reSee.it - Related Post Feed

Posted - July 11, 2023 at 2:14 PM

Saved - February 6, 2024 at 7:35 AM

@TheMilkBarTV - MilkBarTV

How world leaders spoke about Putin before the war in Ukraine. https://t.co/EG8utHIH7H

Video Transcript AI Summary

Two American speakers express trust in Vladimir Putin, with one stating that he found Putin to be straightforward and trustworthy. Another speaker praises Putin for his initial move towards democracy and describes him as very smart. The same speaker also mentions having a good relationship with Putin and states that he kept his word in their agreements. Another speaker acknowledges the challenges faced by the Russian president, including the need for economic restructuring and rebuilding civic society. This speaker believes it is understandable that Putin presents himself as a strong and patriotic leader. Lastly, one speaker expresses confidence in improved cooperation between NATO members and Russia. However, another speaker predicts that Putin will eventually take over all of Ukraine.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: Is this a man that Americans can trust? I looked the man in the eye. I found him to be very straightforward and trustworthy. We had a very good dialogue. I was able to, get a sense of his soul. I wouldn't have invited him to my ranch if I didn't trust him. Speaker 1: Well, here's Biden 20 years ago praising Vladimir Putin for moving toward democracy. I'm close to amazed by how far Putin seems to have come in making throwing his lot with the West. I don't think anybody since Peter the Great has made such a significant, at least Initial move to the west. Speaker 2: Mister Putin has got he got all he's very smart. Speaker 0: Well, you know him better than most people. Speaker 2: Yeah. I think we had a really good blunt relationship. Speaker 0: Did Putin ever renege on a personal agreement he made to you? Speaker 2: He did not. Speaker 0: So behind closed doors, he could be trusted? Speaker 2: He kept his word in all the deals we made. Speaker 3: We have to understand the scale of the problems that the president of Russia has to deal with, and they're unlike any of Speaker 0: the problems that any Speaker 3: of the problems that any of the rest of us in in the Western world have to deal with. I mean, he's dealing with an economy that needs absolutely fundamental restructuring, civic Society that needs to be rebuilt after the years of Communism and external relations that have a whole series of historical Legacies that have to be overcome. So I don't think it's surprising that he is and presents himself as a strong leader, as a patriotic leader for Russia. Speaker 0: I am Confident that this new level of cooperation between NATO's members and Russia will now change the world and for the better. Speaker 2: I got along with him great. But ultimately, he's gonna take over all of Ukraine.

@CalliFanciulla — Péonia

Posted - September 9, 2023 at 7:18 AM

Saved - September 9, 2023 at 7:59 PM

reSee.it AI Summary

Russia's President Putin claims that if he is considered a war criminal, then all US presidents since Nixon should be too. He lists numerous US-involved wars since 1890, highlighting the deaths of millions of civilians. Zoltan Grossman describes 150 military operations by the US, both abroad and domestically. The conclusion is clear: the US provokes wars, fuels conflicts, and seeks global dominance. Russia, in contrast, has not participated in 150 wars resulting in the deaths of millions.

@CalliFanciulla - Péonia

🔴 #RUSSIA Vs #USA 📍Poutine : "Si je suis un criminel de guerre, que sont les présidents américains depuis Nixon jusqu'à aujourd'hui ? Selon le président de la Fédération de Russie, s'il doit être jugé en tant que criminel de guerre, il devrait être rejoint par tous les présidents américains qui ont provoqué des dizaines de guerres dans le monde sans même avoir le droit de le faire. Poutine énumère également les guerres dans lesquelles les États-Unis ont été impliqués depuis 1890 : Fin du 19e siècle 1890 - Dakota du Sud, les troupes du gouvernement américain tuent et abattent 300 Indiens Dakota capturés. 1890 - Argentine, intervention militaire américaine à Buenos Aires. 1891 - Les marines chiliens répriment un soulèvement local. 1891 - Haïti : l'armée américaine réprime une émeute de Noirs à Navas. 1892 - Idaho, l'armée américaine réprime une émeute dans une mine d'argent. 1893 (- ?) - Hawaï, la marine américaine renverse le gouvernement du Royaume indépendant et annexe l'État. 1894 - Chicago : l'armée américaine réprime brutalement une grève des chemins de fer, tuant 34 personnes au total. 1894 - Le Nicaragua est occupé par l'armée américaine pendant un mois. 1894-1895 - Chine : la marine et les marines américains participent à la guerre sino-japonaise. 1894-1896 - Corée, occupation de Séoul. 1895 - Panama, les marines américains attaquent la province colombienne. 1896 - Nicaragua, les marines américains débarquent à Corinth. 1898-1900 - Chine, participation de l'armée américaine à la répression de la rébellion des boxeurs. 1898-1910 (- ?) - Philippines, la marine américaine renverse le gouvernement et tue 600 000 Philippins. 1898-1902 (- ?) - Cuba, la marine américaine combat pendant la guerre hispano-américaine. 1898 (- ?) - Porto Rico, occupation pendant la guerre hispano-américaine. 1898 - Guam, la marine américaine occupe l'île et y construit une base militaire. 1898 (- ?) - Minnesota, l'armée américaine détruit la tribu Chippewa (Ojibwe) près du lac Leach. 1898 - Nicaragua, les marines américains débarquent dans le port de San Juan del Sur. 1899 (- ?) - Samoa, l'armée américaine participe à la guerre du trône. 1899 - Nicaragua, la marine américaine débarque au port de Bluefield. 1899-1901 - Idaho, l'armée américaine réprime brutalement la révolte des mineurs de Coeur d'Alene. Premier quart du XXe siècle 1901 - Oklahoma, l'armée américaine réprime la rébellion des Indian Creek. 1901-1914 - Panama, la marine américaine occupe et annexe la zone du canal. 1903 - Honduras, les marines américains répriment la révolution. 1903-1904 - République dominicaine, les marines américains répriment la révolution. 1904-1905 - Corée, les marines américains participent à la guerre russo-japonaise. 1906-1909 - Cuba : les marines américains interviennent et suppriment les élections démocratiques. 1907 - Le Nicaragua, à la suite de l'occupation, crée un protectorat dans le cadre de la "diplomatie du dollar". 1907 - Honduras, occupé par les marines américains pendant la guerre avec le Nicaragua. 1908 - Panama : les marines américains interviennent dans le processus électoral. 1910 - Nicaragua, les marines américains occupent Bluefield et Corinth. 1911 - Honduras, l'armée américaine participe à la guerre civile. 1911-1941 - Chine : la marine et l'armée américaines occupent le pays et participent à la répression de nombreuses émeutes. 1912 - Cuba, l'armée américaine participe à la guerre civile. 1912 - Panama, l'armée américaine et les marines répriment une émeute électorale. 1912 - Honduras : le corps des marines défend les intérêts économiques des États-Unis. 1912-1933 - Nicaragua : l'armée américaine occupe le pays pendant dix ans et participe à la guérilla. 1913 - Mexique, pendant la révolution, l'armée américaine fuit et évacue. 1914 - République dominicaine, la marine américaine combat les rebelles autour de Saint-Domingue. 1914 - Colorado, l'armée américaine réprime brutalement une grève de 🔽

@CalliFanciulla - Péonia

2. mineurs. 1914-1918 - Mexique : la marine et l'armée américaines participent à des opérations militaires contre les nationalistes. 1914-1934 - Haïti : l'armée américaine occupe le pays pendant 19 ans après la répression du soulèvement. 1915 - Texas : les troupes fédérales répriment brutalement le soulèvement mexico-américain, plan San Diego. 1916-1924 - République dominicaine : l'armée américaine occupe le pays pendant huit ans. 1917-1933 - Cuba : l'armée américaine occupe le pays et y établit un protectorat économique. 1917-18 - Première Guerre mondiale : la marine américaine combat l'Allemagne pendant un an et demi. 1918-1922 - Russie : la marine américaine effectue cinq débarquements de troupes pour lutter contre les bolcheviks. 1918-1920 - Panama, l'armée américaine réprime les émeutes postélectorales dans le cadre de l'opération "Duty Police". 1919 - Honduras, l'armée et les marines américains répriment des émeutes pendant la campagne électorale. 1919 - Yougoslavie : l'armée et les marines américains combattent les Serbes en Dalmatie. 1920 - Guatemala, intervention de deux semaines contre des militants syndicaux. 1920-1921 - Virginie orientale, l'armée américaine réprime une émeute de mineurs. 1922 - Turquie, l'armée américaine combat les nationalistes à Smyrne. 1922-1927 - Chine : l'armée et la marine américaines répriment un soulèvement nationaliste. 1923 - Mexique : bombardement par des avions militaires américains. 1924-1925 - Honduras : intervention militaire américaine, à deux reprises, lors de la campagne électorale. 1925 - Panama : l'armée et les marines américaines mettent fin à une grève générale. Milieu du XXe siècle 1927-1934 - Chine : l'armée et la marine américaines occupent le pays. 1932 - Salvador : la marine américaine réprime la rébellion des Marty. 1932 - Washington DC, l'armée américaine réprime la manifestation des anciens combattants de la Première Guerre mondiale en faveur du versement d'une prime. 1941-1945 - Seconde Guerre mondiale : la marine et l'armée américaines combattent le Japon, l'Italie et l'Allemagne pendant trois ans et procèdent au premier bombardement atomique de deux villes japonaises. 1943 - Détroit, l'armée américaine réprime la rébellion noire. 1946 - L'Iran quitte le nord du pays face à la menace nucléaire américaine. 1946 - Yougoslavie, menace nucléaire des États-Unis en réponse à l'abattage d'un avion américain. 1947 - Uruguay, déploiement d'une menace de bombardier nucléaire. 1947-1949 - Grèce : opération militaire américaine pour soutenir l'extrême droite dans la guerre civile. 1948 - Allemagne : menace nucléaire américaine avec des bombardiers nucléaires stratégiques à Berlin contre l'URSS. 1948-1949 - Chine, l'armée et la marine américaines évacuent les Américains avant la victoire des communistes. 1948-1954 - Philippines, la CIA mène une opération militaire. pendant la rébellion de Hook. 1950 - Porto Rico, opération visant à réprimer la rébellion de Ponce. 1951-1953 (- ?) - Corée, l'armée et la marine américaines menacent de bombardements nucléaires la Corée du Nord et la Chine. 1953 - Iran : à la suite d'une opération, la CIA renverse la démocratie et instaure un régime de contrôle. 1954 - Les États-Unis et le Viêt Nam coopèrent en brandissant la menace nucléaire contre les rebelles. 1954 - Guatemala, opération de la CIA, bombardement des aéroports nicaraguayens, menace nucléaire américaine suite à la nationalisation d'entreprises américaines. 1956 - Égypte, menace nucléaire américaine contre l'Union soviétique avec demande de non-intervention dans la crise de Suez, évacuation des étrangers par les Marines. 1958 - Liban, l'armée et la marine américaines occupent le pays et répriment les insurgés. 1958 - Irak : menace nucléaire américaine contre l'Irak et avertissement d'invasion du Koweït. 1958 - Chine : menace nucléaire des États-Unis contre la Chine en cas de réunification avec Taïwan. 1958 - Panama : l'armée américaine réprime 🔽

