reSee.it - Related Post Feed

andrewmichta
Posted - February 16, 2023 at 6:22 AM
Saved - February 17, 2023 at 1:10 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
Putinism has emerged from Russians' resentment over losing the Cold War. It's similar to the Dolchstolegende that fueled interwar German nationalism. Putin's neoimperial aspirations are nested in a sea of Russian national resentment over loss of power and prestige. The outcome of the war in Ukraine is crucial. If Russia wins, it will embolden them to press on into other countries. But if Russia is defeated, it could unleash centrifugal forces that would foreclose its path to empire. Arm Ukraine now.

@andrewmichta - Andrew A. Michta

🧵I’m increasingly convinced that #Putin and “Putinism” have been made possible by the accumulation of resentments across the Russian society. #Putinism has emerged from Russians’ inability to accept that they lost the Cold War because the Soviet Union could no longer compete 1/

@andrewmichta - Andrew A. Michta

#Putinism is akin to the Dolchstoßlegende that emerged in Germany after its 1918 loss in Wold War I. It argued that the great German people were never defeated, but betrayed by cowardly politicians-stabbed in the back. That German legend fueled DEU interwar national resentment.2/

@andrewmichta - Andrew A. Michta

Roughly within a decade after WWI the Dolchstoßlegende and the national resentment it fueled gave rise to Hitler and his attempt to re-litigate the outcome in 1918. Only the unequivocal defeat of Germany in 1945 buried the legend, foreclosing the path to empire through war.3/

@andrewmichta - Andrew A. Michta

At a risk of over-rationalizing history, I’d argue that for the past 30 yrs Russia has travelled a trajectory similar to that of interwar Germany. Putin’s neo-imperial aspirations are nested in a sea of RUS national resentment over loss of power & prestige on the world stage. 4/

@andrewmichta - Andrew A. Michta

The Russian story that Putin has been pushing is one of the West, having taken advantage of Russia’s weak leaders (Gorbachev, Yeltsin, etc) robbed Russia of it glory to diminish its “velikiy russkiy narod,” That it is now poised to destroy RUS civilization. 5/

@andrewmichta - Andrew A. Michta

If I’m right, the Russian threat to its neighbors and its neo-imperial drive will not end regardless whether Putin remains in power or not. In the long duree of Russian history, it can only break if Russia is decisively defeated in #Ukraine- in a way that every Russian sees it 6/

@andrewmichta - Andrew A. Michta

That’s why so much is riding on the outcome of the war in #Ukraine. If Russia wins it will see this as a civilizational victory over the West. It will be emboldened to press on into #Georgia, #Moldova and down even breaching the @NATO line. 7/

@andrewmichta - Andrew A. Michta

But if Russia is defeated in #Ukraine, the collapse of the legend of “velikiy russkiy narod” could unleash centrifugal forces in RUS that would foreclose its path to empire. It would be a period of instability & risk but it would offer Europe a path to peace. #ArmUkraineNow End

DmitryOpines
Posted - February 21, 2023 at 9:00 AM
Saved - February 21, 2023 at 12:13 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
Putin's State of the Nation address was filled with conspiracy theories and grievances against the West. He claimed Ukraine was trying to acquire nuclear weapons and accused the West of wanting global domination. He also talked about defending children against degradation and national traitors. The speech lacked substance and was more about Putin's personal grievances.

@DmitryOpines - Dmitry Grozoubinski

Alright! The feed for Putin's State of the Nation address has gone live. Speech due to start nowish but it's his country and he'll be late if he wants to. Currently showing the whitest audience since the Republic National Convention. Will live tweet 👇. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AjjQkaKMoTE

@DmitryOpines - Dmitry Grozoubinski

Mixed news for Sergei Shoigu, the Russian Minister of Defense who didn't score a front row seat but is nowhere near a window and thus presumably safe from the world's most deserved defenestration until at least the afterparty.

@DmitryOpines - Dmitry Grozoubinski

Announcer just asked everyone to switch off their mobile phones, and if there's one speech you don't want your Britney Spear's 'Toxic' ringtone going off in it's this one...

@DmitryOpines - Dmitry Grozoubinski

5 minutes late to start the speech, a year late to take Kyiv. Bad form, Vova.

@DmitryOpines - Dmitry Grozoubinski

He's announced like he's entering the octagon to fight Hulk Hogan. "Theeeee Presideeeeent of the Russsiiiiaaan Federaaaation!"

@DmitryOpines - Dmitry Grozoubinski

Admits it's a difficult time, but immediately describes it as a pivotal, cardinal time in the world. "On each of us lies a huge responsibility." Mostly you though, dude.

@DmitryOpines - Dmitry Grozoubinski

Ok, straight into the special operation. Describes the mission as both a defense of the Donbas and a pre-emptive strike against a Nazi regime. Now waxing lyrical about how the Donbas held out against Ukraine, believing Russia would rescue it. Christ.

@DmitryOpines - Dmitry Grozoubinski

Ahaha. "We did everything possible to resolve this problem peacefully." Currently claiming that Western governments were just buying time and pretending to want peace.

@DmitryOpines - Dmitry Grozoubinski

"Ukrainian Neonazis!" DRINK!!

@DmitryOpines - Dmitry Grozoubinski

"Even before the launch of the special operation, the Ukrainian government was in negotiations with the West to acquire anti-air and other weapons" Yeah, wonder why dude.

@DmitryOpines - Dmitry Grozoubinski

Oh my god, he just mentioned Biolabs in Ukraine and claimed Ukraine was trying to acquire nuclear weapons. This is 4chan level conspiracy stuff in a Presidential address.

@DmitryOpines - Dmitry Grozoubinski

Ahaha, there is so much projection in this speech you can see it in space. "The West is used to doing whatever it wants, regardless of what other countries think, and used to lying to its own people."

@DmitryOpines - Dmitry Grozoubinski

Now we're onto the expansion of NATO and the deployment of anti-missile systems. And "hundreds of US bases all over the world." Is he getting this speech from internet memes?

@DmitryOpines - Dmitry Grozoubinski

He claims that the rejection of their proposals in December 2021 proved that there was going to be a massive attack on the Donbas, and waxing lyrical about 2015 fighting there. Thankfully, nothing he's done since then has caused any damage to that region.

@DmitryOpines - Dmitry Grozoubinski

"I want to repeat this, 'it is they who started the war, and we are using force, and expending force, to end it." Good line, shame it's fucking insane.

@DmitryOpines - Dmitry Grozoubinski

"We are protecting the lives of people, but the West's goal is global domination." "They have spent $150bn" which he's now comparing to global aid spending by the G7 of $60bn. Because Uganda really needs HIMARS.

@DmitryOpines - Dmitry Grozoubinski

The audience looks bored as fuck. You can get this shit on Solovyov or RT every day. Also he's clearing his throat and coughing a lot, but honestly he looks reasonably good and his voice is strong so I don't buy into the 'about to die' theories.

@DmitryOpines - Dmitry Grozoubinski

What's interesting about this is that this is supposed to be a "State of the Nation" speech, it's like 12 minutes in and he's basically not mentioned Russia once. It's all just grievance about the West. Currently doing 20th century greatest hits. Babbling about Austria-Hungary.

@DmitryOpines - Dmitry Grozoubinski

Ahahaha, he just said the "Edelweiss" thing. Background - Ukraine renamed one of its mountain divisions Edelweiss, which was the name of a Nazi Mountain Unit... but also the name of everyone's mountain everything because it's an iconic mountain flower.

@DmitryOpines - Dmitry Grozoubinski

"It's remarkable the West doesn't notice that the Ukrainians are Nazis because they don't care as long as they're fighting us." It's so hard to explain to these people how much the West would prefer to never think about them at all.

@DmitryOpines - Dmitry Grozoubinski

"We are not at war with Ukraine. They have become hostages to the Kyiv regime and their Western Backers." Reminder: Kyiv government has an approval rating of like a billion %.

@DmitryOpines - Dmitry Grozoubinski

Currently talking about a regime stripping a country of its natural resources for its own enrichment, which again is projection so bright it will burn your corneas off if you look right at it.

@DmitryOpines - Dmitry Grozoubinski

"The more long ranged weaponry Ukraine is supplied with, the further we will have to push the danger from our borders." Good luck with that, champ.

@DmitryOpines - Dmitry Grozoubinski

He's being very vague about what they actually plan to do. There's a pattern to this speech whereby he identifies a threat and then says, "We will take appropriate measures."

@DmitryOpines - Dmitry Grozoubinski

Now talking about informational warfare. Claims the youth are being targeted. Handwrings over the Church, which absolutely no one in Russia attends services of by the way.

@DmitryOpines - Dmitry Grozoubinski

We're onto culture war stuff. The West is degrading the family. Paedophilia shout out. Gay marriage is in the bible etc. "In Russia, our policy has always been that adults can live how they like... BUT" "Anglican church is looking to explore the idea of a gender neutral god"

@DmitryOpines - Dmitry Grozoubinski

"We are obliged to defend our children against degradation!"

@DmitryOpines - Dmitry Grozoubinski

We are now talking about national traitors. Anyone from the Soviet Union has heard this kind of rhetoric before. "We won't do what the West does and engage in witch hunts." Fucking hilarious when you're dragged off in handcuffs for holding a protest sign.

@DmitryOpines - Dmitry Grozoubinski

"I think we're all proud that an absolute majority support our special operation. In this support is exemplified by the patriotism that defines our country and the indivisibility of our fate from that of the nation."

DravenNoctis
Posted - November 29, 2023 at 12:42 PM
Saved - November 29, 2023 at 2:51 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
Putin's thought-provoking questions shed light on why the West dislikes him. Ironically, the very nations responsible for coups, wars, and destruction claim moral superiority. Who anointed the West as global masters? Why is their way always deemed right? Americans wonder why they're disliked, but fail to question their global dominance. With bases worldwide, imposed policies, and cultural influence, the West leaves a trail of devastation. Putin's query, "Who do you think you are?" resonates deeply.

