, as we know Putin meddles in elections and As we know, Putin is an authoritarian dictator, this is an
00:18:55.000 unprovoked war.
00:18:56.000 And all there are in terms of interlocution and communication is just the nodding along.
00:19:03.000 That is the function of the media.
00:19:04.000 You don't see questions asked like, you won't ever get you interviewing Antony Blinken,
00:19:10.000 you won't get you interviewing Hillary Clinton or any figure in power because they avoid
00:19:17.000 those questions.
00:19:18.000 I mean, beyond avoiding them, they delegitimize that line of inquiry.
00:19:22.000 They smear any form of dissent, presumably because when this war started, a lot of people
00:19:29.000 would have gone, oh, what, Ukraine, Russia, that's going to go on for ages and ages, isn't
00:19:33.000 it?
00:19:34.000 You can't beat Russia in wars, they're a nuclear superpower, isn't it?
00:19:36.000 It's going to just drain resources and won't it endlessly escalate?
00:19:39.000 I mean, one of the pledges that Biden offered was that you wouldn't see troops like, you
00:19:46.000 know, he said US troops and as far as I know, that's not necessarily happened yet.
00:19:49.000 But I know that you referred to that Telegraph article and I feel like the UK are putting
00:19:54.000 troops into Ukraine for training purposes and there's a suggestion that BAE systems
00:19:59.000 might start operating out of there.
00:20:02.000 So you do see this incremental escalation that's completely at odds with even the narrative
00:20:06.000 they offer you at the beginning of the crisis.
00:20:09.000 And what do you think about that aspect of it?
00:20:09.000 Conflict!
00:20:12.000 The way that the narrative alters and shifts and amplifies?
00:20:15.000 Yeah, I always think about Olaf Scholz, the German Chancellor.
00:20:19.000 In, you know, the early days of the war, when they were trying to get Germany to send planes and tanks, he said, no, no, no, we're not doing it.
00:20:26.000 I'm trying to prevent World War Three is what he would say.
00:20:28.000 I'm trying to prevent nuclear war.
00:20:30.000 Well, now he's allowed the transfer of planes.
00:20:33.000 He's allowed.
00:20:35.000 They're sent the German made Leopard tanks.
00:20:37.000 So, you know, is he taking his country toward World War Three?
00:20:41.000 By his previous logic, he is.
00:20:43.000 And you mentioned the troops.
00:20:46.000 So, recently, your new defense secretary, Schaps, I'm kind of blanking on his name.
00:20:51.000 Grant Schaps.
00:20:53.000 Grant Schaps.
00:20:54.000 He suggested that the British troops that have been training Ukrainians inside the UK, maybe we should start doing that training inside Ukraine.
00:21:03.000 And then Rishi Sunak came out the day after and he said, no, that's down, you know, that's down the line.
00:21:08.000 Don't worry about it.
00:21:09.000 You know, it's not going to happen anytime soon.
00:21:12.000 British troops have been in Ukraine.
00:21:14.000 The Times reported in April 2022 that British SAS soldiers were inside Ukraine training Ukrainian soldiers on anti-tank weapons outside of Kiev.
00:21:24.000 A few months later, the New York Times reported that some NATO countries had special operations forces in Ukraine, and the UK was listed on there.
00:21:33.000 And the US also has a handful of special operations forces.
00:21:36.000 And, you know, that was revealed by the Discord leaks.
00:21:39.000 They have about 14, according to this leak, this leaked Pentagon document.
00:21:43.000 And the British had 50, which is a significant presence.
00:21:48.000 That's not just embassy security.
00:21:51.000 So they're they're doing things.
00:21:52.000 And there's also CIA on the ground, of course.
00:21:54.000 And we don't know what they're doing.
00:21:56.000 That's part of the transparency issue.
00:21:59.000 You know, they could be doing, you Who knows how close they are to the front lines?
00:22:04.000 We don't know.
00:22:04.000 But if the UK started sending troops openly, that would be another very big escalation.
00:22:11.000 So, it's something to keep an eye out for.
00:22:13.000 But it's worth pointing out that they've actually been there.