@CalliFanciulla - Péonia

3. réprime les manifestations. 1960-1975 - Vietnam : l'armée, la marine et l'aviation participent à la guerre du Vietnam. Un million de morts dans la plus longue guerre américaine, les États-Unis menacent de bombardements atomiques en 1968 et 1969. 1961 - Cuba : une opération d'invasion de la CIA échoue. 1961 - Allemagne : menace nucléaire des États-Unis contre l'Union soviétique pendant la crise du mur de Berlin. 1962 - Laos : opération militaire pendant la guerre de guérilla. 1962 - Cuba, menace nucléaire américaine contre l'Union soviétique et Cuba, blocus naval pendant la crise des Caraïbes. 1963 - Irak : la CIA organise un coup d'État au cours duquel le président est assassiné et le parti Baas prend le pouvoir. Saddam Hussein revient d'exil et dirige les services secrets. 1964 - Panama : l'armée américaine réprime les émeutes liées à la restitution du canal. 1965 - Indonésie : coup d'État organisé par la CIA, plus d'un million de personnes tuées. 1965-1966 - République dominicaine : l'armée et la marine américaines répriment les manifestations pendant la campagne électorale. 1966-1967 - Guatemala : les Bérets verts américains combattent les rebelles. 1967 - Détroit, l'armée américaine réprime des émeutes afro-américaines, faisant 43 morts. 1968 - Armée américaine, l'armée américaine parvient à mettre fin aux émeutes après l'assassinat de Martin Luther King. Plus de 21 000 soldats sont déployés dans les villes. 1969-1975 - Cambodge : l'armée et la marine américaines bombardent le pays. En dix ans, jusqu'à 2 millions de personnes sont tuées par les bombardements, la famine et le chaos politique. 1970 - Oman, occupé par l'armée américaine pour empêcher une invasion de l'Iran. 1971-1973 - Laos : les États-Unis bombardent le Sud-Vietnam. 1973 - Dakota du Sud : l'armée américaine réprime les Indiens Undide Nee. 1973 - Moyen-Orient : menace nucléaire et menace de guerre mondiale de la part des États-Unis pendant la guerre du Moyen-Orient. 1973 - Chili : un coup d'État militaire renverse et assassine le président Salvador Allende. 1975 - Cambodge : l'armée américaine bombarde le Mayaguez, un navire capturé, tuant 28 soldats. À la fin du XXe siècle 1976-1992 - Angola, opération de la CIA visant à apporter un soutien militaire aux gangs armés d'Afrique du Sud pendant la guerre civile. 1980 - Iran, soldats, menace nucléaire des États-Unis, l'armée tente en vain de sauver les otages de l'ambassade, 8 soldats meurent dans cette tentative. 1981 - Libye : la marine américaine abat deux avions libyens. 1981-1992 - Salvador - opération contre les rebelles. 1981-1990 - Opération Nicaragua, l'US Navy et la CIA répriment la révolution. 1982-1984 - Liban, la marine et l'armée de l'air américaines s'engagent dans une guerre contre les rebelles chiites. 241 marines sont tués. 1983-1984 - Grenade, invasion militaire américaine quatre ans après la révolution. 1983-1989 - Honduras : invasion américaine, manœuvres, construction d'une base. 1984 - Iran : deux avions civils iraniens sont abattus au-dessus du golfe Persique. 1986 - Libye, bombardement naval américain. 1986 - Bolivie, l'armée américaine participe à la guerre de la cocaïne. 1987-1988 - Iran : la marine et l'armée de l'air américaines interviennent dans la guerre d'Irak, bombardent et abattent un avion iranien. 1989 - Libye : la marine américaine abat deux avions libyens. 1989 - Îles Vierges, l'armée américaine réprime une émeute de Noirs à St. Croix. 1989 - Les États-Unis bombardent les Philippines. 1989 (- ?) - Panama, l'armée américaine renverse le gouvernement national, plus de 2 000 morts. 1990 - Liberia, l'armée américaine évacue les étrangers pendant la guerre civile. 1990-1991 - Arabie Saoudite, invasion américaine après l'invasion irakienne du Koweït, 540 000 soldats américains à Oman, au Qatar, au Bahreïn, aux Émirats arabes unis et en Israël. 1990-1991 - Irak : bombardements, invasion militaire américaine 🔽

@CalliFanciulla - Péonia

4. blocus naval des ports irakiens et jordaniens, frappes aériennes ; 200 000 personnes tuées lors des invasions de l'Irak et du Koweït ; destruction à grande échelle de l'armée irakienne. 1991 - Le Koweït 1991-2003 - Irak : bombardements, zones d'exclusion aérienne au-dessus du nord kurde et du sud chiite ; attaques aériennes et blocus naval constants. 1992 - Los Angeles : l'armée américaine et le corps des Marines sont déployés contre les manifestants et les émeutiers. 1992-1994 - Somalie, occupation par l'armée et la marine américaines, participation à la guerre civile. 1992-94 - Yougoslavie, blocus naval de la Serbie et du Monténégro par l'OTAN. 1993 - Bosnie, bombardements, patrouilles aériennes, zone d'exclusion aérienne, guerre civile, assassinats de Serbes, frappes contre la Serbie et abattage d'avions serbes. 1994 - Haïti, invasion américaine, blocus naval et occupation, renversement du gouvernement militaire. 1996-1997 - Zaïre (Congo) : les troupes américaines envahissent les camps de réfugiés hutus au Rwanda et les régions où la révolution congolaise a commencé. 1997 - Le Liberia 1997 - L'Albanie 1998 - Le Soudan attaqué car selon la CIA, produit des armes chimiques pour les terroristes. 1998 - Afghanistan : attaque au missile contre d'anciens camps d'entraînement de la CIA utilisés par des groupes fondamentalistes islamiques qui auraient attaqué l'ambassade. 1998 - Irak : bombardement, quatre jours d'attaques aériennes et de roquettes intenses après des allégations selon lesquelles les autorités auraient entravé le travail des inspecteurs en désarmement. 1999 - Yougoslavie : nombreux bombardements, tirs intensifs de roquettes et frappes aériennes de l'OTAN après le refus de la Serbie de quitter le Kosovo. Occupation du Kosovo par l'OTAN. Début du 21e siècle 2000 - Yémen 2001 - Macédoine, déploiement de troupes de l'OTAN. 2001 - États-Unis, réponse de l'US Air Force et de l'US Navy. 2001-2022 - Afghanistan, invasion par les troupes américaines, bombardements et attaques au missile, mobilisation massive aux États-Unis pour renverser le régime des talibans, chasse aux combattants d'Al-Qaïda, mise en place du régime Karzaï et lutte contre les talibans. Plus de 30 000 soldats américains et de nombreuses sociétés militaires privées occupent le pays. 2002 - Yémen 2002 - Philippines : déploiement de troupes américaines et mission navale contre Abu Sayyaf dans l'archipel de Sulu, à l'ouest de Mindanao. 2003 - Colombie, l'armée américaine et les forces spéciales sont déployées dans la zone rebelle pour soutenir l'armée colombienne dans la défense de l'oléoduc. 2003-2011 - Irak, guerre, bombardements, occupation, renversement de Saddam Hussein. L'invasion a mobilisé plus de 250 000 soldats américains. Les forces américaines et britanniques occupent le pays et combattent les rebelles sunnites et chiites. Plus de 160 000 soldats et de nombreux entrepreneurs privés se chargent de l'occupation et construisent de grandes bases permanentes. 2003 - Liberia, participation aux forces de maintien de la paix, opération visant à renverser le dirigeant du pays. 2004-2005 - Haïti, l'armée américaine, la marine et l'armée américaine occupent le pays. 2005 - Pakistan, attaques à la roquette et à la bombe, opérations secrètes et frappes de drones. 2006 - Somalie : des missiles, des forces navales et l'armée américaine participent à l'opération. Les forces spéciales du SWAT participent à l'invasion de l'Éthiopie, qui est renversée par le gouvernement islamiste ; bombardements AC-130, attaques au missile de croisière et frappes aériennes contre les insurgés islamistes ; blocus militaire contre les "pirates" et les rebelles. 2008 - Syrie : les forces spéciales sont impliquées dans une attaque d'hélicoptère à 5 miles de l'Irak ; 8 civils syriens sont tués. 2009 - Yémen : des frappes de missiles tuent 49 civils. 2011 - Libye : bombardements, attaques à la roquette, invasions 🔽