@DravenNoctis - Noctis Draven

Putin asks the simple but logical and important questions, questions that tell you exactly why the west hates him and would love him to be removed. It's ironic that the countries most responsible for coups, wars, assassinations, displacing of people, overthrowing of governments and destruction of countries and economies are also the ones whom claim to be the moral arbiters. Whom made the west the masters of the world, whom laid the crown at the feet of the west and said, "Rule us, lead us, be the example?" Why is it that every way is wrong unless it is the western way? Americans especially say, "The world hates us!" But never do they stop to ask why? You're bases blanket the world, your troops stationed all over, your policies forced upon everyone, your culture and degeneracy exported abroad and the trail of dead could wrap around the world a thousand times. So to ask the question that Putin asks, "Who do you think you are?" #UkraineRussianWar #ukraine #russia #Zelensky #putin #nato #BRICS #china #india #africa #Trump #biden #EU #IsraeliCrimes #Palestine #Israel #PalestineUnderAttack #Palestina #Gazagenocide #gaza

Video Transcript AI Summary
We constantly hear our name being mentioned. We are expected to do something. We are obligated. Our actions are taken seriously. We have the right to warn someone.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Имя мы слышим все время звучит. Вы должны. Вы обязаны. Мы вас серьезно пред. Вот тут такие имеете права кого-то пред предупреждение
Mylovanov
Posted - December 15, 2023 at 11:09 PM
Saved - December 16, 2023 at 7:59 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
Putin's year-end address is filled with lies and propaganda. He blames the West for the conflict in Ukraine, but even if there was a coup in 2014, it doesn't justify Russia's invasion. Russia's actions to protect pro-Russian populations are not justified, as there are legal avenues to address rights violations. Putin's claims about shelling in Donbas are false, as the conflict started with Russian intervention. Russia's goals in Ukraine do not justify military force. Putin's defense of "demilitarization" is overshadowed by the cost in Russian lives. Russia's arrogance and refusal to compromise will lead to its demise. Putin's description of the conflict as a civil war between brothers is misleading. Russians and Ukrainians have different cultures and values. Russia may weather sanctions, but there are limits to its resilience. The war will end, war criminals will be prosecuted, and international law will be restored.

@Mylovanov - Tymofiy Mylovanov

Putin tells lies, half-truths, and fantasies at his year-end address. This is propaganda, but it works. So, we must resist and refute each point Here is what he said about Ukraine and the West and why it's wrong 1. Putin blames the West for the war in 2014 and 2022 1/ https://t.co/1ho5T45t1x

@Mylovanov - Tymofiy Mylovanov

Putin: How did the conflict in Ukraine begin? It began with the state coup in Ukraine in 2014 Let's stop right here. Even if it were a coup in 2014, Russia or Putin has no right to invade and annex any territories. The international law doesn't allow it 2/

@Mylovanov - Tymofiy Mylovanov

There is the principle of non-intervention. It grants every sovereign State the right of to conduct its affairs without outside interference But of course 2014 wasn't a coup. Pro-Russian president Yanukovych rejected aspirations of Ukrainians to move towards Europe. 3/

@Mylovanov - Tymofiy Mylovanov

Protests followed. Yanukovych ordered to shoot protestors and things unravelled. He fled Ukraine to Russia. Russia invaded and annexed Crimea, then invaded Donbas 4/

@Mylovanov - Tymofiy Mylovanov

2. Putin claims Russia's actions are justified to protect pro-Russian populations in eastern Ukraine that have suffered for 8 years No, they are not. Even the rights of some part of the population were violated by the government, there are courts, international law, and the UN /

@Mylovanov - Tymofiy Mylovanov

Violation of any rights of any people doesn't provide Russia or any other country with an excuse to invade another country. 6/

@Mylovanov - Tymofiy Mylovanov

Putin says: They spent eight years shelling Donbas. They forced us to take these actions No, no one shelled anyone in Donbas until Russians appeared there. They started taking over the government buildings, arresting the government officials, shooting people who resisted 7/

@Mylovanov - Tymofiy Mylovanov

Then, the "separatists" somehow got tanks and artillery (from Russia) and the war started. Most of the shelling and shooting happened in 2014-2015, when Russia military and Russian supported irregular militia were fighting Ukrainian regular army. 8/

@Mylovanov - Tymofiy Mylovanov

3. Putin denies Russia is seeking to encroach on others "We are not creating any blocs. And our friendship is not directed against third countries – it is aimed at benefiting ourselves, but not at harming anyone." 9/

@Mylovanov - Tymofiy Mylovanov

No one cares if you are creating any blocs or not. What I and others care about is that you use Iranian drones to shoot at my city everyday and that these drones and technology kill my friends 10/

@Mylovanov - Tymofiy Mylovanov

4. Putin defends the ongoing "special military operation" to achieve Russia's goals of "denazification, demilitarization and neutral status" for Ukraine Putin and Russia can have any goals they want, but they have no right to use military force to achieve them. 11/

@Mylovanov - Tymofiy Mylovanov

5. Putin claims Russia is successfully "demilitarizing" Ukraine by destroying large numbers of Western-supplied weapons. "We have also destroyed almost 2,300 armoured vehicles of various types. This is what is called demilitarisation." 12/

@Mylovanov - Tymofiy Mylovanov

I don't know if these numbers are accurate, but the cost of this "demilitarization" is "depopulation of Russia". Putin decision to invade Ukraine has killed over 300 000 Russians according to the US intelligence estimated declassified this week. The loss of tanks is over 2K too /

@Mylovanov - Tymofiy Mylovanov

6. Putin warns that Western military aid to Ukraine may end one day: "everything they get is a freebie, and I apologise for such talk. But these freebies may end one day" 13/

@Mylovanov - Tymofiy Mylovanov

It is true that currently the allies are having a tough time getting its act together. But democracies are stronger than autocracies and while the political process is slow and painful, things will get through If Russia starts winning, the West will mobilize again 14/

@Mylovanov - Tymofiy Mylovanov

In any case, Russian economy and military is no match to NATO and the West. Putin is delusional trying to argue that Russia is stronger 15/

@Mylovanov - Tymofiy Mylovanov

7. Putin indicates Russia will dictate the terms of any settlement, not compromise. There is nothing new here. Russia doesn't want to compromise. Most people understand it for now. And this Russian arrogance is the source of its demise. 16/

@Mylovanov - Tymofiy Mylovanov

8. Putin rules out any second mobilization of troops "So what do we need mobilisation for? There is absolutely no need for it today." To me this speaks of a political vulnerability. Remember that 15K killed in Afghanistan plus the arms race brought the Soviet Union down. 17/

@Mylovanov - Tymofiy Mylovanov

Russia has already lost 300K people in Ukraine and is sanctioned. And Russia today is no match to the USSR. It might have already lost and even dissolved, but we just simply don't know it yet. It is like cancer - it will take time to work its way through. 18/

@Mylovanov - Tymofiy Mylovanov

9. Putin describes the conflict as a "civil war between brothers", indicating Ukraine should reconcile with Russian domination. "Russians and Ukrainians are essentially one people. What is happening now is an immense tragedy; it is like a civil war between brothers" 19/

@Mylovanov - Tymofiy Mylovanov

First of all, it is a man made tragedy. This man is Putin. And no Russians and Ukrainians are not the same people. We have different cultures. Russian culture is to tolerate, respect, and obey a cruel tsar. Ukrainian culture is that of freedom and challenge to authority 20/

@Mylovanov - Tymofiy Mylovanov

Russia values the glory of state above the freedom of a human. Ukraine values exactly the opposite. 21/

@Mylovanov - Tymofiy Mylovanov

10. Putin presents a defiant message that Russia is weathering sanctions and Ukraine cannot defeat it militarily with Western help. "Our main objective is to strengthen sovereignty... economic security and sovereignty... and the growing capability of our security component." 22/

@Mylovanov - Tymofiy Mylovanov

it is true that sanctions have limited effect and Russia has sufficient resources to continue to fight the war. It is also a scandal that the world continue to trade with Russia paying it 100s of billions enabling the war. But there are limits to the resilience of their economy /

@Mylovanov - Tymofiy Mylovanov

One day the war will be over, Ukraine will be peaceful, and the future generations of Russians will be ashamed of the atrocities their parents have committed. The world will prosecute war criminals and the international law will be restored. Let's make it happens sooner! X

beinlibertarian
Posted - February 4, 2024 at 12:41 AM
Saved - February 4, 2024 at 12:23 PM

@beinlibertarian - Being Libertarian

If Tucker Carlson interviews Putin how many years will it take for people to analyze what he’s saying in a term that’s even slightly more complex than “good guys vs bad guys?” https://t.co/kOQi55LD5z

Video Transcript AI Summary
The Bush administration accuses President Hussein of deceiving the world about his weapons of mass destruction. A new UN resolution has been proposed, which, if passed, would authorize war due to his failure to prove disarmament. When asked about the new resolution, Speaker 1 maintains their position that they have not pursued any weapons of mass destruction and questions the need for issuing new resolutions. They emphasize that their stance remains unchanged and they prioritize their independence and dignity.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: The Bush administration says president Hussein is just trying to fool the world one more time about his missiles and his weapons of mass destruction. And he faces a new UN resolution accusing him of failing to prove he has disarmed. A resolution which, if passed, would in effect Authorize war. Will the new proposed United Nations resolution, the one that's just out this week. Will this make any difference at all in your position? Speaker 1: The basic position, there is no change. We have not pursued any weapons of mass destruction. So what do they want to issue new resolutions about now? Speaker 0: So basically, no change in your position? Speaker 1: The basic stand of our position is clear. We do not compromise our independence. For our dignity
rustyrockets
Posted - February 7, 2024 at 9:12 PM
Saved - February 10, 2025 at 1:11 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
I think it's fine for Tucker Carlson to interview Putin, and we can choose for ourselves what to think about it. Today, we explored the significance of the interview, media reactions, and its potential implications.