00:22:15.000 Now, we don't know if they're still there, but based on these reports from these certain time periods, there were, you know, there's enough evidence that I believe it's safe to say there were British troops on the ground in Ukraine.
00:22:27.000 Tucker Carlson, God love him, said that it's likely that there will be a hot war between the United States and Russia within a year.
00:22:36.000 What do you think about that?
00:22:38.000 I really hope that he's wrong because, you know, that can't happen.
00:22:43.000 And that used to be the attitude was we can't go to war with Russia with, you know, can't go to war with the Soviet Union, can't go to war with Russia.
00:22:50.000 They have thousands of nukes.
00:22:52.000 It can't happen.
00:22:53.000 But obviously, that attitude has shifted now that things keep escalating.
00:22:57.000 I mean, we're doing the U.S.
00:23:00.000 And NATO are doing everything short of having troops there fighting Russia.
00:23:05.000 They're giving them all the weapons.
00:23:07.000 They're giving them all the intelligence.
00:23:09.000 And Russia knows this.
00:23:10.000 You know, there's been all these drone attacks inside Russia, in Crimea, and they're using Western intelligence for that.
00:23:16.000 Russia knows it.
00:23:18.000 Russia has, if they want to go to war with NATO, they have the pretext to bomb a NATO base in Poland.
00:23:24.000 Right now, we are relying on the restraint of this madman Vladimir Putin that they keep, you know, that's what we hear about him is that he's some sort of madman.
00:23:34.000 But then they also say, oh, he's just bluffing when he's talking about nuclear weapons.
00:23:38.000 So, you know, I try not to be too alarmist, but we're at the point now where if you wake up tomorrow morning and the US and Russia, NATO and Russia are at war.
00:23:48.000 You know, don't be surprised.
00:23:49.000 It's not going to be a shock.
00:23:51.000 And, you know, I really hope that this opposition in DC and other places in Europe and Slovakia, they just elected a government that wants to end military aid to Ukraine.
00:24:03.000 I hope that keeps growing because we really need to end this thing.
00:24:06.000 We're at that point now where Something could spark it.
00:24:10.000 You know, there's all these planes, NATO and Russian planes are always having these close encounters.
00:24:14.000 There was that Ukrainian air defense missile that hit Poland last year and they said it was Russia.
00:24:20.000 You know, it's just where we're at.
00:24:22.000 Again, just if we wake up and the headline is NATO at war with Russia, you know, we tried to warn you.
00:24:29.000 I prefer it to some of the headlines I've seen recently.
00:24:31.000 Now the reliance on Russian restraint is, it seems extraordinary that that would be sort of part of a strategy and the confusing messaging also around, the confusing messaging around, yeah, he's bluffing, he's mad, he's ill, all of this sort of almost antiquated 20th century propaganda.
00:24:53.000 Seems extraordinarily misguided and while I'm listening to you I'm thinking why is this important?
00:24:58.000 Of course it's important because of the potential to provoke a superpower into Armageddon which is being addressed and identified as you said by the German Chancellor even Biden himself a few years ago said you know that would be the end of the world and The very point of a cold war was because a hot war was inconceivable.
00:25:14.000 A proxy war is even an acknowledgement that America's imperialist interests can be better met.
00:25:21.000 And these are not the interests of the American people, of course.
00:25:23.000 To clarify, of the military-industrial complex and the establishment elites that masquerade behind the veil of democracy.
00:25:32.000 You've seen the show before, right?
00:25:33.000 This is what we talk about.
00:25:36.000 What I wanted to say is that the reason that it's important to continually interrogate this is because we've foreclosed on the possibility of a different world where the population of any country, yours, mine, might say, is that what I want to happen with my taxpayer dollars?
00:25:50.000 If indeed, as claimed, the role of the United States is to act as emissaries and peacekeepers and referees in global conflicts that purportedly have no benefit to them, then It ought to be at the directive of the population.
00:26:08.000 Certainly, for example, the concomitant Hawaiian fires demonstrated a sort of clear public opinion preference for support on domestic issues rather than foreign wars.