@CalliFanciulla - Péonia

5/5 menées par l'OTAN, frappes aériennes coordonnées et attaques à la roquette contre le gouvernement de Kadhafi pendant le soulèvement des rebelles. Les forces spéciales américaines mènent des opérations secrètes. 2014 - Irak : bombardements, tirs de missiles. 2014 - Syrie, bombardements, frappes de missiles, opérations d'invasion américaines. Participation à la guerre civile du côté des terroristes. Poutine : "Cette liste n'a pas été préparée par mon administration : - Cette liste n'a pas été préparée par mon administration, tout le monde connait ces operations, ces guerres menées par les États-Unis. Zoltan Grossman décrit 150 opérations militaires menées par l'armée américaine, à la fois contre des pays étrangers et sur le territoire national, même à Washington. Les conclusions sont claires : qui sont les criminels de guerre, qui provoquent les guerres dans le monde, qui alimentent les conflits, qui veulent soumettre tout le monde à leur volonté ? La Russie n'a pas participé à 150 guerres au cours desquelles des millions de civils ont été tués et pour lesquelles vous avez voté au Sénat américain".

@saras76 — Sara Rose 🇺🇸🌹

Posted - October 14, 2023 at 10:15 PM

Saved - May 20, 2024 at 11:35 AM

@saras76 - Sara Rose 🇺🇸🌹

Putin making fun of Biden for wearing a mask on a zoom call 😭 https://t.co/Byo2rGmzuC

Video Transcript AI Summary

Yesterday, I addressed the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation, emphasizing the importance of significantly reducing our country's accumulated net emissions by 2050 in the context of social and economic development. I also mentioned considering preferential treatment for foreign entities. It is crucial to highlight that Russia is genuinely interested in enhancing international cooperation.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: Вчера у меня было обращение к Федеральному собранию Российской Федерации ежегодно и в числе важнейших в контексте социально-экономического развития страны, существенно ограничить к 2050 году накопленный объем чистой эмиссии в нашей стране. Рассмотреть возможность преференций даже для зарубежных. Хотел бы еще раз подчеркнуть, что Российская Федерация искренне заинтересована в активизации международного сотрудничества с тем, чтобы

@nancy_hamm1 — 🌟🇺🇸Nancy Hamm🇺🇸🌟

Posted - October 24, 2023 at 2:15 PM

Saved - October 25, 2023 at 3:00 PM

@nancy_hamm1 - 🌟🇺🇸Nancy Hamm🇺🇸🌟

🚨🚨🚨HAS BIDEN COMMITTED TREASON??? https://t.co/ijk8EffCDn

Video Transcript AI Summary

Upon my inauguration, I will terminate every open borders policy of the Biden administration and begin the largest domestic deportation operation in American history. Joe Biden's claim of being the first president to inherit an unsecured border is false. The actions of my office have been borderline treasonous. A mother lost two children to Fentanyl during the last administration. Under President Trump, illegal border crossings decreased by 83%, resulting in fewer cases of rape, drowning, sex trafficking, fentanyl overdose, and suspected terrorists entering the country. If he comes back, I will fix this situation. No one did more to secure the border than President Trump. I am committed to this cause, even considering returning for free because I am so angry.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: We have no choice. Upon my inauguration, it's our inauguration, I will terminate every open borders policy of the Biden administration and begin the largest domestic deportation operation in American history. Speaker 1: Joe Biden's the 1st president in the history of the nation who came in office and unsecured a border. That is unequivocally false. So what him as secretary of my office has done is borderline treasonous. Speaker 2: A mom, a poor mother who lost 2 kids to Fentanyl. That Fentanyl they took came during the last administration. Speaker 1: They said our policies were were inhumane. Well, let me tell you something. Under president Trump, Illinois grace was down 83% of 45 year long. So when president Trump had Illinois grace down 83%. How many women weren't being raped? How many children didn't drown in the river? How many women and children were sex trafficked in the United How many Americans didn't die of fentanyl overdose? How many north suspected terrorists didn't come across that border? If he comes back, I back and fix this shit. No one did more. No one did more to secure this border than president Trump. If you don't like him, then you don't like him. I made a commitment. I even thought I might come back for free. I'm so pissed

@RNCResearch — RNC Research

Posted - October 25, 2023 at 2:42 PM

Saved - October 25, 2023 at 3:34 PM

@RNCResearch - RNC Research

Why does Biden always look so confused? https://t.co/wSN2V4oUZk

@jacksonhinklle — Jackson Hinkle 🇺🇸

Posted - December 14, 2023 at 4:32 PM

Saved - December 14, 2023 at 11:14 PM

@jacksonhinklle - Jackson Hinkle 🇺🇸

🚨🇮🇱 How do you defend this @JoeBiden? https://t.co/82Br60V6n1

@Urwrstnghtmare2 — 📵#BOB(BewustOngevaccineerdeBurger) 🏛

Posted - December 24, 2023 at 12:13 PM

Saved - December 25, 2023 at 11:35 AM

@Urwrstnghtmare2 - 📵#BOB(BewustOngevaccineerdeBurger) 🏛

Waarom is er oorlog in Oekraïne? https://t.co/7JqiuBpHvg

Video Transcript AI Summary

In 2014, three foreign ministers from Poland, Germany, and France arrived in Ukraine to guarantee a peaceful resolution between the government and the opposition. However, just two days later, a coup d'etat took place, allegedly orchestrated by the United States. The European guarantors claimed ignorance of the situation. The memory of these events seems to have faded in Europe, but Ukraine has not forgotten. The desire to bring Ukraine into NATO and the ongoing conflict in the Donbas region have contributed to the current tragedy.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: So in 2014, 3 foreign ministers arrived from Europe, from Poland, Germany, and France. They signed as guarantors of the agreement between the government of the time, president Yanukovych, and the opposition. They agreed that everything would be resolved peacefully. 2 days later, they carried out a coup d'etat. Why? Why did they not decide to win through elections? They did it to make a point to create conflict. That's why. And you may ask who did this? Our American cronies. And the Europeans, who signed as guarantors of the agreement between the government and the opposition, pretended they knew nothing at all. And now you can ask anyone in Europe, does anyone remember anything about it? No. But we have not forgotten, and we won't forget this, plus the unbridled desire to crawl up to our borders, taking Ukraine into NATO. All this led to this tragedy, plus the bloody events in the Donbas region that lasted 8 years. All of this led to the tragedy we are now experiencing.

@ShadowofEzra — Shadow of Ezra

Posted - December 27, 2023 at 1:05 PM

Saved - December 27, 2023 at 1:23 PM

@ShadowofEzra - Shadow of Ezra

Is Joe Biden the president? https://t.co/nJcIK1ekqi

Video Transcript AI Summary

Joseph R. Biden is the president of the United States, according to Speaker 1. Speaker 0 asks if he was duly elected and is lawfully serving, to which Speaker 1 simply repeats that he is the president without addressing the specific language used.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: Is Joseph r Biden of Delaware the duly elected and lawfully serving president of the United States of America? Speaker 1: He is the president of this country. Speaker 0: Is he the duly elected and lawfully serving president of the United States? Speaker 1: He is the president of our country. Are you answering that Speaker 0: omitting the language duly elected and lawfully Fully serving Speaker 1: purposefully? I'm answering the question, he is the president of the United States. Speaker 0: And you have no view as whether he was duly elected or is lawfully serving. Speaker 1: I'm telling you he's the president of the United States.