@rustyrockets - Russell Brand

So, we agree right? It's OK that Tucker Carlson conducts this interview with Putin and it's OK that we decide for ourselves whether we agree with its contents. On the show today, we took a deeper dive into the significance and context of this interview, the reaction of the media AND its potential implications.

Video Transcript AI Summary
Journalists have a duty to inform the public, especially about major global events like the war in Ukraine. Americans are largely uninformed about the conflict, yet are funding it through taxes. We interviewed Vladimir Putin to provide a different perspective than what's presented in mainstream media. Critics call this propaganda, but we believe Americans deserve to hear Putin's views, even if we disagree with them. The mainstream media’s coverage is biased, focusing on amplifying Zelensky's requests for more US involvement and omitting crucial information, such as prior treaties and the role of the military-industrial complex. We believe in freedom of speech and the right to access diverse information to form your own conclusions, even if the establishment tries to suppress it. This is about understanding the war, not supporting Putin.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: The first part of the Tucker trailer is where he says that journalists have a duty to report the news. Americans should know what Vladimir Putin is saying, thinking, feeling. Let's have a look at this trailer. Speaker 1: 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. First, because it's our job. We're in journalism. Our duty is to inform people. Two 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. What they should know, they're paying for much of it in ways they might not fully yet perceive. Speaker 0: Does that seem reasonable to you? You're paying for this war through your tax dollars. You should know what it's about. Now I this is I'm gonna back myself here, and I'm gonna back you. I reckon I'll be able to watch Vladimir Putin talking to Tucker Carlson. It's not like it's I don't know, Clint Eastwood or Brad Pitt, and I'm gonna get all swept. Oh my god. He's so charismatic. I don't care what he says. I'm on board. I'm gonna have to watch and go, right. This guy used to be in the KGB. He's a world leader. I'm sure there's all sorts of tyranny and hypocrisy and control going on in Russia, but what he sit because you know what he's gonna say. He's gonna say this. I don't want Ukraine in NATO. I don't think NATO should be expanding in a former Soviet territories. We want some autonomy in the Donbas region for Russian nativists and off the table and with that deal because they already had a treaty before Boris Johnson, UK prime minister, went over there and scuppered it at the behest of Joe Biden. There was a treaty already, and we don't talk about that. Why don't we talk about that in the legacy media? Because it's not part of the agenda they want to elevate and escalate because they are obviously partnering the military industrial complex who benefit from this war. Even your so called border bill includes $60,000,000,000 of further aid to continue to fund this war. So we agree. Right? It's okay that Tucker Carlson conducts this conversation. It's okay that we decide for ourselves whether or not we agree with what Putin is saying. And it seems that it's a pretty significant issue and warrant debate, conversation, transparency, and clarity. The second part of Tucker's, video there talks about the effects of the war on the population using an interesting phrase, depopulation. Let's get into that. Speaker 1: The war in Ukraine is a human disaster. It's left hundreds of thousands of people dead, an entire generation of young Ukrainians, and has 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 two economic order, the system that guaranteed prosperity in the West for more than eighty 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. They will define the lives of our grandchildren. Speaker 0: I suppose what Tucker's proposing there is that a conversation around epochal global geopolitical events that may define political, social, and cultural life for generations to come warrants conversation. Are you confident that CNN, the BBC, MSNBC, the New York Times, the trusted news initiative and look into that organization, are you confident that their version of events has your best interest at heart? Based on what you've seen in the global media machine, are you convinced that what they care about is the quality of your life, your freedom, your appreciation of reality or do they and here comes a ball right out of left field care about control, establishing absolute control, shutting down dissent wherever it's available. Just take a glance at the hate speech laws in Ireland. Just look at take a look at the censorship bill in Canada, in our country, The United Kingdom, proposed censorship laws in the EU. Seeing a hell of a lot of control, not seeing all of the love that one might expect to see if what we are expected to believe is that the globalist establishment is about care and concern. The next part of this conversation is about propaganda. What you're gonna hear a lot of is, oh, Tucker's a propagandist. He's a Putin apologist. He's giving Putin a platform. All of that stuff that people like to try out in situations like this. I would remind you, Vladimir Zelensky went to the Golden Globes and thanked JPMorgan, went to the Golden Globes and thanked BlackRock in post. Thank you, BlackRock, for your investment. Now I'm not saying that the Ukrainian people ought to be protected. Of course, they should. Of course, the waste of Ukrainian lives is one of the biggest consequences and biggest stains upon our global character generated by this conflict. But when you're talking about propaganda, when you see Sean Penn giving an Oscar, I mean, the what's being propagandized is the, the ongoing defense of a seemingly unwinnable military conflict against an unassailable conflict that ought be curtailed at the earliest possible opportunity through diplomacy. Is that crazy? Is that crazy? Or is that, I don't know, common sense? Speaker 1: 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. Speaker 0: Omission. They don't report on vital truths consistently. Speaker 1: 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 Zelensky'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. Speaker 0: That's extraordinary. The language of commerce, the language of branding, we've been so coached in that lexicon and that vernacular that it's all we're able to see. The reductivism, the simplification of believing that a particular product that will make you will make you feel youthful or exciting or sexy. Those that kind of mentality is being applied at the level of global politics now. We had a conversation with, Tucker Carlson. Actually, this currently exclusively available to our Awakened Wonders over on Locals. Let's have a look at a short excerpt from that conversation that's available if you're watching us now on Locals, you're Awakened Wonders, you can watch it now, but you're gonna have to stay with us to see us break down the lee legacy media hysteria that's following this significant event because this is what the censorship industrial complex exists for, to shut down the possibility that you gain access to sufficient information to decide for yourself whether or not geopolitical events really do advance your condition, really do benefit you personally because you're paying for for these wars. You're gonna send your children. They're talking about conscription in The UK and Australia and Sweden. We are funding it both with our lifeblood and with our tax dollars. And after the Afghanistan Conflict, can you confidently say that this stuff is working? Speaker 1: And, again, I just have to say it once more. The people who should be defending the right of every American to say exactly what he believes, period, are the same ones now lecturing us about hate speech? Are you joking? Speaker 0: I mean, someone here in the chat right now says, Russia says they have denied the MSM interview request, not that they haven't asked. This is, you know, like like so you're saying that it's a good point in the chat. Have other legacy media organizations requested conversations with Putin? It's entirely possible that they have, but look at the nature of the reporting on this war. We've got some fantastic, footage that we'll show you of a conversation that Putin Putin had with the legacy media a little while ago, and he bought up January 6. He said, hey, January 6 was interesting the way your legacy media frame that. You're gonna love that. But I'll just show you, what Tucker Carlson says about freedom of speech and Putin's potential reasons for entering this war, which could include NATO encroachment on former Soviet tree on former Soviet territory, which is a breach of an agreement between Gorbachev and Reagan, you know that. The significance of the twenty fourteen coup, you know all about that. Right? The relevance of bio labs, that's gonna be significant, isn't it? We are then gonna be in a position to assess for ourselves. Okay. Well, you know, it's not like saying, oh, Putin should be our best friend and why don't we go on holiday with him? What it's about, Russell, you need to visit mister Putin. I'm on my way. I'm on my way to that Kremlin right now. Edmund Free, Putin is a murderer. Quite possibly, very likely. Former KGB, agent, person that whose invasion of Ukraine is quite likely criminal. But remember, the International Criminal Court can't be evoked. Why? Because if the International Criminal Court were to start investigating the last few decades of American military activity abroad, it would find that it's similarly criminal. So this is not about saying, isn't Russia fantastic and what a great guy Putin is. Far from it. This is about saying, wait a minute. Our legacy media is a propagandist machine that's about shutting down the sent, imposing censorship, and amplifying the messaging of the powerful to erode your personal freedom, our personal freedom, even our freedom to disagree with one another, which is the greatest freedom we have and is necessary in anything remotely resembling a democracy. Speaker 1: 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 three years ago, the Biden administration illegally spied on our text messages and then leaked the contents to their servants in the news media. Speaker 0: Amazing. They illegally spied on them. This is how it this is how the machine functions. Illegal surveillance, spying. This is the machine that we are dealing with. This is the machine that will do anything it can to shut down dissenting voices and then claims it's doing it for your benefit. Speaker 1: This in order to stop a Putin interview that we were planning. Last month, we're pretty certainly did exactly the same thing once again. But this time, we came to Moscow anyway. Speaker 0: Pretty bold, brave stuff there. I mean, what they'll say on the legacy media is, oh, it's not brave because Tucker knows he'll get a favorable audience, but what does that matter? All we're really asking, it's pretty basic, is would you like to hear the perspectives of Vladimir Putin before endorsing a 88,000,000,000 bill that's calling itself a border bill when $60,000,000,000 of that funding is going to the Ukraine when you know Ukraine's democracy is pretty dubious? They're canceling elections even though Joe Biden won't debate. Nobody won't turn up in his own primaries even though we're censoring and shutting down information and using the CIA to prime media organizations to ignore true stories about laptops that are dubious. Stay free. See it first on Rumble.
Twitermytweet
Posted - February 8, 2024 at 12:27 AM
Saved - February 9, 2024 at 7:36 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
In an exclusive interview with Tucker Carlson, Vladimir Putin discusses various topics. He emphasizes that Russia is not an enemy of the United States and seeks peace. Putin expresses doubts about President Biden's control over the country and mentions the importance of traditional values. He also addresses the situation in Ukraine, his relationship with former President Trump, and the lack of communication with the current White House. Putin highlights Russia's alliance with China and expresses concern about the Gaza situation. He comments on the US southern border and dismisses climate change as a real issue. Putin also shares his views on the transgender movement and American football.