00:26:20.000 And the idea that that kind of conversation is equated with, you know, Putin apologism or A lack of regard for the plight of Ukrainian people is reductive and simplistic and untrue because of the sheer number of conflicts around the world that America continue to inspire, fund and enact.
00:26:38.000 And I suppose when I think of what we're doing, when we're dealing with someone like you who has a particular expertise and a background and history dealing with the subject that you're dealing with, I feel like it's important to acknowledge that what we're saying is we're being misinformed and lied to and there are different ways of organizing reality.
00:26:54.000 It's not like there's just some Invisible trajectory that sweeps your taxpayer dollars into the sort of profitable war machine and it is something that should be discussed and in order to discuss it you have to be well informed and in order to do that you have to have a media that's not just amplifying the agenda of the powerful.
00:27:12.000 Do you think it is conceivable that people could reject the ongoing support of this of this conflict and therefore demand a peaceful resolution?
00:27:24.000 Yeah, like I said, you know, I think that the opposition is growing and we are in kind of this new media age, especially, you know, with this show, you know, being on Rumble being, you know, they want to shut you down, but you have your outlets that, you know, they can't control.
00:27:40.000 And Antiwar.com is a very unique thing because, again, this website was founded in 1995 and they kind of cut their teeth opposing the NATO bombing of Kosovo.
00:27:52.000 And they had sources on the ground finding out NATO was bombing civilian targets.
00:27:57.000 And it was kind of the first thing of its kind online.
00:28:00.000 And now, since then, because of that, they were targeted by the FBI.
00:28:03.000 They were under FBI surveillance.
00:28:06.000 But now there's kind of There's so much of this now.
00:28:09.000 There's a lot available that, you know, ordinary people that might not necessarily really pay attention or try to look for the truth in these, when it comes to conflicts like this, you know, they could find it a lot easier now.
00:28:23.000 You could kind of stumble across it.
00:28:26.000 So, I think that's kind of, that's, you know, what I try to do and the reason why I am a news editor, why I just talk about the news all day.
00:28:34.000 It's my, you know, it's my focus.
00:28:36.000 Is because if you just follow the news, if you just have the context of the events that have happened, again, it's all out there for us.
00:28:43.000 You know, if you just follow along, you know, they they lie by omission.
00:28:48.000 Of course, this is what, you know, Chomsky wrote about is that, you know, one example I always think of recently, Iran seized two oil tankers in the Persian Gulf.
00:28:58.000 If back in I believe it was around April or May.
00:29:02.000 And the context that was missing from that story was that a couple weeks before that, the U.S.
00:29:08.000 stole a shipment of Iranian oil.
00:29:10.000 They forced an oil tanker to sail to the U.S.
00:29:12.000 and they stole the oil.
00:29:13.000 So they seized the tanker and Iran responded.
00:29:16.000 And you don't hear about what caused it, what provoked it.
00:29:20.000 They never want to include that.
00:29:22.000 So it's just a matter of knowing, like, it's kind of, you don't need to be super informed, just kind of be aware of what's happening.
00:29:31.000 And when it comes to Ukraine, and I think it just has to be clear to more people that considering what the US has done to the Middle East and North Africa for the past 20 years, you know, how can they think that they really care about Ukrainians?
00:29:45.000 How can you believe that that's what this is about?
00:29:47.000 So I think it's kind of just opening more people up to that reality.
00:29:52.000 Yeah, and now there seems to be an appetite to... Antony Blinken said that China want to become a dominant world power and want to become sort of a hegemonic unipolar force and replace the United States.
00:30:08.000 I feel like, is that True.
00:30:10.000 Is that how China are behaving?
00:30:12.000 I'm sure they have their own imperialism, colonialism, tyranny, corruption.
00:30:17.000 Of course, I'm sure.
00:30:18.000 But do you think that there is an agenda?