@TuckerCarlson — Tucker Carlson

Posted - February 6, 2024 at 6:44 PM

Saved - February 6, 2024 at 7:15 PM

@TuckerCarlson - Tucker Carlson

Why I'm interviewing Vladimir Putin. https://t.co/hqvXUZqvHX

Video Transcript AI Summary

We are in Moscow to interview Russian President Vladimir Putin. The war in Ukraine has had significant global impacts, reshaping military alliances and the world economy. However, many English-speaking countries remain unaware of these changes due to corrupt and biased media outlets. While numerous interviews have been conducted with Ukrainian President Zelensky, no Western journalist has interviewed Putin. Americans have the right to know about a war they are involved in, and we have the right to inform them. Despite attempts to suppress this interview, it can be watched for free on our website. We encourage viewers to watch and make their own judgments.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: We're in Moscow tonight. We're here to interview the president of Russia, Vladimir Putin. We'll be doing that soon. There are risks to conducting an interview like this, obviously, so we thought about it carefully over many months. Here's why we're doing it. 1st, because it's our job, or in journalism. Our duty is to inform people. 2 years into a war that's reshaping the entire world, most Americans are not informed. They have no real idea what's happening in this region, here in Russia or 600 miles away in Ukraine, but they should know. They're paying for much of it in ways they might not fully yet perceive. The war in Ukraine is a human disaster. It's left 100 of 1000 of people dead, in entire generation of young Ukrainians, and it's depopulated the largest country in Europe. But the long term effects are even more profound. This war has utterly reshaped the global military and trade alliances, and the sanctions that followed have as well. And in total, they have upended the world economy. The post World War 2 economic order, the system that guaranteed prosperity in the west for more than 80 years is coming apart very fast, and along with it, the dominance of the US dollar. These are not small changes, they are history altering developments. That will define the lives of our grandchildren. Most of the world understands this perfectly well. They can see it. Ask anyone in Asia or the Middle East what the future looks like. And yet the populations of the English speaking countries seem mostly unaware. They think that is nothing has really changed, and they think that because no one has told them the truth. Their media outlets are corrupt. They lie to their readers and viewers, and they do that mostly by omission. For example, since the day the war in Ukraine began, American media outlets have spoken to scores of people from Ukraine, and they have done scores of interviews with Ukrainian president Zelensky. We ourselves have put in a request for an interview with Zelensky. We hope he accepts, but the interviews he's already done in the United States are not traditional interviews. They are fawning pep sessions, specifically designed to amplify Zalenskiy's demand that the US enter more deeply into a war in Eastern Europe, and pay for it. That is not journalism. It is government propaganda. Propaganda of the ugliest kind, the kind that kills people. At the same time, our politicians and media outlets have been doing this, promoting a foreign leader like he's a new consumer brand. Not a single Western journalist has bothered to interview the president of the other country involved in this conflict, Vladimir Putin. Most Americans have no idea why Putin invaded Ukraine, or what his goals are now. They've never heard his voice. That's wrong. Americans have a right to know all they can about a war they're implicated in, and we have the right to tell them about it, because we are Americans too. Freedom of speech is our birthright. We were born with the right to say what we believe. That right cannot be taken away no matter who is in the White House, but they're trying anyway. Almost 3 years ago, the Biden administration illegally spied on our text messages and then leaked the contents to their servants in the news media. They did this in order to stop a Putin interview that we were planning. Last month, we're pretty certain they did exactly the same thing once again, but this time we came to Moscow anyway. We are not here because we love Vladimir Putin. We are here because we love the United States, and we wanted to remain prosperous and free. We paid for this trip ourselves. We took no money from any government or group, nor are we charging people to see the interview. It is not behind a paywall. Anyone can watch the entire thing shot live to tape and unedited on our website, tucker carlson.com. Elon Musk, his great credit, has promised not to suppress or block this interview once we posted on his platform x, and we're grateful for that. Western governments, by contrast, will certainly do their best to censor this video on other less principle platforms because That's what they do. They were afraid of information they can't control, but you have no reason to be afraid of it. We are not encouraging you to agree with what Putin may say in this interview, but we are urging you to watch it. You should know as much as you can, and then like a free citizen and not a slave. You can decide for yourself. Thanks.

@karma44921039 — karma

Posted - February 7, 2024 at 7:00 AM

Saved - February 7, 2024 at 7:11 PM

@karma44921039 - karma

Putin has been warning the world about the US creating biological weapons https://t.co/1qi2XVJqzy

Video Transcript AI Summary

Ukraine is accused of conducting military biological programs near the Russian border. They allegedly experimented with dangerous pathogens like coronavirus, anthrax, cholera, and African pig plague. Russia believes this poses a direct threat to their safety. Ukraine and their US allies have denied these claims, but Russia remains convinced and accuses them of trying to cover up the evidence.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: Were carrying out military biological programs. They were experimenting with the strains of coronavirus, anthrax, cholera, African pig plague and other deathly lethal pathogens and now they are trying to more puff the evidence of this program, but we have every reason to believe that next to Russia, in Ukraine, next to Russian borders, they were basically creating components for biological weapon and our numerous warrants of that such developments have pose as direct threat to the safety of Russia. They were rejected by Ukraine and by their patrons from the US and they did it in a very brazen way.

@TCNetwork — Tucker Carlson Network

Posted - February 8, 2024 at 11:18 PM

Saved - February 9, 2024 at 8:51 PM

@TCNetwork - Tucker Carlson Network

Tucker asks Putin about jailed WSJ journalist https://t.co/SjPMutFJBP

Video Transcript AI Summary

The interviewer asks if the speaker will release Evan Gershkovitz, a 32-year-old Wall Street Journal reporter who has been in prison for almost a year. The speaker responds that they have already shown goodwill and cannot release him. The interviewer argues that Gershkovitz is not a spy and suggests it may degrade Russia to exchange him for someone else. The speaker counters that Gershkovitz covertly received classified information and is not just a journalist. They do not rule out his return to his home country and agree that keeping him in prison in Russia is senseless. The interviewer expresses hope that Gershkovitz will be released.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: Just gotta ask you one last question and that's about Evan Gershkovitz who's The Wall Street Journal reporter. He's 32 and he's been in prison for almost a year. And I just wanna ask you directly if as a sign of your decency, you'll be willing to release him to us, and we'll bring him back to the United Speaker 1: We have done so many gestures of goodwill out of decency that I think we have run out of them. We have never seen Speaker 0: difference is the guy's obviously not a spy. He's a kid. And maybe he was breaking your law in some way, but he's not a super spy and everybody knows that. And he's being held hostage in exchange, which is true. With respect, inspected. It's true, and everyone knows it's true. So maybe he's in a different category. Maybe it's not fair to ask for, you know, somebody else in exchange for letting him out. Maybe it degrades Russia to do that. Speaker 1: He was receiving classified confidential information, and he did it covertly. I Speaker 0: mean, it's a 32 year old. Like, the owner. Speaker 1: He committed something different. He's not just a journalist. I reiterate he's a journalist who was secretly Complete getting confidential information. I do not rule out that the person you refer to, mister Gershkovits, may return to his motherland. By the end of the day, it does not make any sense to keep him in prison in Russia. Speaker 0: I hope you let him out.

@TCNetwork — Tucker Carlson Network

Posted - February 8, 2024 at 11:35 PM

Saved - February 9, 2024 at 8:50 PM

@TCNetwork - Tucker Carlson Network

Who blew up Nord Stream? https://t.co/OV1py70Pjc

Video Transcript AI Summary

Speaker 0 asks who blew up Nord Stream, to which Speaker 1 jokingly replies that "we" did, implicating Speaker 0. Speaker 0 denies involvement and questions if there is evidence that NATO or the CIA did it. Speaker 1 avoids providing details but suggests looking for someone with an interest in such cases. Speaker 0 expresses confusion over the magnitude of the incident and suggests that if Speaker 1 had evidence, they should present it to win a propaganda victory. Speaker 1 claims it is difficult to defeat the United States in propaganda because they control global media, making it costly to get involved. They believe shining a spotlight on their sources of information won't yield results.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: Who blew up Nord Stream? Speaker 1: We. You for sure. Speaker 0: I was busy that day. Nate, do you have do you have me? I did not pull up Nord Stream. Thank you, though. Speaker 1: You personally may have an alibi, but the CIA has no such alibi. Speaker 0: Do do you have evidence that NATO or CIA did Speaker 1: You know, I won't get into details, but people always say in such cases, look for someone who is interested. Speaker 0: But I'm confused. I mean, that's the biggest act of industrial terrorism ever, and it's the largest emission of CO2 in in history. Okay. So if you had evidence, and presumably given your security services, your intel services, you would, that NATO, the US, CIA, the West did this? Why wouldn't you present it and win a propaganda victory? Speaker 1: In the war of propaganda, it is very difficult to defeat the United States Because the United States controls all the world's media and many European media, the ultimate beneficiary of the biggest European media are American Financial Institutions. Don't you know that? So it is possible to get involved in this work, But it is cost prohibitive, so to speak. We can simply shine the spotlight on our sources of information, and we will not achieve results.

@TCNetwork — Tucker Carlson Network

Posted - February 8, 2024 at 11:58 PM

Saved - February 9, 2024 at 8:50 PM

@TCNetwork - Tucker Carlson Network

Putin reveals which world leader crushed the Ukrainian peace treaty. https://t.co/PViTL3kFU1

Video Transcript AI Summary

As of February 2024, Speaker 0 asks if the person in question has the freedom to directly communicate with the speaker or their government to resolve the ongoing issues. Speaker 1 responds that the person considers themselves the head of state and won the elections. They believe that the coup d'etat in 2014 is the main source of power. Despite flaws in the government, the person is recognized as the president by the United States, Europe, and most of the world. Speaker 1 mentions negotiations with Ukraine in Istanbul, where the person was aware and even signed a preliminary document. However, they claim that former British Prime Minister Johnson dissuaded them from signing, leading to a sense of ridicule and sadness.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: But do you think at this point, as of February 2024, he has the latitude, the freedom to speak with you or your government directly about putting an end to this, which clearly isn't helping his country or the world. Can he do that, do you think? Speaker 1: Why not? He considers himself head of state. Family. He won the elections. Although we believe in Russia that the coup d'etat is the primary source of power for everything that happened after 2014. And in this sense, even today, government is flawed. But he considers himself the president, and he is recognized by the United States, all of Europe and practically the rest of the world in such a capacity. Why not? Again, we negotiated with Ukraine and Istanbul. We agreed. He was aware of this. He even put his preliminary signature on the document I am telling you about. Speaker 0: His But Speaker 1: then he publicly stated to the whole world, we were ready to sign this document, but mister Johnson, his Then the prime minister of British Britain came and dissuaded us from doing this, saying it was better to fight Russia. And we agreed with this proposal. And the his fact that they obeyed the demand or persuasion of mister Johnson, the former prime minister of Great Britain, seems ridiculous and very sad to me. Premium.