@Twitermytweet - Mr. Bigglesworth 𝕏

Bombshell: Tucker Carlson’s Exclusive Interview with Vladimir Putin in Moscow – Full Transcript Released! TUCKER: What would you tell the people running America? PUTIN: Our message is Russia is not your enemy. We don’t want war. We’re ready for peace. Your leaders seek conflict. This is not what we want. Russia stands for its own people. We do not want what is not ours. TUCKER: Would you visit Washington? PUTIN: Yes, of course. I’ve been to the United States Before. I enjoy visiting and have met with every president except Joe Biden. If invited I would go. Yes. TUCKER: What is your opinion of President Biden? PUTIN: We’re convinced he is not running the country. Let’s say we have good sources that confirm that but it’s plain for anyone to see for themselves. The US has now entered into a dark period. It has unaccountable leadership. TUCKER: Do you think Joe Biden won fair and square? PUTIN: I would rather not get into domestic American politics but will say my embassy reported your southern border was better run than that 2020 election. (chuckles) TUCKER: One poll in America shows you more popular than Biden – any reaction? PUTIN: (laughs) I don’t know if that should be taken seriously but Russian ideals have support. We believe in traditional values; marriage is between a man and a woman: men are men and women are women. TUCKER: Who would you like to see as the next president of the United States? PUTIN: Once again it is not for us to say or get involved. Contrary to longstanding accusations we do not meddle in your elections. We don’t need to because the same people end up running things anyway. TUCKER: Why did you invade Ukraine? PUTIN: Did we invade or were we invaded? Look at the history. Look at the people living there. Historically it’s we who were invaded and are simply fighting back now. The lands and people are Russian and we will have again what was always ours. TUCKER: How will you fee lol if Trump won again? PUTIN: We had good relations when Mr. Trump was president. There was no war. Our relations were at a high point. That said nothing is predictable or stats the same. We will have to see. PUTIN: I remember laughing to his jokes when he was a comedian in Russia. Let’s go back to laughs. TUCKER: Why is that? PUTIN: There are strong financial entities in whose interest it is to keep us as adversaries. One of your presidents warned against that. We Russians do not have that problem. TUCKER: Do you see the United States as an enemy? PUTIN: No. Categorically no. We were allies in WWII. Russians helped settle Alaska, California and we were in Hawaii too. Our people are not enemies but those in DC are certainly not our friends. TUCKER: Can you be more specific and name names? PUTIN: It would be pointless. It is not up to us to solve your domestic issues. Besides, I’m sure you know the names better than us. TUCKER: So are you saying your adversary is not Joe Biden but the people behind him? PUTIN: Exactly. Joe Biden may not even be aware of what’s going on. He may not understand the level of sanctions thrown at Russia. Who put those sanctions together? Those our the adversaries. TUCKER: Is that why you are championing the BRICS? PUTIN: The BRICS would exist anyway. It’s a natural reaction to the western trading block. It’s a counterweight. When the dollar is weaponized against states there will be a natural alternative to it. That’s what we want. TUCKER: Is that why you and Russia have been targeted? PUTIN: It’s more complicated than that but I’m sure it’s a good part of the reason. Whenever the dollar is endangered the United States takes extreme measures. It cannot afford to have the dollar fail. TUCKER: But isn’t Russia weaker and more vulnerable economically than the US? PUTIN: When you look at the size of economies we are small. But few people take into account our vast natural resources. Russia has over $80 trillion in the ground. No country even comes close to us. TUCKER What is your opinion of President Biden?

@Twitermytweet - Mr. Bigglesworth 𝕏

PUTIN: We are convinced he is not running the country. Let’s say we have good sources that confirm that but it’s plain for anyone to see for themselves. The US has now entered into a dark period. It has unaccountable leadership. TUCKER: OK. Point well taken but don’t you have the same issues in Russia. PUTIN: Yes. To a degree. But in Russia those interests are more aligned with the thinking of the average Russian man on the street. In the United States that is not the case. The elites have deserted you. TUCKER: so who do you think is running the US then? PUTIN: The forces which have always ran it. You may change presidents but you do not change those in real power. That is who we have to deal with. Joe Biden is just a facade for this power structure. TUCKER: Let’s turn to politics. What’s your opinion of President Biden? PUTIN: We’re convinced he’s not running the country. Let’s say we have sources that confirm that but it’s plain for anyone to see. The US has now entered into a dark period. It has unaccountable leadership. So who do you think is running the US then? PUTIN: The same forces which have always run it. You may change presidents but you do not change those in real power. That is who we have to deal with. Joe Biden is just a facade for this power structure. TUCKER: Let’s turn to politics. What’s your opinion of President Biden? PUTIN: We’re convinced he’s not running the country. Let’s say we have sources that confirm that but it’s plain for anyone to see. The US has now entered into a dark period. It has unaccountable leadership. TUCKER: But there have been persistent reports you have cancer? PUTIN: I assure you those rumors are false. if I had cancer and beat it I would share the good news and the cure with the world. TUCKER: Thank you for sitting down with us. How is your health?There have been some rumors  PUTIN: I’m glad to talk to you and through you to the American people. I’m fine. I feel good. Given my years I’m in the best of health but father time. TUCKER: Let’s turn to politics. What’s your opinion of President Biden? PUTIN: We’re convinced he’s not running the country. Let’s say we have sources that confirm that but it’s plain for anyone to see. The US has now entered into a dark period. It has unaccountable leadership. TUCKER: When you say some fear him are you saying Musk has enemies? PUTIN: It’s clear to see he has enemies within the United States – the way he was stripped of $50 billion in assets – we would call that being signaled out for special treatment. It’s unfair on the face of it. TUCKER: Didn’t you fear Musk when he started supplying Ukraine with Starlink gear? PUTIN: If anyone seriously thinks a few internet dishes can defeat the might of Russia – well what can I say. But no, we did not fear or blame Mr. Musk. The government didn’t give him much choice. TUCKER: Alot has changed in the world. What’s your opinion of Elon Musk? PUTIN: We see Mr. Musk as a businessman – a highly successful one. He’s built a great fortune and a huge following. He’s a unique thinker with a force of personality who cannot be bought. Some fear that. TUCKER: Do you any advice for Elon? PUTIN: I would say continue on. Do not be intimidated. But if the going ever gets too rough there is Russia. We would gladly open our doors to you. We have welcomed American businessmen before and would value someone of Mr. Musk’s caliber. TUCKER: Let’s turn to Trump. First tell me how you feel about the current situation with the likelihood of him being reelected? PUTIN: It would be a bit strange and out of order but we are well prepared. He has promised to end the fighting in Ukraine and we support that notion. TUCKER: How could he end you end the war so fast? PUTIN: For one thing he never insulted us. He has a great respect for Russia. We would start from a position of friendship and trust – then all problems are solvable. We could get it done. Trust me. TUCKER: Are you referring to Biden calling you a killer?

@Twitermytweet - Mr. Bigglesworth 𝕏

PUTIN: We have been the recipients of numerous insults and slurs going back a few generations of politicians. Mr. Trump was a refreshing break from that. He is very popular in Russia. Perhaps that won’t do him any good. Are you in any communication with Trump? PUTIN: No. Of course not. But should he win again our lines of communication would open up instantly whereas right now we have no dialogue with President Biden. TUCKER: That’s shocking to me. No o e from the White House has been in contact with you? PUTIN: That’s right. No one has called since we congratulated Mr. Biden on his election victory. It’s puzzling to us that communications are colder now than during the cold war. TUCKER: How do you think the 2024 election will go? PUTIN: We are just observing. It’s our responsibility to be vigilant since it will impact the world. We are hoping the election is carried out in a way where the results can be believed. In Russia we do not have mail in ballots. TUCKER: Let’s turn to China. What is your relationship like? PUTIN: President Xi and I are especially close. Russia and China are enjoying good relations as of now which is an obvious asset to us sunce they are one of our biggest energy partners. We will continue to be friends. TUCKER: There are accusations China has helped you in the war in Ukraine. Is that true? PUTIN: That is not something I can discuss. Let’s just say Russia isn’t an isolated power. That strategy has failed. We have more allies and trading partners now than before the war started. TUCKER: Do you ever contemplate a situation where Russia and China may join forces against the United States? PUTIN: Do you mean economically or militarily? I would say we want neither. It’s not in our interest to clash with the US because all sides would lose in such a conflict. TUCKER: Speaking of conflicts, what is your take on the Gaza situation? PUTIN: It is really unfortunate. The Palestinians are being devastated. Israel is acting in an unconstrained manner. It shows the terrible double standards in the world. Where are the sanctions on Israel? TUCKER: Is Russia involved in any way especially through your alliance with Iran? PUTIN: No. Of course not. We do not oppose the existence of Israel but at the same time we support the right of the Palestinians to self determination. We want to be even handed. TUCKER: Are you following what’s happening on the US southern border? PUTIN: Actually yes. It’s part of my daily briefing. We Russians find it ironically amusing your Congress will spend billions protecting foreign borders but neglect it’s own. It’s quiet laughable but deadly. TUCKER: Deadly? How do you mean that? PUTIN: Deadly serious of course. People are dying daily crossing your border in an uncontrolled way. It is a free-for-all. The world hasn’t seen anything like it in the modern era – reckless for a country to throw itself wide open like that. TUCKER: Is Russia taking advantage of the border situation in any way? PUTIN: No. Why should we. We don’t have to do a thing. America is self destructing. And as Napoleon said, don’t stand in the way of your enemy destroying themselves. TUCKER: So then you do see America as an enemy? PUTIN: That was just a saying but the current administration is definitely not a friend. TUCKER: Can that be changed? PUTIN: That’s why you have elections. TUCKER: Thank you again for continuing to engage with me on so many different topics. Can we get even more interesting so to speak? PUTIN: For sure. I am open to most subjects. TUCKER Let’s touch on climate change. It’s still being pushed in the United States and Europe. What’s your position? PUTIN: Humanity is not even a Type 1 civilization on the Kardashev scale. If we can’t harness the energy potential of the planet how can we control the climate? TUCKER: Are you at least concerned?