00:30:21.000 I mean, if I imagine for a minute that it was the US that was surrounded by Chinese military bases rather than the opposite, or if China were agitating in some sort of off-coast former territory to meddle with the economic affairs as is happening with Taiwan and the
00:30:41.000 semiconductors and stuff. I feel that would be regarded as extreme hostility. What do you think about this
00:30:50.000 attempt to portray China as an aggressor? Is it unfair? Am I being naive, optimistic? What's
00:30:55.000 going on? If you look at what US policy is right now towards China, when we're
00:31:00.000 speaking militarily, they're not trying to prevent China from taking over the world.
00:31:05.000 They're trying to prevent China from being the hegemon in Southeast Asia, a few hundred miles off their coast.
00:31:14.000 That's what the US is focused on is Taiwan and the South China Sea.
00:31:19.000 And, you know, it's very clear that China, what China has been doing in a lot of instances is a reaction to what the U.S.
00:31:27.000 is doing, especially in Taiwan.
00:31:28.000 I mean, Taiwan, it's an issue that's tough to talk about briefly because it's kind of complicated.
00:31:35.000 But when the U.S.
00:31:36.000 and China normalized relations in 1979, the deal was the U.S.
00:31:41.000 would pull their troops out of Taiwan.
00:31:42.000 They would not recognize Taiwan as a country.
00:31:46.000 And they would not flirt with Taiwan's independence.
00:31:50.000 They would, you know, it's an issue for Chinese people in China and mainland China and Taiwan to work out.
00:31:58.000 But in recent years, we've seen, especially when Nancy Pelosi went over there, the U.S.
00:32:03.000 is increasing military aid.
00:32:05.000 The U.S.
00:32:06.000 in 1982, they released the third joint communique And that was these things they released when the US and
00:32:13.000 China were normalizing relations to work out certain issues.
00:32:16.000 And in this one, the US said basically that they would eventually stop selling weapons to Taiwan.
00:32:22.000 Now, that's open for interpretation. It's intentionally vague, the language, but this was essentially the deal that
00:32:28.000 the US made.
00:32:29.000 And now, in recent years, arms sales have increased.
00:32:32.000 And this year, President Biden, for the first time, started giving Taiwan military aid, the same way he's arming Ukraine by sending weapons directly from Pentagon stockpiles.
00:32:42.000 This is unprecedented in the era of US-China normalized relations.
00:32:47.000 And they're doing all this in the name of deterrence.
00:32:50.000 They say they need to deter China from invading Taiwan, from blockading Taiwan.
00:32:56.000 But if you look at the past few years, since the US policy toward Taiwan sort of changed, which really happened in the Trump administration, they started loosening restrictions for official government contacts.
00:33:07.000 That's another thing that really irks China is, you know, US and Taiwanese officials talking.
00:33:14.000 In that time, as the US has increased that military and diplomatic support, we've seen a lot more Chinese military activity around Taiwan.
00:33:22.000 China held their largest ever military drills around Taiwan when Nancy Pelosi went over there.
00:33:28.000 Nancy Pelosi's visit provoked that.
00:33:30.000 So, this is the pattern.
00:33:32.000 And it doesn't matter really how you feel about Taiwan, if they should be independent or not, if you're in the US.
00:33:40.000 It's just the reality.
00:33:41.000 The more the U.S.
00:33:42.000 does this, the more military pressure Taiwan's going to come under and the more likely a war is going to be.
00:33:47.000 Same thing in the South China Sea.
00:33:49.000 There's this maritime dispute.
00:33:51.000 China makes very sweeping claims to the South China Sea.
00:33:54.000 There's little encounters between Chinese and Philippine vessels.
00:33:57.000 The U.S.
00:33:58.000 has a mutual defense treaty with the Philippines.
00:34:00.000 Whenever a Chinese coast guard boat cuts off a Philippine boat, The U.S.
00:34:05.000 comes out and says the U.S.
00:34:07.000 Mutual Defense Treaty with the Philippines applies to attacks on vessels in the South China Sea.
00:34:11.000 So, that means the U.S.
00:34:12.000 is saying, if this maritime dispute over rocks and reefs turns hot, we're going to go to war.
00:34:19.000 So, how is China, with respect to the U.S., not talking about its own backyard, but how is China, you know, the aggressor in this situation when the U.S.