@TuckerCarlson — Tucker Carlson

Posted - February 12, 2024 at 7:01 PM

Saved - February 12, 2024 at 8:44 PM

@TuckerCarlson - Tucker Carlson

Tucker's first discussion since the Vladimir Putin interview. https://t.co/t4O4NRYSV1

Video Transcript AI Summary

The speaker discusses their determination to conduct an interview with Vladimir Putin despite obstacles from the US government. They emphasize their shock and anger at the government's surveillance and intrusion into their personal life. The speaker clarifies that their views are constantly evolving based on new evidence and that their main goal is to tell the truth. They express their disappointment in the current US administration's incompetence and criticize the state of American cities compared to Moscow. The speaker believes that compromise is necessary in international relations and highlights the need for leaders to understand history and the consequences of their actions. They criticize the biased media landscape and the erosion of democracy in the US. The speaker concludes by discussing the importance of humility and wisdom in leadership.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: I'll start in reverse order. Why now? Well, I've been trying for 3 years to do this interview. The US government prevented me from doing it by spying on my text messages and leaking them to the New York Times. And that spooked the Russian government into canceling the interview. So I've been trying to do this, But my country's intel services were working against me illegally, and that enraged me, because I'm An American citizen. I'm 54. I pay my taxes. I obey the law. And there was no expectation in the America that I grew up in that my government and its Intel services NSA and CIA which were always outwardly focused on our foreign enemies, would be turned inward against American citizens. And I'm shocked by that, and I'm infuriated by that. And so once I discovered that that was happening, and I confirmed it was happening, and they admitted that they did it, that I was totally determined, monomaniacally dedicated to doing this interview, not simply because I want to know, What Vladimir Putin is like, and what he thinks about a war that is resetting the world, and really, gravely damaging my country's economy. But also because they told me I couldn't, on the basis of illegitimate means, and for no really Clearly stated justification, and I thought, that can't stand. I don't I want to live in a free country. I was born in 1, and I'm going to do whatever small thing I can do to maintain, you know, the society that I I I k. Speaker 1: I love. You are you are known to be Pro Republican party. Right wing of Republican party. This is what they claim. They said, first, you've been a democrat That's not true. Became a republican. Okay. Or you are known to be pro Trump, anti Biden. What is truthful in this? And you went to Putin. Because you are pro Trump and anti Biden? Speaker 0: I mean, my views are not very interesting. I would I'm not sure how I'd characterize them. They're changing as quickly as the world itself is changing. And I as a matter of principle, I think that, you know, that your view should change when the evidence changes. And assumptions that you had in the past were proven wrong. That has happened to me virtually every month of my life. If you pay close enough attention, you can rate your own performance, just as if you're betting on sports. You know, I lost That one. And when you do, when it turns out that things you thought were true were lies, you should admit it. So what are my views? I'm not Tell the truth is my main view, and I plan to do that to the best of my abilities. So, Trump played no role in this whatsoever. There's, obviously, an election in my country Coming, to fruition in November, I have no idea what's going to happen. I think that the current administration is Very obviously incompetent, and the President is senile. That's not an attack. Everyone knows it. It has now Been confirmed, I would say, this week, in the report that you're all familiar with. But, and that's very sad, But it it had sort of nothing to do with the interview. I wanted to interview Putin because he's the leader of a country that the US government is sort of at war with, though not in a in a declared way. Speaker 1: Sir, you know your president, president Biden. Well, you've been working in several Media organizations from PBS, CNBC, m m m m m and and and and and and and and and and and and and and Speaker 0: and and and Speaker 1: and and and and and and, Fox News, CNN, And you've been covering this field well, and you know the American politicians. And now you've been following Putin, and you did A very lengthy interview with the gentleman. And for sure, to interview them, you did your homework, and you did your research. Comparing The culture, the competence between Vladimir Putin and Biden. How do you see the 2 men now, Running the world. Speaker 0: I mean, if this were boxing, the fight would be called by the medic. So and I say that as an American. And I'm I don't have another passport. I don't plan to ever leave my country. My family's been there 100 of years, and I love it. I am a patriotic American. And I grieve when I see that the President is noncompass menace. And that in my country, it is considered very rude to say that. And you sort of wonder, how did you get to place where you have an incompetent president who's driven, not simply the standard of living, but life expectancy downward, And no one feels free to say that. That's not a political observation. It's a statement of fact, which is provable, empirically. And the most radicalizing thing I would just say, for me, in the 8 days I spent in Moscow, was not simply the leader of the country, who of course is impressive. It's the largest land mass in the world. And it's wildly diverse, linguistically, culturally, religiously. It's hard to run a country like that for 24 years, whether you like it or not. So an incapable person couldn't do that. He is very capable. And many of you know him, and you know that. What was radicalizing, very shocking, and very disturbing for me, was the city of Moscow, where I'd never been. The biggest City in Europe, 13,000,000 people. And it is so much nicer than any city in my country. I had no idea. My father spent a lot of time there in the eighties when he worked for the US government and barely had And now, it is so much cleaner, and safer, and prettier, aesthetically. It's architecture, it's food, it's service. Then any city in the United States that you have to and this is non ideological how did that happen? How did that happen? And at a certain point, I don't think the average person cares as much about abstractions as about the concrete reality of his life. And if you can't use your subway, for As many people are afraid to in New York City, because it's too dangerous, you have to sort of wonder, like, isn't that the ultimate measure of leadership? And that's true by the way, it's radicalizing for an American to go to Moscow. I didn't know that, I've learned it this week. To Singapore, to Tokyo, to Dubai and Abu Dhabi. Because these cities, no matter how we're told they're run, and on what principles they're run, are wonderful places to live. They don't have rampant inflation, where you're not gonna get raped. Speaker 1: Sir, excuse me. Speaker 0: What is that? Speaker 1: Excuse me. Are you Anti American model? Speaker 0: No. I am the most pro American. So I'm 54. I was born in 1969. I grew up a country that had cities like Moscow and Abu Dhabi and Dubai and Singapore and Tokyo, and we no longer have them. And what I have discovered is that's a voluntary choice. As inflation is, as you heard in that fascinating last panel, inflation is the product of choices made mostly by the central bank, not exclusively, but by policy makers. Crime. Same. You don't have to have crime, actually, if you don't put My children don't smoke marijuana at the breakfast table. Why? Because I won't allow them. It's very simple. It's a short conversation. No. And you can run your country the same way. We're not gonna put up with that, so don't do it. And people understand that. Filth, graffiti, Paris, one of my favorite cities, New York, one of my favorite cities, are filthy. And part of the reason they're filthy is because people spray paint obscenities on buildings and no cleans it up. So that encourages more people to do the same. And our policy makers, for some reason, don't notice this. London, another one of my favorite cities. You see English girls begging for drugs on the sidewalk. And I thought to myself, if I'm Boris Johnson, who briefly and very badly ran that country, I would ask myself, like, wait a second. My countrymen are begging for drugs on the street. Maybe I should do something about that. But now, he'll show up and give some speech about Ukraine and how we need to send, you know, more Bostrombombs to the brain. Speaker 1: Now you Speaker 0: What are you doing? Speaker 1: You mentioned Ukraine. By talking to this gentleman, President Putin, for this lengthy interview, my question is, did you had coffee with him? Did you have any Of the record discussion before the interview? After. Did you feel during the interview or before or after That this man can make or is willing to do a historical compromise, number 1, on the, status of the world With the US, and number 2, about Ukraine, is he a compromiser? Yes or no? Speaker 0: Of course. Right? I mean, the leaders of every country on the planet, other than maybe the United States, during the unipolar period, are forced by the nature of their jobs to compromise. Compromise is part of that's what diplomacy is. And he's among those. His position is clearly hardening. Russia has been rebuffed by the West. I mean, Vladimir Putin, this is not I'm not flacking for Putin. I'm an American. I'm not gonna live in Russia. I don't love Vladimir Putin. I'm I'm stating the facts. He asked Bill Clinton to join NATO. He tried to make a missile deal Speaker 1: He mentioned this in the interview. That's correct. Speaker 0: And he's mentioned it in other forums as well. And NATO said, no, we don't want you. Now if the point of NATO, not if, the point of NATO originally, of course, the post war goal of NATO was to keep the Russians, the Soviets, from coming into Western Europe. It was a bull work against the Russians. So if the Russians actually joined the alliance, that would suggest you have solved the problem and you can move on to do something constructive with your life. But we refused. And so, I mean, just meditate on that. Go sit in the sauna for an hour and think about what that means. Speaker 1: Before sitting in the sauna, a question a question now. Final conclusion, you think that Vladimir Putin is eager for a compromise, a compromise like Yalta, Cycasbiko, the Ottoman Empire, several agreements, any international agreement to share Power and to share influence in the world with the west if there is somebody who is willing. And Biden administration wants tension, wants war, want to exert pressure on him so that they can Weaken his economy and weaken his alliance with with China. Is this is what you are reaching from your conclusions? Speaker 0: My conclusions are in code. I mean, I've been thinking about this for a couple of years. I have a whole new set of data to mull over it. I'm not a genius, so it's going to take me a while to figure out what I think. But at this stage, 4 days later, I would say first of all, Yalta and Sykes Picot are 2 of the worst agreements ever struck. So I hope whatever comes out of this is nothing like those. But, first things first. Putin wants to get out of this war. He's not going to, become more open to negotiation, the longer this goes on. One of the things we've learned in the course of the last 2 years is that Russia's industrial fill capacity, is a lot more profound than we thought it was. I mean, Russia's having an e Russia, this country, we're assured, was a Gas station with nuclear weapons, has a pretty easy time making missiles, rockets and artillery shells, whereas NATO doesn't. So we should think about what that means, 1. 