@Twitermytweet - Mr. Bigglesworth 𝕏

PUTIN: I’m more concerned with real issues. Climate change is not one of them. The Earth does a fairly good job of regulating itself. And if Siberia gets a little warmer all the better. More farmland for Russia. TUCKER: But what would you tell the true believers who’re convinced we’re headed for disaster? PUTIN: I’d tell them worrying about climate change is like complaining about the weather. If you don’t like the climate, move. If you are worried about the weather, get an umbrella. TUCKER: Along those lines, how do you see the transgender movement? PUTIN: It’s interesting to me that all the things which use to be a target of blackmail are now badges of honor. In Russia there are no laws either way but we certainly do not force our children into it. TUCKER: Russia has been criticized for its ant gay laws and as being unfriendly to LGBTQ+. PUTIN: We have laws which protect our children. And we do not drape our embassies in rainbow flags. That’s correct. Otherwise we do not interfere in the private lives of adult citizens. TUCKER: Do you follow American sports? We are about to have the Super Bowl. PUTIN: In fact yes. Russia is a great sporting nation. We hosted the Winter Olympics and the World Cup fairly recently. We like all sport. TUCKER: What do you think of American football? PUTIN: It’s an interesting sport. But why do you call it football when the ball is almost always played with the hands? It also seems needlessly violent at times. TUCKER: That’s true. Will you be watching? PUTIN: The game will not be shown in Russia. TUCKER: So you won’t get to see Taylor Swift either then? PUTIN: No. We have been given a reprieve. TUCKER: Thank you President Putin for your time. Text by AMG-NEWS

FreeStateOfMeme
Posted - February 8, 2024 at 7:05 PM
Saved - February 8, 2024 at 8:47 PM

@FreeStateOfMeme - MemeHeardRoundTheWorld

@RealAlexJones The real reason they don't want Tucker interviewing Puťìñ. Putin on ideological differences between Americans and Rusšìans. https://t.co/pH25DSzlB0

Video Transcript AI Summary
The speakers discuss the ideological differences between the United States and Russia, as well as the historical context of their relationship. They mention the individualistic nature of American society compared to the collectivist nature of Russian society. The conversation touches on the colonization of the American continent and the ethnic cleansing that occurred, as well as the history of slavery in the United States. The speakers highlight the importance of understanding and finding ways to cooperate despite these differences, as there have been periods of unity between the two countries in the past. They emphasize the need to focus on common interests and positive aspects to foster collaboration.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Большое уточнение. Просто мой вопрос был не только американо-иранских отношениях, но и о об американо-иранских отношениях, но и об американо-российских отношениях и наличиях, согласны вы с этим или нет, идеологических фундаментальных противоречий, но ключевым вопросам международного права. Speaker 1: -Перед встречей с Обамой вы меня прямо так и толкаете. Speaker 0: О Это же очень важно, потому что если страна считает, что ей позволено больше, чем всем остальным, то Я думал, Speaker 1: что вы не заметите. Нет, вы заметили, удивительно, какой цепкий боец. У нас идеологических противоречий на сегодняшний день практически нет. У нас есть фундаментальные культурологические. В основе американского самосознания лежит индивидуалистическая идея, в основе российского коллективистская. Вот есть один из исследователей Пушкина, который об этом очень точно и ясно сказал. Вот Унесенные ветром, помните, там главная героиня, -Она говорит, что я не могу себе представить, что я буду голодать. Вот для нее это самое главное. О нашем представлении, о представлении русского человека. Все-таки другие задачи. Это что-то такое о за горизонт уходящий, что-то такое душевное, что-то такое связанное с Богом, -Понимаете, это немножко разная философия жизни. И поэтому понять друг друга довольно сложно. Но можно. Speaker 0: Для этого, наверное, есть международное право для Speaker 1: того, что я общаюсь. Ну да. Ну вот, о США, безусловно, демократическая страна, и она развивалась изначально как демократическое государство. Ведь когда люди начали осваивать этот континент, они приезжали, выстраивали отношения друг с другом и по факту жизни Вынуждены были это делать в диалоге друг с другом, поэтому она изначально рождалась как фундаментальная демократия. Вместе с не будем забывать, что освоение американского континента Вы меня зовуте, прямо в Гепри, мне не хочется об этом говорить. Но освоение американского континента началось о крупномасштабной этнической чистке, которая не имела себе равных в истории человечества. Ведь европейцы, когда приехали, они этим и занимались, надо прямо об этом сказать. Она, не знаю, вот человечеству не так много известно из истории, ну, скажем, о уничтожении Карфагена римлянами, да, когда они уходили, они даже землю, так вот легенда гласит, солью посыпали, что там ничего не росло, об освоении американского континента европейцами, там землю никто не посыпал, потому что ее использовали, но уничтожали коренное население. После этого американская история знает рабство, и оно так глубоко проникло, ведь Колин Пауэлл еще в своей книжке написал, как ему было тяжело человеку с темным цветом кожи, тяжело было проиграться, как он всегда чувствовал на себе взгляды окружающих, значит, это сидит. Сидит наверняка до сих пор в душах и сердцах людей. Ведь, ну, вот смотрите, мы знаем, во всяком случае сегодня, очень многие о стороны советского режима. Знаем Сталина, да? Так, как раньше мы его не знали. Знаем, что это был диктатор, тиран. Я очень сомневаюсь, чтобы Сталин весной 45 года, если бы у него была атомная бомба, -Применил бы ее против Германии. В 41-42 году, когда стоял вопрос о жизни или смерти государства, Может быть, применил, если бы у него было. А в 45-м, когда уже противник все, Сдавался, по сути дела, шансов у него никаких не было. Я сомневаюсь, вот я лично. А американцы применили против Японии, терпящие поражения, причем против неядерного государства? Знаете, вот у нас большие различия между нами, но это ведь Speaker 0: о -Нормально, когда люди с такими большими Speaker 1: различиями полны решимости искать пути, которые помогают понимать друг друга. И мне представляется, что у нас нет другого выбора. И, более того, Ведь не случайно, что в критические периоды современной, новейшей истории о России и Соединенные Штаты объединялись и в Первую мировую войну, и во Вторую мировую войну. Вот как бы, как бы не противостояли друг другу, а когда вот гром грянул, произошло объединение. Что-то все-таки объединяет, о какие то обще фундаментальные интересы объединяют, нам нужно нам нужно вот на это обращать внимание, прежде всего. Знать наши различия, но при этом все-таки обращать внимание на тот позитив, который поможет нам сотрудничать.
DravenNoctis
Posted - February 9, 2024 at 2:19 AM
Saved - February 9, 2024 at 10:20 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
I just finished watching the Tucker/Putin interview and it was refreshing to hear Putin speak at length. He showcased his extensive knowledge of Eastern European history and explained that Ukraine is not technically a sovereign country, but rather allowed to exist independently by Russia and Poland. Putin emphasized the threat of Nazism in Ukraine and how it poses a danger to Russia, considering the millions of Russians who died fighting against the Nazis. He also discussed the 2014 coup in Ukraine, orchestrated by the CIA and the West, which led to the rise of a neo-Nazi regime. Putin highlighted the broken promises of not expanding NATO further onto Russia and the preparations for NATO bases in Ukraine. He mentioned the ongoing conflict and the need for action to protect Russians living in Ukraine. The interview covered topics such as the economy, BRICS, Orthodox Christian beliefs, and even the imprisoned American reporter. This interview provides an opportunity for Westerners to hear Putin's perspective uncensored by the mainstream media.

@DravenNoctis - Noctis Draven

I finished the Tucker/Putin interview and I must admit, I never grow tired of hearing Putin speak. It is refreshing to see a leader who obviously makes his own decisions able to speak and explain them. In the west you will never see a president or any leader for that matter give an interview for over two hours and still do most of the speaking. Western leaders are usually highly unqualified and don't know enough about their area to speak for long, read from scripts or if they do seem competent they are usually lying so they keep questions and interviews short on purpose, so this was refreshing. In summary, Putin revealed he has a very encyclopedia like knowledge of Eastern European history while explaining that technically Ukraine isn't even a sovereign country but more allowed to exist independently by Russia and Poland. This explains of course why Ukrainians and Russians share not only a language but much more. It was a long winded history lesson but important for western audiences to see so that they understand that Russia is not invading Ukraine but instead keeping NATO from expanding on its borders and rooting out Nazism that was being cultivated and nurtured by the west so that the west could turn it against Russia via proxy wars. Putin also explained why the Nazism that makes up a large part of Ukrainian culture is a threat to Russia and not simply a belief system Russia wishes to control. Common sense dictates that over 30 million Russians died fighting to defeat the Nazis, so of course allowing Nazi culture and society to spring up literally next door is dangerous and sensitive for Russians. Pair that with the fact that the US and west are all too happy to take the Nazis in Ukraine and point that rage and anger at Russia and you have yet another reason for the SMO. Ultimately Putin echoed what most of us already know, that Ukraine had been fine and peaceful on its own for many years up until the 2014 coup instigated by the CIA and collective west to install Ukrainian leadership who would better play ball with western interests. Unfortunately that new leadership would be the neo-nazi regime we know today that Russia fights against. From 2014, 2016 and on the new Ukrainian leadership would begin to punish and purge Russians living in Ukraine by violent and deadly means. This was also explained in depth by Putin to Tucker along with the many promises the west and its various leaders made to Putin and Russia that they would NOT expand NATO further onto Russia. However the once peaceful Ukraine had now begun preparing to receive NATO bases and was already receiving training. What was taking place was the west was building an army, a proxy NATO army. Between training, arming and cultivating the Nazi ideology they would have all they needed to launch their attack at Russia 🇷🇺 A last ditch effort for peace was made with the infamous peace deal that both sides had agreed upon. Boris Johnson however, came to Kiev and convinced Zelensky to tear up the agreement and stand against Russia. Thus between the cries for help by Russians being murdered by the UAF and the reality of NATO but a stones throw from Russian borders Russia knew action was needed and the SMO began and continues. Putin also talked in depth about economy, about BRICS and the Orthodox Christian beliefs. Tucker tried to talk to putin about the imprisoned American reporter as well and Putin agreed to wanting to find a solution for this. It was a much needed interview that would at long last allow westerners and Americans to hear Putin in his own words without being censored and filtered by the owned and controlled western mainstream media. I do not think this interview will change courses already charted or change events to come but at least it allows people to hear both sides of a very complicated issue. All in all, I'd highly recommend people watch it. #UkraineRussianWar #ukraine #russia #Zelensky #putin #nato #TuckerCarlson #PutinInterview

WarClandestine
Posted - February 9, 2024 at 2:35 AM
Saved - February 9, 2024 at 11:51 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
The excerpt highlights the absurdity of current US foreign policy, questioning the need for involvement in distant conflicts while domestic issues persist. The author agrees with Putin's suggestion to prioritize negotiation with Russia and focus on resolving problems at home, drawing parallels to the "America First" approach.

@WarClandestine - Clandestine

This is the most impactful excerpt from the entire interview and perfectly summarizes the insanity of the current US foreign policy. “Do the United States need this? What for? Thousands of miles away from your national territory. Don’t you have anything better to do? You have issues on the border. Issues with migration. Issues with the national debt. More than 33 trillion dollars. You have nothing better to do, so you should fight with Ukraine? Wouldn’t it be better to negotiate with Russia?” Putin is correct. The US should be concerned with our own issues and not funding wars on the other side of the planet. Sounds kind of like “America First”.

Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker questions why the United States is involved in Ukraine instead of focusing on issues like border control, migration, and national debt. They suggest negotiating with Russia and reaching an agreement, understanding that Russia will fight for its interests. The speaker believes it would be smarter to respect Russia's interests and seek solutions through common sense.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Do the United States need this? What for? Thousands of miles away from your national territory. Don't you have anything better to do? You have issues on the border, issues with migration, issues with the national debt, More than $33,000,000,000,000. You have nothing better to do, so you should fight in Ukraine? Wouldn't it be better to negotiate with Russia, make an agreement, already understanding the situation that is developing today, realizing that Russia will fight for its interest to the end, and realizing this, actually return to common sense, Start respecting our country and its interests and look for certain solutions. It seems to me that this is much smarter and
acoyne
Posted - February 9, 2024 at 2:39 AM
Saved - February 9, 2024 at 2:24 PM

@acoyne - Andrew Coyne 🇺🇦🇮🇱

Tucker hasn’t been this badly humiliated by an interviewee since Jon Stewart.

@RonFilipkowski - Ron Filipkowski

46 minutes into his history lesson, Putin stops to mock Tucker for applying to the CIA when he was younger and getting rejected. https://t.co/oyoADwytpI

Video Transcript AI Summary
With the support of the CIA, it's fortunate that you weren't accepted into the organization, as you had wanted to join. We should be grateful for that, considering the seriousness of the CIA.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: With the backing of CIA, of course. The organization you wanted to join back in the day, as I understand. We should thank God they didn't let you in. Although, it is a serious organization. I understand. My former
YukonStrong
Posted - February 9, 2024 at 3:14 AM
Saved - February 9, 2024 at 3:45 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
Putin's interview with Tucker Carlson reveals his perspective on the Ukraine conflict, history, and global politics. He criticizes NATO's rejection of Russian cooperation and expansion, blames the CIA for the 2014 coup in Ukraine, and sees Ukraine's invitation to join NATO as a direct threat. Putin claims no territorial aspirations outside of Ukraine and calls for the "De-Nazification" of Ukraine to end the war. He discusses the Nord Stream pipeline, the US dollar's abuse as a foreign policy tool, and the need for global security and cooperation. Putin believes the global economy is shifting away from the US due to aggression, sanctions, and currency control. He mentions the dangers of AI, genetic enhancements, and the need for international treaties. Putin suggests releasing a WSJ reporter as a gesture of goodwill but accuses him of espionage. He sees Ukraine as a US satellite state and blames NATO, Europe, and the West for aggression. The author concludes that Putin enjoys defying NATO and criticizes Canada's reliance on the US, Western support for the Ukraine war, and the push for digital currency. They view China as a global threat and advocate for cutting ties and out-innovating them. The author advises preparing for the worst and calls for immediate changes in culture to avoid downfall.

@YukonStrong - Yukon Strong 🇨🇦🇺🇸

A 🇨🇦 perspective on Putin’s #TuckerCarlson Interview Putin started off with a story of deep historical and cultural knowledge of Ukraine, however as I am of Ukrainian descent myself I noticed he conveniently left out Holodomor. This was a brutal starvation and socialist re-education of Ukrainians just prior to WWII by Stalin, which was overshadowed by the holocaust and events of WWII, even though it was an equally brutal genocide. To me this was a red flag that his account of history was not entirely honest, and certainly one sided. One thing that separates Holodomor from other genocides is that is was done purely in the name of the communist ideal, not territorial, religious or racial division. It was an ideological persecution, the same type we see from Trudeau and the #woke authoritarians in North America. Join the socialist ideal …or else. In his time as president, Putin expressed he felt US Presidential will was repeatedly undermined by US administrative will (the swamp) in his face to face negotiations with multiple US presidents. It seems to me Putin is in a position of advantage diplomatically due to dealing with multiple negotiations and administrations, learning from mistakes and gaining experience over the years whereas every new president is starting out more or less from scratch. In Putin’s eyes the war was not started in 2022, but an attempt to end a war which was initiated by the CIA and NATO. Ukraine’s invasion is a response to repeated rejection of Russia peace initiatives after the fall of the USSR, and NATO’s promise not to expand eastward which was broken 5 times with expansions eastward. This was brought to a head by the CIA initiated coup of Ukraine in 2014 and the military fallout in the Donbas region, and finally triggered by Ukraine’s invitation to join NATO on 2022 forcing Putin’s invasion. In short, Putin sees NATO as repeatedly rejecting Russian attempts at co-operation, followed by NATO claiming territory which is in his view is both historically and culturally Russian, suddenly becoming a NATO member state and posing a direct threat to Russia. I also infer he felt USA was weak under Biden and it was Russia’s first chance to respond from the primary aggression that occured in 2014. Putin claimed he has no territorial aspirations outside of Ukraine, and in order for him to consider an end to the war if will require the “De-Nazification” of Ukraine. Embarrassingly, the Canadian liberal govt has antagonized the situation with their incompetence and attempts at virtue signalling via the invitation of Yaroslav Hunka to Canadian parliament and the stupidity of our politicians to applaud him. He cited this blunder as a recent provocation and example of whY Neo-Naziism needs to be eliminated within Ukraine. Canada must to get rid of Trudeau. With respect to Nordtsream he says responsibility lies with someone who had the will and submarine capability to blew it up. (USA) and claims there is an alternate route for gas to be supplied to Germany from Russia through Poland, Putin is willing to help germany out, but Ukraine refuses to allow Germany to regain energy stability. Putin says the worlds security should be shared and is not meant for the “golden billion” and that is the only scenario the world could become stable, sustainable, and predictable and the world is going through a period of severe disease. Putin then pointed to the US dollar as a tool for foriegn policy abuse as one of the biggest mistakes of US political leadership. By freezing assets and restricting Russia’s transactions they have driven Russia to embrace the yuan, and scared other nations into downsizing their US reserve funds. He alluded to Russia and China’s border to be stable and peaceful, from my perspective it seemed that it is a similar situation as the US-Canada border. Their trade has surpassed 230 billion yearly and is rich in hi tech, energy, scientific research and development

@YukonStrong - Yukon Strong 🇨🇦🇺🇸

In regards to global economy Putin assessed as so: In 1992 the G7 was 47% and BRICS 16% In 2022 G7 is 30% and BRICS has finally surpassed it Putin claims this shift will continue due to US aggression, sanctions and currency control, while the rest of the world focuses on trade, cooperation and growth When posed with the question if a new administration could change the war in Ukraine he responded it would Come down to US foriegn policy stopping sanctions, restrictions, bombing and power abuse He touched on AI, genetic and cybernetic enhanced humans and how they will change the future forever, and as there are no current rules surrounding this fields things are growing dangerous. He alluded to the rise of the global nuclear threat being Akin to the rise of AI, genetic & other fields destroying humanity that an international treaty will be needed to prevent global destruction. When asked if he would release Even Gershkovich from the WSJ as gesture of good faith, Putin said he is open to it, but it will require good will on behalf of USA first. Putin is definitely using him as a hostage bargaining chip, but insisted he is not an innocent reporter and was in fact engaged in espionage, caught seeking classified documents in secret while working for US Special Services. When pressed on Ukraine conflict leading to larger global conflict, Putin sees Ukraine as a US satellite state and that the aggression is coming from NATO, Europe and the west and it will require Ukraine to come to the negotiation table to end the conflict. He claimed the war could have been ended 18 months ago but former UK president Johnson interfered with a Ukrainian treaty signed in Istanbul. He says there is also an element of civil war to the conflict and in some cases even Ukraine’s own troops identify as Russian, and continue to dismantle the Ukrainian Orthodox Church in solidarity.