2, the West doesn't spend any time, or our policy in Washington spent no time thinking about like, what are the achievable goals here? I have heard personally, US government officials say, well, we're just gonna to return Crimea to Ukraine. Well, you don't need to be a Russia scholar. So that's not going to happen, short of a nuclear war. That's insane, actually. So even to say something like that reveals that you're a child, you don't understand the area at all, and you have no real sense of what's possible. And so as long as our leaders, and not simply in the US, but NATO, and I really mean Germany, don't like, take the time to learn about possible is we're not gonna get anywhere. Speaker 1: You think there is a big gap between the depths of understanding the philosophy of history between Biden And between Putin you you see Putin who have studied history and who is very deep in History. And he looks like he gave you a lecture in in for 30 minutes concerning the history of Ukraine and its relationship with The mother, Russia. Does Biden understand the law of action and reaction which moves a country like Russia? Speaker 0: I can't overstate how incapacitated Joe Biden is. That's not an attack, that is a fact. And anyone who tells you otherwise is lying. So So these are not decisions Joe Biden is making. But there are capable people around Biden, and I know them. What they lack is any perspective Tip at all. So a conversation with a US policy maker about the history of the region would begin and end with a conversation about, of course, Chamberlain and Churchill and Hitler. Period. So the American policy maker historical template is tiny. In fact, there's only 1. And it's a 2 year period in the late 19 thirties. And everything is based on that understanding of history and human nature. And that's insane. And so, actually, American policymakers have convinced themselves that Vladimir Putin is going to take over Poland. And It is not a defense of Putin. I don't mean to defend Putin. I'm not a fan of Putin's, and I'm not a subject to Putin's. I'm an American. However, there's no evidence that Putin has any interest in his borders. He is the largest country in the world. And it's very hard to run. They don't need natural resources. There's nothing in Poland he wants. There's nothing he will gain by taking Poland, other than more trouble. That is if you're saying if you could have made Poland, you don't know what you're talking about. Speaker 1: Here is a point a point in the interview when you asked him, are you Are you ready to to invade Poland? Speaker 0: Are you in expansion of power yet? Speaker 1: Expansion. Yes. In in in Poland, he said, Only if Poland launched Speaker 0: a war Of course. Speaker 1: On Russia. Okay? Ukraine did not launch a war on Russia, and he invaded Ukraine. Why you didn't follow-up on this question? Speaker 0: I started with that question, actually. But he treated me to 35 minutes of Catherine the Great Okay. And the ruse. But no, the core question is why did he move his forces into Eastern Ukraine. And I watched this from a distant vantage in the United States, and I watched the Vice President of the United States, Kamala Harris, Go to the Munich Security Conference, just days before that, in February of 2022, and say in a public forum, at a press Conference. To Zelensky, the president of Ukraine, we want you to join NATO. Which is another way of saying, it's a synonym for, we plan to put nuclear weapons un Russian. Speaker 1: You think there's true abate for him? Speaker 0: They've been joking. Of course they did. Speaker 1: They threw Speaker 0: a bait. And it just tells you how constipated Tricked it and censored. The US media landscape is, that I was the only one who said that. Well, wait a second. The purpose of diplomacy is to reach A peaceful, mutually one hopes beneficial conclusion to a crisis. So if you're showing up voluntarily at the Munich Security Conference and Hey, Zelensky. Why don't you allow us to put nuclear weapons on Russia's border? You're cruising for a war because you know that's the red line. Because Putin has said that, And any close observer the area already knows? Speaker 1: Now do you have an explanation, a reasonable explanation, why there is this Anti war and this very negative remarks about this interview from a lot of your colleagues and a lot of politicians in the world. Speaker 0: One of the ways that I think I'm different is, I don't like the Internet. And, I haven't seen any of the reaction. And I would imagine, You know, I'm not the most popular person among my colleagues in the United States. I wouldn't have dinner with them anyway, so it's no great loss. But, You know, they I I can't imagine what their motives would be. I didn't go to Russia, of course, to promote Vladimir Putin. And if I if that was my purpose, I'd say so, because I'm not embarrassed. I went because I felt that most Americans, in whose name all of this is being done, don't really know what's happening, and they know nothing about the guy they're supposedly at war with, unofficially. And I just felt that my job, if I have a job in this world, is to bring information to people so they can decide. And so I wanted to do the longest interview I could with Vladimir Putin, that contained the most amount of Vladimir Putin talking, not me grandstanding about what a great person I am. When an American journalist interviews someone like Vladimir Putin, the whole point of the interview I'm a good person and you're not. And that interview was aimed at his colleagues in the newsrooms in the United States. I'm a good person. Why are you such a bad person? You're committing genocide. Okay. That's not fruitful, and that's certainly not my role. I care what God thinks of me, what my wife thinks of me, and what my 4 children think of me, and that's all I care about. So I don't need to prove that I'm a good person. Wanna hear Vladimir Putin talk, so people in my country can assess what's happening. Speaker 1: I That's it. I'll I'll I'll use the devil's advocate. But advocate away. Yes. Okay. I'll tell you. You you should challenge in in in the rules of an interview, and you're a master in in your in your business. It's not for me to give you a lecture about that, but you should challenge some ideas. For instance, You you didn't talk about freedom of speech in in Russia. You did not talk about Navalny, About assassinations, about about the restrictions on, opposition in the coming Elections. Speaker 0: I didn't talk about the things that every other American media outlet talks about. Why? Speaker 1: Because, yes. Because those Speaker 0: are covered. And because I have spent my life talking to people who run countries, in various countries, and have concluded the following, that every leader kills people, including my leader. Every leader kills people. Some kill more than others. Leadership requires killing people. Sorry. That's why I wouldn't want to be a leader. That Press restriction is universal in the United States. I know because I've lived it. I've, you know, asked my phone, you know, I've had a lot of jobs. And I've done this for 34 years, and I know how it works. And, there's more censorship in Russia than there is in the United States, but there's a great deal in the United States. And so, you know, at a certain point, it's like people can decide whether they think, you know, what what countries they think are better, what systems they think are better. I just wanna know what he thinks. That was the whole point. Speaker 1: Yes. I was very surprised, about an inappropriate remark. I I don't think it is Contains any of the, what you can call John TS or, niceties from, missus Clinton when she mentioned A phrase about you, I don't want to repeat it. Speaker 0: Oh, you're not gonna hurt my feelings. Don't worry. Speaker 1: Well well, gentleman, she she called this gentleman, just honorable Gentlemen that he is playing the role of a you say it. Speaker 0: I I didn't see it. Speaker 1: You didn't see it. Speaker 0: She's a child. I don't listen to her. Speaker 1: How's Libya doing? No. No. No. No. No. Oh, okay. She she said, the the the the the the useful idiot. And and and if you see the interview, that has nothing to do with this at all. He was trying to get a testimony about the world as Putin sees it. And this is Exactly what we need to know, how this man thinks. Either you consider him an enemy or you consider him a friend or you consider him a dictator, but you you should understand how the man Thanks. Now the You put Speaker 0: it better than I could. That's a you just described my motive right there. Speaker 1: Okay, sir. Now now now the the the question is if this is the that is that, as they say in the United States, and this is The the the, the power of media and the the way the media is becoming very biased in a deep state like America, where are we going in the model of democracy in the world? Speaker 0: Media information In a free country is a counterbalance against entrenched power. Not just government power, but the economic power, business. It was, in my country, Constitutionally, it is designed to be to serve as a counterbalance to that. So if sources of information, media outlets To align with entrenched power, then you have a powerless population, and it's totalitarian. And that is very quickly, the direction the United States is headed. And and I do think that technology abets this progression, and machine learning, especially. And so it's a perilous moment, if if it, you know, were Percie, purportedly. And a prerequisite for democracy is information, so that the electric can make up its mind and decide who to choose. And so if you don't have access to information, you don't have democracy. And we're in this sort of weird spiral, where our leaders lecture us ever more about democracy and how sacred it is, Even as they choke it off, choke it to death. And so I think the people who provide information, who bring the facts to the public, have a critical role to play. And right now It's difficult. I'm not facing any great I I don't mean to cast myself as a hero. I'm certainly not a hero at all. But I do think it's Tougher and tougher to do that. And that means we have a greater obligation to do it. Speaker 1: Sir, do you have an explanation? Till this moment, since the Gaza Events took place till now. Nobody came out and said, how on earth the United States of America Is vetoing the the stoppage of, fire, how a country would veto Not to continue war. How how somebody is against stopping a war. Speaker 0: The United States is, for this moment, is the most powerful country in the history of the world. So if you were to frame this in terms we're all familiar with, which are the most basic terms, the terms of the family, the United States would be DAP, would be the father. And the father's sacred obligation is to protect his family and to restore peace within his walls. So if I come home fortunately, if I come home from work and 2 of my kids are fighting, what's the first thing I do? Even before I assess why they're fighting, before I gather the facts and know what's happening Speaker 1: I stop the fight. Speaker 0: Stop fighting. Speaker 1: Yes. Speaker 0: So if I come home and I have 2 kids fighting and I say, go, go, beat the crap out of them. I am evil. Because I violated The most basic duty of fatherhood, which is to bring peace, because I have the power. I'm the only one who can bring peace. And so if you see a nation with Some power, abetting war for its own sake. You have a leadership that has no moral authority, that is illegitimate. And I mean that too. And I and I not I'm not even referring to any specific region or conflict. I mean, generally. And I'm deeply offended by that. Deeply. And and it's something that I try to express, and I'm often called a traitor for saying that. It's the opposite. I say that because I believe in the United States. I think it's a moral it has been a morally superior country. And if we allow our leaders to use our power to spread destruction for its own sake, That is shameful. It's a binary. Okay? It's a it's a black and white. It's a 0 and a 1. You are either creating or you're destroying. You're improving or you're degrading. And that's how you know whether something is good or bad, whether it's virtuous or evil. If you just judge the fruits. By its fruits, you will know it. And I and I'm very distressed and concerned that we are entering an era where this awesome force for good is instead being used for evil. Speaker 1: Two quick questions because I ran out of time. First question is, now in the American elections, we have probabilities. Yes. Either it's Biden and Trump, or Biden and somebody else not Trump, Or no Biden and no Trump and circumstances or fate get us 2 different People representing a republican or democrats. What do you think where are we going to reach? Coming 19th November, Who will be running the show? Speaker 0: I haven't. Honestly, I haven't the faintest idea. But I think there's volatility ahead in our political sphere. When clearly, there is because Speaker 1: I I like you when you said, I I don't have an an idea. You you have this courage of to say that you don't know. You were telling me this morning that what one of the things which you like very much about here, our our president, Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed, god bless him, when you ask him a question, If he doesn't have an answer, he tell me, actually, I don't know the answer of this question. Speaker 0: I've never heard a leader of anything, whether it's a country or a company or a soccer team, ever in my life, in a life spent interviewing people. I've never heard a single one of them say, you know, I don't I don't know the answer. It's very complicated. I haven't figured I've never heard anybody say that. And to me, that is the pure sign of wisdom. Because wisdom grows from humility. Wisdom grows From the recognition that you are not God. And in the United States, we had a period where we were sort of, you know, having this debate about, Are some religions good and some religions bad? I'll tell you my view on it, and it's a hardened view. It's a sincere view. I divide the world not between Muslim, Jew, She's a Buddhist. I divide the world between people who believe they're God, and people who know they're not. And the only people I trust are in the second category. Because that is the beginning of wisdom. When you know you are not God, that you cannot affect every change that you want, that you can't foresee the future, that you're not omnipotent, then you are much more likely to make good decisions, wise, humane decisions. By contrast, when you believe you have the power To shape the world and other people, as we were hearing this morning, through biohacking. When you think you can create a better human being through technology, you're very dangerous. Because you don't understand your own limits. You will get a lot of people killed, when you when you have those false beliefs, in my opinion. Speaker 1: By by this note, mister Carlson, thank you very much for Giving us this chance to come for the first time after your great interview To talk to the world through this podium and this country and my humble sir. Thank you, sir. Speaker 0: Thank you for having me. Free speech is bigger than any one person or any one gonna say Societies are defined by what they will not commit. What we're watching is the total inversion of virtue.

@Honker0 — The Honker

Posted - March 6, 2024 at 6:43 PM

Saved - March 6, 2024 at 8:37 PM

@Honker0 - The Honker

@POTUS Why does Putin endorse you? https://t.co/yFWNvWaUjf

Video Transcript AI Summary

I prefer Biden over Trump. Biden is more experienced, predictable, and comes from an old-school political background. However, we are willing to work with any US leader trusted by the American people. Translation: I prefer Biden over Trump. Biden is more experienced, predictable, and comes from an old-school political background. However, we are willing to work with any US leader trusted by the American people.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: Байден или Трамп? Байден. Он человек более опытный, он прогнозируемый, он политик старой формации. Но мы будем работать с любым лидером США, которому окажет доверие американский народ.

@Travis_4_Trump — 🇺🇸Travis🇺🇸

Posted - May 25, 2024 at 3:32 PM

Saved - May 27, 2024 at 2:44 AM

@Travis_4_Trump - 🇺🇸Travis🇺🇸

Joe Biden just admitted that once elected he talked with Putin about invading Ukraine and it was planned. Is this grounds for impeachment and arrest for treason? https://t.co/4j2SFD4pU6

Video Transcript AI Summary

I met with Putin before or after becoming president, and we discussed NATO potentially fracturing. He seemed excited about the idea of causing problems for NATO.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: Was certain that NATO would fracture. I met with him right after being elected president before or right after I was sworn in, and we talked about this very issue. The fall, he had tied that fall, he decided to look. I shouldn't get into this problem if it gets me a little excited. Putin.

@MEtirol — etirol 𝕊

Posted - June 6, 2024 at 2:24 PM

Saved - June 9, 2024 at 11:30 PM

reSee.it AI Summary

Russia has become an enemy of the West due to its size and resources, which have historically attracted conquest. The US Neo-Cons had plans to control Russia's resources, but Putin's refusal to submit to US hegemony changed the game. Putin's speech at the OSCE Security Conference in 2007 solidified his status as the new enemy of the West.

@MEtirol - etirol 𝕊

⁉️ How did Russia become an enemy of the West ⁉️ There are solid reasons why the hegemonic West is so hostile towards Russia. The sheer size of the country with all its resources has always been an incentive for the West to conquer it. Napoleon and Hitler proved this in the past. More recently, it was the US Neo-Cons who had a firm plan to take over Russia. In 1998, former US Secretary of State M. Albright is reported to have said at a meeting with Russian Foreign Minister Yevgeny Primakov: Russia has the greatest natural resources in the whole world and that annoys Albright. In her opinion, these resources should not be controlled by Russia alone in future, but by several countries, of course under the supervision of the USA. Under Yeltsin, the US and the west had full access to Russia and began to plunder the country with the help of the corrupt Russian oligarchs: (click link: https://t.co/5AvDwXYdL7 ). When Putin came to power, the game changed. He was not prepared to bend the knee to the US hegemon and insisted on Russia's sovereignty. Putin's legendary speech at the OSCE Security Conference in Munich in 2007 is impressive testimony to this. The Neo-Cons have never forgiven him for this and have systematically shaped him into the new enemy of the West with their media an think tanks. Here are the most important excerpts from Putin's speech at the OSCE Security Conference in Munich in 2007.

Video Transcript AI Summary

The speaker criticizes the unipolar model, stating it's impossible in today's world due to lack of moral foundations. They condemn the US for overstepping its boundaries in various aspects, making no one feel safe. NATO's expansion is seen as a provocation, with American bases near Russia's borders. The speaker asserts Russia's long history of independent foreign policy won't change.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: I consider that the unipolar model is not only unacceptable but also impossible in today's world. And this is not only because if there was individual leadership in today's and precisely in today's world, then the military, political and economic resources would not suffice. What is even more important is that the model itself is flawed because at its basis, there is and can be no moral foundations for modern civilization. One state and, of course, the first and foremost, the United States has overstepped its national borders in every way. This is visible in the economic, political, cultural, and educational policies it imposes on other nations. Well, who likes this? Who is happy about this? It results in the fact that no one feels safe. I want to emphasize this. No one feels safe because no one can feel that international law is like a stone wall that will protect them. Of course, such a policy stimulates an answer. But what is happening at the same time? Simultaneously, the so called flexible frontline American bases appear in Bulgaria and Romania with up to 5 1,000 men in each. It turns out that NATO has put its frontline forces on our borders and we continue to strictly fulfill the treaty obligations and do not react to these actions at all. I think it is obvious that NATO expansion does not have any relation with the modernization of the alliance itself or with ensuring security in Europe. On the contrary, it represents a serious provocation that And what And what happened to the assurances our Western partners made after the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact? Where are those declarations today? Russia is a country with a history that spans more than a 1000 years and has practically always used the privilege to carry out an independent foreign policy. We are not going to change this tradition today.

@MEtirol - etirol 𝕊

@maneco1964 WHO FINANCED THE RUSSIAN OLIGARKS UNDER YELTSIN? “The protector was Lord Jacob Rothschild”: Khodorkovsky explains who ruled in the shadows before Putin attacked the oligarchs. The former head of Yukos, the oil company that produced 20% of Russia's oil, spoke out about how the…

@MattWallace888 — Matt Wallace

Posted - November 7, 2024 at 4:45 PM

Saved - November 7, 2024 at 6:39 PM

@MattWallace888 - Matt Wallace

What do you notice about Joe Biden today? https://t.co/dO6FOpe1u3

Video Transcript AI Summary

Wait, that's it? This is weird and creepy. No way! He's happy Trump won! Look at that smile. Joe, where did your 20 million votes go? Can someone ask that? Hey, Libs and press, can you look into this?

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: Wait. That's it? Weird. Creepy. Crazy. No way. Dude, he's happy Trump won. He's happy Trump won. Look at him. He's having a great time. Look at that smile. Joe, where'd your 20,000,000 votes go? Can somebody ask that? Hey, Libs. Hey, press. Can you ask that?

@Glenn_Diesen — Glenn Diesen

Posted - February 19, 2025 at 5:57 AM

Saved - February 20, 2025 at 4:31 AM

@Glenn_Diesen - Glenn Diesen

Jeffrey Sachs discusses the significan ce of the Trump-Putin call: Did the US just end the 30-year long Cold War 2.0 of encircling Russia? https://t.co/Hv5xNeIClw

Video Transcript AI Summary

In 1994, the U.S. initiated a project to expand NATO eastward indefinitely, despite assurances given to Mikhail Gorbachev in 1990 that NATO wouldn't move "one inch eastward." This expansion continued under multiple presidents, with seven more countries added in 2004. In 2007, Putin urged a halt, reminding the U.S. of the broken promise. Further destabilizing actions included the U.S. unilaterally withdrawing from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty in 2002 and considering NATO expansion into Ukraine and Georgia. A turning point occurred with a recent call between Presidents Trump and Putin, signaling respect for Russia's concerns, coupled with the U.S. Defense Secretary acknowledging that Ukraine will not join NATO. This shift offers a basis for peace, marking a potential reversal of a long-standing provocative strategy.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: A very bad idea of The United States taken in 1994. It's a project. The project, was a project to expand NATO forever anywhere. Just keep moving east. Keep moving not only to the first wave, which was the prime minister's country, Hungary, Czech Republic, and Slovakia, but then move eastward closer to the former Soviet Union, into the former Soviet Union, surround Russia in the Black Sea region, go all the way to a little country in the South Caucasus, Georgia. It was mind boggling. Clinton signed on to that in 1994. It became what we call the deep state project, meaning it didn't really matter who the president was. Each president would come and basically would be informed. NATO's moving eastward. You're part of that process. So Clinton started it in 1994. And as prime minister Orban said, he mentioned briefly, in 1990, on 02/09/1990, in unequivocal, clear as can be terms, The United States had said to president Mikhail Gorbachev, NATO will not move one inch eastward. And if you have any doubt about it, all the documents are now online, available. You can scrutinize everything. Hans Dietrich Genscher, the US the German foreign minister said the same thing same day. He's on tape actually explaining, no. No. I don't just mean within Eastern Germany. I mean anywhere to the East. Clinton, being Clinton, and The US Deep State being The US Deep State started this project in 1994. They already had the idea, by the way, in in 1991, '90 '2, as soon as the Soviet Union ended. Now we move. Now we move eastward. Now we control everything. Now we are the sole superpower. So this has gone on for thirty years, and each president got into it under George Bush junior. Seven more countries were added, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Bulgaria, and Romania, Nine in 02/2004. Then in 02/2007, president Putin said at the summit that's taking place right now, the Munich Security Summit, said stop. You told us no expansion, not an eastward expansion, even an inch you said. You've now done 10 countries. Stop. Perfectly reasonable. Stop. I don't think our president Donald Trump would much like to see China and Russia building their military bases up from Central America. You know, this was how the Russians saw this. Why are you coming to our border when you told us you weren't gonna move? And there was one other thing that was very important in this, which is probably the most decisive thing and almost not even recognized. In 02/2002, the US did something really, really, really destabilizing, and that is it unilaterally left the anti ballistic missile treaty. That was a core strategy to stop a nuclear war between the two superpowers because what ABM had done for thirty years was to say, we each have deterrence. You if you strike us, we can strike back. We'll limit our anti ballistic missiles so that both sides maintain deterrence. In 02/2002, the United States unilaterally, unprovoked, walked out of the ABM, said, no. No. We're not gonna do it anymore. We're going to put anti ballistic missile systems into Russia's bordering territories. The Russians said, aren't you kidding? The US said, what's your problem? We do what we want. So in 02/2007, Putin said, stop already. In 02/2008, George Bush junior doubled down as Americans typically do and said, okay. Now we're moving to Ukraine and to Georgia. That was, why this war occurred. But Ukraine had one more sliver of, of life, and that was that they elected a president in 02/2010 that didn't want to be part of NATO, and the public didn't wanna be part of NATO. Why? Because they knew this is very dangerous. Why get into this provocative situation? His name was Viktor Yanukovych. Americans don't like neutrality, but Yanukovych was trying to be neutral between the two sides, and The US played a rather unfortunate role on 02/22/2014 in a violent overthrow of this person. And, that's when the war started. And it's been now ten years, and no president has, told the truth until yesterday, by the way. Yesterday is a historic day because the a call took place between president Putin and president Trump. It was the first call. We don't know if there had been a short call beforehand between the two of them, but there was no call by Biden and Putin. With war going on for three years, no call. And now there was a call, and the readout from the American side was excellent. What president Trump said in the call was we respect Russia. We hear Russia's concerns. We fought on the same side in World War two. Nice point, by the way. True. Russia lost Soviet Union lost 27,000,000 people in World War two and was an ally of The United States. The fact that wasn't mentioned for years and years and years by president Biden. And then the defense secretary had said the new defense secretary said yesterday the truth for the first time that Ukraine is not going to join NATO. This is the basis for peace. This is absolutely the basis for peace, and they couldn't tell the truth for three decades. They could not admit what any of us knew because I've been around this region for thirty six years in detail. I sat with Boris Yeltsin. I sat with Mikhail Gorbachev. But the Americans would not tell the truth publicly until yesterday that this was so provocative. It was a game. They thought they'd win the game. I don't know how many people here play or played in their childhood the game of risk. The game of risk was a big game for me. You wanted your piece on every part of the world map. That was the game when you took over the whole world, world hegemony we now call it. You won. They're playing that game until this administration. So the two most important three important things have happened in my view in this administration so far. First, our new secretary of state Marco Rubio told the fundamental truth. We are in a multipolar world. First time the sentence was uttered, he told the truth. What does it mean? The American mindset for thirty years was we run the show. Marco Rubio said, well, we don't run the show. We live with other powerful countries. Great start. Second and third were the two events yesterday. So I'm feeling about peace that this is really something that happened yesterday. If if they follow through, we know what Washington is like. There is every crazy idea swarming still. A project of thirty years doesn't go down necessarily in one phone call or one statement by, the secretary of defense, but it's pretty important that it was said so publicly and so visibly. And, of course, Europe is in a tizzy because Europe signed on to The US project. All these politicians in Europe are there where they are because they were part of The US project. And now The US is reversing its project, and you didn't tell us, and you didn't what are we supposed to do? We're way out there. And so they're completely befuddled. And I have to say, I told them personally, many of these leaders, and I mean personally one by one for years, you are gonna get trapped this

@27khv — Brian McDonald

Posted - February 19, 2025 at 5:14 PM

Saved - March 2, 2025 at 8:07 PM

@27khv - Brian McDonald

US Republican Roger Wicker, head of the Senate Armed Services Committee, just casually suggested Putin should be "executed." Meanwhile, the U.S. is supposedly engaging in diplomacy with Russia. https://t.co/ozVdV1TtAY

@bertalanzoli — The world is patriots.🇺🇸🇷🇺

Posted - March 21, 2025 at 2:01 PM

Saved - March 22, 2025 at 2:42 PM

@bertalanzoli - The world is patriots.🇺🇸🇷🇺

Would accept Putin's invitation if he invited you over for dinner? A.Yes B. No https://t.co/WoakymKs33

@ivan_8848 — Ignorance, the root and stem of all evil

Posted - April 29, 2025 at 10:24 AM

Saved - June 25, 2025 at 8:11 AM

@ivan_8848 - Ignorance, the root and stem of all evil

Why is NATO surrounding Russia with its bases even after the fall of the Soviet Union? ‘It was never about resisting communism’ – ex-President Medvedev https://t.co/tggpkjLxXO

Video Transcript AI Summary

Европейским лидерам помешали две вещи в воплощении принципов: неспособность противостоять курсу руководства США и Англии (Рейгану и Тэтчер), и надежды на сокрушение коммунизма. Коммунизма давно нет, хотя его пытались строить. Элементы этой политики реализуются до сих пор, включая военное присутствие США в Европе, базы НАТО и попытки выстроить диалог с позиции силы. Дело не в коммунизме, а в тотальной русофобии. **Translation:** Two things prevented European leaders from implementing principles: the inability to resist the course of the US and British leadership (Reagan and Thatcher), and hopes for the destruction of communism. There has been no communism for a long time, although they tried to build it. Elements of this policy are still being implemented, including the US military presence in Europe, NATO bases, and attempts to build a dialogue from a position of strength. The point is not communism, but total Russophobia.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: У себя этих европейских лидеров, но воплощению в жизнь этих принципов помешали две вещи. Во-первых, неспособность и нежелание европейских руководителей противостоять жёсткому курсу американского и английского руководства, а именно Рейгану и Тэтчер, и надежды на сокрушение коммунизма. Что любопытно, никакого коммунизма, как известно, давно нет. Но его и не было. Во всяком случае, мы его пытались строить. Однако элементы этой политики реализуются до сих пор. В том числе усиленное военное присутствие США в Европе, многочисленные базы НАТО, попытки выстроить диалог с позиции силы. В чём дело? Значит, не в коммунизме, конечно, а в тотальной русофобии. МУЗЫКА

@Alex_Oloyede2 — Spetsnaℤ 007 🇷🇺

Posted - August 1, 2025 at 6:51 PM

Saved - August 2, 2025 at 9:29 PM

reSee.it AI Summary

The conversation centers on claims made by former President Trump regarding Russian and Ukrainian military casualties. One participant argues that a 1 to 14 casualty ratio is unsustainable for Russia, questioning the Kremlin's lack of retaliation if such losses were accurate. They assert that Russia outguns Ukraine and has adapted its military strategy, prioritizing personnel safety. The discussion highlights discrepancies in reported casualties, with claims of significant Ukrainian losses and the misclassification of missing personnel. The participant emphasizes that the conflict favors Russia, suggesting Ukraine would have faced greater devastation otherwise.