@YukonStrong - Yukon Strong 🇨🇦🇺🇸

After listening to his statements here are my conclusions, Putin is thoroughly enjoying the fact NATO can’t stop him and will not bend the knee to western will. He sees this all as payback for decades of foreign policy abuse by USA From a Canadian perspective I’ve never felt Canada to be so absurdly weak on the global stage. We are 100% reliant on USA for our survival, yet the USA is losing dominance every year simply due to competing nations having a larger population, bigger economies and better manufacturing. I think western support for the Ukraine war hinges on fears the world is abandoning US dollar reliance more than anything else, and ideological stupidity and naivety by the likes of the current Canadian govt and woke EU nations. I am starting to also view the push for digital currency as not just a tool for power abuse, but as a desperate last ditch effort to combat rise of the BRICS economy. Trust is waning in the US dollar and might globally. Biden’s incompetence and weakness will have decades long consequences. Trump must be elected in 2024. I also view China as the biggest threat globally, including to Putin himself. He is naive to think China is not actively undermining his nation too. I also see our social strife with respect to the #woke UN agenda driven policy, socialism, transgenderism and emasculation of North American men as direct result of Chinese influence to exploit and weaken western society. It is highly likely that China is infiltrating both the west and Russia through technology / espionage and IMO the best thing the west could do would be to completely cut ties with China and out innovate them on our own soil to regain global superiority economically and militarily. To do this 🇨🇦 and 🇺🇸 should enter into long term military, Energy, resource, manufacturing and technology initiatives to compete with BRICS nations before it’s too late. We must get both our nation’s borders and immigration under control and Instill a competitive and extremely hard work ethic in our society I also advise everyone reading this to prepare for the worst, prepare for it now and pray that war does not escalate globally. Canada’s embarrassingly reckless govt and its incredibly petty goals leave me feeling the danger to our nation to be extremely high after watching this interview Is Putin a good guy? Bad guy? I leave that to the reader but I say this with all seriousness, 🇺🇸 and 🇨🇦 are going down unless we change course immediately in almost every aspect of our culture.

@YukonStrong - Yukon Strong 🇨🇦🇺🇸

FYI @RealAndyLeeShow @SheilaGunnReid @AndrewLawton @Yanky_Pollak my first attempt at “journalism”

KanekoaTheGreat
Posted - February 9, 2024 at 3:43 AM
Saved - February 9, 2024 at 4:09 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
Putin sheds light on Russia's relationship with the West, highlighting initial optimism for collaboration after the Soviet Union's collapse. He proposed a joint missile defense system, but it was rejected, leading to Russia's development of hypersonic missiles. Putin expresses concerns about NATO expansion and accuses the CIA of orchestrating a coup in Ukraine. He attributes the War in Ukraine to NATO's open doors for Ukraine, the coup, and the persecution of dissenters. Tensions persist due to Ukraine's refusal to implement the Minsk agreements. The posts raise questions about collaboration, Putin's interpretation of events, and the role of NATO and the CIA in the war.

@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat

Vladimir Putin sheds light on Russia's complex relationship with the West following the collapse of the Soviet Union, detailing aspirations for collaboration with Presidents Clinton and Bush, concerns about NATO expansion, a CIA-backed coup in Ukraine, the Minsk Agreements, and the onset of the War in Ukraine in 2014. Russia's Post-Soviet Optimism Putin revisited the Soviet Union's dissolution, emphasizing Russia's initial hope for collaboration with the West. He highlighted Russia's voluntary acceptance of the Soviet Union's collapse, expecting the "civilized West" to view it as an invitation for cooperation. Putin recalled Russian President Boris Yeltsin's praised speech in front of the United States Congress, famously saying, "God Bless America," while expressing optimism for acceptance by the West. Putin's Missile Shield Plan In 2007, Putin proposed a joint U.S.-Russia-Europe missile defense system to President George W. Bush. While the U.S. claimed to build a missile shield in Eastern Europe to counter threats from Iran, Putin suggested a collaborative approach to avoid threatening Russia's security. Despite initial interest, Putin's proposal was rejected, leading to Russia's development of hypersonic missile systems. "I suggested working together: Russia, the United States, and Europe. They said it was very interesting. They asked me, "Are you serious?" I said, "Absolutely". I said, "Just imagine if we could settle such a global strategic security challenge together. The world will change. We'll probably have disputes, probably economic and even political ones. But we could drastically change the situation in the world." He says "Yes, and asks, "Are you serious? I said, "Of course". "We need to think about it." I said, "Go ahead, please." Putin describes how Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice visited him in Moscow in 2007 to decline his proposal. In response, Putin explained that Russia would be forced to take countermeasures. "We are now ahead of everyone, the United States and the other countries in terms of the development of hypersonic strike systems. And we are improving them every day. But it wasn't us. We proposed to go the other way, and we were pushed back. Now, about NATO's expansion to the east. Well, we were promised no NATO to the east, not an inch to the east, as we were told. And then what? They said, well, it's not enshrined on paper, so we'll expand. So, there were five waves of expansion. The Baltic states, the whole of Eastern Europe, and so on." NATO Expansion Concerns Putin describes Russia's grievances regarding NATO's eastward expansion, emphasizing the breach of promises made during earlier negotiations. He recounted the diplomatic efforts to dissuade NATO from encroaching on Russia's borders, illustrating a growing rift in relations, particularly in the aftermath of NATO bombing Yugoslavia in violation of the United Nations charter. Putin recalled asking President Bill Clinton about Russia joining NATO. After initially expressing interest, Clinton said it would be impossible after he spoke to his advisors. Putin also mentioned the CIA's involvement in supporting opposition parties in Russia. "The promise was that NATO would not expand eastward. But it happened five times. There were five waves of expansion. We tolerated all that. We were trying to persuade them. We were saying, please don't... We are a market economy, and there is no Communist Party power. Let's negotiate." "In 2008, at the summit in Bucharest, they declared that the doors for Ukraine and Georgia to join NATO were open. Germany, France, and other European countries seemed to be against it. But then, as I was told later, President Bush exerted pressure, and they had to agree. It's ridiculous. It's like kindergarten. What kind of people are these? We're ready to talk, but with whom? Where are the guarantees? None. So they started to develop the territory of Ukraine." CIA's Role in Ukraine Putin took a deep dive into the Ukrainian crisis, particularly the contentious events surrounding the Orange Revolution in 2004 and Viktor Yanukovych's removal from power during the Maidan Revolution in 2014. He asserts that the United States, with a particular focus on the CIA and State Department, played a significant role in the 2014 Ukrainian crisis, characterizing it as a coup orchestrated with American backing. Putin explained that Germany, Poland, and France signed an agreement between Yanukovych and the opposition that would guarantee a peaceful resolution through an early election. Putin criticized the decision to resort to violence instead of allowing an early election, asserting that the CIA's actions were a political miscalculation. "He had no chance of winning, frankly speaking. Everyone knew that. Then, why the coup? Why the victims? Why threaten Crimea? Why launch an operation in Donbas? This I do not understand. That is exactly what the miscalculation is. CIA did its job to complete the coup. I think one of the deputy secretaries of state said that they cost a large sum of money. Almost 5 billion. But the political mistake was colossal. Why would they have to do that? All this could have been done legally, without victims, without military action, and without the loss of Crimea. We would have never considered even lifting the finger if it hadn't been for the bloody developments on Maidan." "The armed opposition committed a coup in Kiev. With the back of the CIA, of course. They have always been our opponents. A job is a job. Technically, they did everything right. They achieved their goal of changing the government. However, from a political standpoint, it was a colossal mistake. Surely, it was political leadership's miscalculation. They should have seen what it would evolve into." War in Donbas 2014 Putin discusses the events leading to the 2014 War in Ukraine, attributing it to NATO's open doors for Ukraine in 2008, the subsequent coup, and the persecution of those opposing it. "In 2008, the doors of NATO were opened for Ukraine. In 2014, there was a coup. They started persecuting those who did not accept the coup. They created the threat to Crimea, which we had to take under our protection. They launched the war in Donbas in 2014 with the use of aircraft and artillery against civilians. This is when it all started. There's a video of aircraft attacking Donetsk from above." "They launched a large-scale military operation. All this against the background of the military development of this territory and the opening of NATO's doors. How could we not express concern over what was happening? From our side, this would have been a culpable negligence." "We addressed the leadership of the United States and European countries to stop these developments immediately and implement the Minsk agreements." The Minsk Agreements Putin explained that current tensions result from Ukraine's leadership's refusal to implement the 2014-signed Minsk agreements. He highlighted Ukraine's reluctance to adhere to the agreements, with leaders openly declaring their refusal. Putin also mentioned former German and French leaders admitting to signing the agreements without intending to implement them. Despite the complexity, Putin expressed readiness to implement the agreements, criticizing Ukraine for favoring a military solution and accusing them of starting the war in 2014. "It was they who started the war in 2014. Our goal is to stop this war. And we did not start this war in 2022. This is an attempt to stop it." Why did the United States and the West refuse to collaborate with Russia after the collapse of the Soviet Union? What do you think about Putin's interpretation of events that led to the War in Ukraine? Do you agree with Putin's assertion that NATO expansion and a CIA-backed coup in Ukraine led to the War in Ukraine?

Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker discusses the collapse of the Soviet Union and the expectations of Russian leadership regarding cooperation with the West. They highlight the broken promises of NATO expansion and the negative response from the West towards Russia. The speaker also mentions the events leading up to the conflict in Ukraine, including the coup and the failure to implement the Minsk agreements. They express their willingness to resolve the conflict peacefully but emphasize the need to protect Russian interests and the people of Donbas.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I'm coming to a very important point of today's agenda. Thank you. After all, the collapse of Soviet Union was effectively initiated by the Russian leadership. I do not understand what the Russian leadership was Guaido and I at the time. But I suspect there were several reasons to think everything would be fine. Of 1st, I think that then Russian leadership believed that the fundamentals of the relationship shipment between Russia and Ukraine were, in fact, a common language. More than 90% of the population there spoke Russian. Family ties, every third person there had some kind of family or friendship ties, common culture, common history, finally, common faith, coexistence with a single state for centuries, and deeply interconnected economies all of these were so fundamental. All these elements together make our good relationships inevitable. The second point is a very important one. I want you as an American citizen and your viewers to hear about this as well. The former Russian leadership assumed that the Soviet Union had ceased to exist. And therefore, There were no longer any ideological dividing lines. Russia even agreed voluntarily early and proactively to the collapse of the Soviet Union and believe that this would be understood by the so called civilized west as an invitation for cooperation and association. That is what Russia was expecting both from the United States and the so called collective West as a whole. There were smart people, including in Germany, Egon Barr, a major politician of the Social Democratic Party, who insisted in his personal conversations with the Soviet leadership on the brink of the collapse of the Soviet Union, that a new security system should be established in Europe. Help should be given to unify Germany, but a new system should be also established to include the United States, Canada, Russia, in other Central European countries. Yes. But NATO needs not to expand. That's what he said. If NATO expands, everything would be just the same as during the Cold War, only closer to Russia's borders. That's all. He was a wise old man, but no one listened to him. In fact, he got angry once. Of if he said you don't listen to me, I'm never setting my foot in Moscow once again. No. Everything happened just as he had said. Speaker 1: It will of course, it did come true, and I and you've mentioned this many times. I think it's a fair point. You've never explained why you think that happened except to say that the West fears a strong Russia, but we have a strong China the West does not Seem very afraid of. What about Russia do you think convinced policymakers they had to Take it down. Speaker 0: The west is afraid of strong China more than it fears a strong Russia. Because Russia has 150,000,000 people and China has 1,500,000,000 population, and its economy is growing by leaps and bounds over 5% a year, it used to be even more. But that's enough for China. As Bismarck once put it, potentials are the most important. China's potential is enormous. It is the biggest economy in the world today in terms of purchasing power parity and the size of the economy. It has already overtaken the United States quite a long time ago, and it is growing at a rapid clip. Let's not talk about who is reign of whom? Let's not reason in such terms. And let's get into the fact that after 1991, when Russia expected that it would be welcomed into the brotherly family of civilized nations, nothing like this happened. You tricked us. I don't mean you personally when I say you. Of course, I'm talking about the United States. The promise was that NATO would not expand eastward, but it happened five times. There were 5 waves of expansion. We tolerated all that. We were trying to persuade them. We were saying, please don't, we are as bourgeois now as you are. We are market economy, and there's no Communist Party power. Let's negotiate. Moreover, I have also said this publicly before. There was a moment when a certain rift started growing between us. Before that, Yeltsin came to the United States. Remember, he spoke in congress and said the good words, God bless America, everything he said were signals. Let us in. Remember the developments in Yugoslavia before the Yeltsin was lavished with praise. As soon as the developments in Yugoslavia started, he raised his voice in support of Serbs, and we couldn't but raise our voices for Serbs in their defense. I understand that there were complex processes on the way there. I do. But Russia could not help raising its voice in support Serbs because Serbs are also a special and close to us nation with orthodox culture and so on. It's a nation that has suffered so much for generations. Well, regardless, what is important is that Yeltsin expressed his support. What did the United States do? In violation of an international law and the UN Charter, it started bombing Belgrade. It was the United States that led the genie out of the bottom. Moreover, when Russia protested and expressed its resentment, what was said, the UN Charter and international law have become obsolete. Now everyone invokes international law. But at that time, they started saying that everything was outdated. Everything had to be changed. Indeed, some things need to be changed as the balance of power has changed. It's true. But not in this manner. Yeltsin was immediately dragged through the mud, accused of alcoholism, of understanding nothing, of knowing nothing. He understood everything. I assure you. Well I became president in 2,000. I thought, okay. The Yugoslav issue is over, but we should try to restore relations. Let's reopen the door that Russia had tried to go through. The end, moreover, I said it publicly, I can reiterate. At a meeting here in the Kremlin with the the outgoing president Bill Clinton right here in the next room, I said to him. I asked him. Bill. Do you think if Russia asked to join NATO, do you think it would happen? Suddenly, he said, you know, it's interesting. Ink. I think so. But in the evening, when we met for dinner, he said, you know, I've talked to my team. No. No. It's not possible now. You can ask him. I think he will watch our interview. He'll confirm of I wouldn't have said anything like that if it hadn't happened. Okay. Were you sincere? Speaker 1: Possible now? Would you have joined NATO? Speaker 0: Look. I asked the question, is it possible or not? And the answer I got was no. If I was insincere in my desire to find out what the leadership position was But if Speaker 1: he had said yes, would you have joined NATO? Speaker 0: If he had said yes, the process of reproachment would have commenced. And, eventually, it might have happened if we had seen some sincere wish on the other side of our partners. But it didn't happen. Well, no means no. Okay. Fine. Speaker 1: Why do you think that is? Just to get to motive. I know you're clearly bitter about it. I understand, but why do you think the West rebuffed you then? Why the hostility? Why did the end of the Cold War not Fix the relationship? What motivates this from your point of view? Speaker 0: You said I was bitter about the answer. No. It's not bitterness. It's just a statement of fact. We're not bride and groom, bitterness, resentment, it's not about those kind of matters in such circumstances. We just realized we weren't welcome there. That's all. Okay. Fine. But let's build relations in another manner. Let's look for common ground elsewhere. Why we received such a negative response, you should ask your leaders. I can only guess why. Too big a country with its own opinion and so on. And the United States, I've seen how issues are being resolved in NATO. I will give you another example now concerning Ukraine. The US leadership exerts pressure, and all NATO members obediently vote. Even if they do not like something. Now I'll tell you what happened in this regard with Ukraine in 2008, although it's being discussed. Of I'm not going to open a secret to you, say anything new. Nevertheless, after that, we tried to build relations in different ways. Of For example, the events in the Middle East, in Iraq we were building relations with the United states in a very soft, prudent, cautious manner. I repeatedly raised the issue that the United States should not support separatism or terrorism in the North Caucasus. But they continue to do it anyway. And political support, information support, financial work, even military support came from the United States and its satellites for terrorist groups in the Caucasus. Of I once raised this issue with my colleague, also the president of the United States. He says, it's impossible. Do you have proof? I said yes. I was prepared for this conversation, and I gave him that proof. Of he looked at it, and you know what he said? I apologize, but that's what happened. I'll quote. He says, well, I'm gonna kick their ass. We waited and waited for some response. There was no reply. I said to the FSB director, write to the CA, what is the result of the conversation with president? He wrote once, twice, and then we got a reply. We have the answer in the archive. The CIA replied, we have been working with the opposition in Russia. We believe that this is the right thing to do, and we will keep on doing it. Just ridiculous. Well, okay. We realized that it was out of the question. Speaker 1: Force is in opposition to you. So you're saying the CA is trying to overthrow your government? Speaker 0: Of course, they meant in that particular case, the separatists, the terrorists who fought with us in the Caucasus, that's who they call the opposition. This is the second point. The third moment is a very important one. It's the moment when the US missile defense system was created. The beginning. We persuaded for a long time not to do it in United States. Of moreover, after I was invited by Bush junior's father, Bush senior, to visit this place on the ocean I had a very serious conversation with president Bush and his team. I propose that the United States, Russia, and Europe jointly create a missile defense system that we believe, if created unilaterally threatens our security despite the fact that the United States officially said that it was being created against missile threats from Iran, that was the justification for the deployment of the missile defense system. I suggested working together, Russia, the United States and Europe, they said it was very interesting. They asked me, are you serious? I said, absolutely. Speaker 1: May I ask what year was this? Speaker 0: I don't remember. It is easy to find out on the Internet when I was in the USA at the invitation of a Bush senior. It is even easier to learn from someone I'm going to tell you about. I was told it was very interesting. I said, just imagine if we could tackle such a global strategic security challenge together. The world will change. Will probably have disputes, probably economic and even political ones, but we could drastically change the situation in the world. He says yes and asks, are you serious? I said, of course. We need to think about it. Time, so I said go ahead, please. Then secretary of defense Gates, former director of CIA and secretary of state the rice came in here, in this cabinet, right here at this table. They sat on this table. Me, the foreign minister, their the Russian defense minister on that side they said to me, yes. We have thought about it. We agree. I said, thank God. Great. No. But with some exceptions. Speaker 1: So twice you've described US presidents making decisions by the people who were elected in your telling. Speaker 0: That's right. That's right. In the end, they just told us to get lost. I'm not going to tell you the details because I think it's incorrect. After all, it was confidential conversation. But our proposal was declined. That's a fact. It was right then when I said, look. But then we will be forced to take countermeasures. We will create such strike systems that will certainly overcome missile defense systems. The answer was, we are not doing this against you, and you do what you want, assuming that it is not against us, not against the United States, I said, okay. Very well. That's the way it went. And we created hypersonic systems with intercontinental range, and we continue to develop them. We are now ahead of everyone, the United states and the other countries in terms of the development of hypersonic strike systems, and we are improving them every day. But it wasn't us. We proposed to go the other way, and we were pushed back. Now about NATO's expansion to the east. Well, we were promised no NATO to the east, not an inch to the east as we were told. And then what? They said, well, it's not enshrined on paper, so we'll expand. So there were 5 waves of expansion, the Baltic states, the whole of Eastern Europe, and so on. And now I come to the main thing. They have come to the Ukraine ultimately. The way. In 2008, at the summit in Bucharest, they declared that the doors for Ukraine and Georgia to join NATO were open. Now about how decisions are made there. Germany, France seem to be against it as well as some other European countries. But then as it turned out later, president Bush, and he's such a tough guy, a tough politician, as I was told later, he exerted pressure on us, and we had to agree. It's ridiculous. It's like kindergarten. Where are the guarantees? What kindergarten is this? What kind of people are these? Who are they? You see, they were pressed. They agreed. And then they say Ukraine won't be in the NATO, you know? I say, I don't know. I know you agreed in 2,008. Why won't you agree in the future? Well, they pressed us then. I say, why won't they press you tomorrow? And you'll agree again. Well, it's nonsensical. Who's there to talk to? I just don't understand. We're ready to talk. But with whom? Where are the guarantees? None. So they started to develop the territory of Ukraine. Whatever is there, I have told you the background, how this territory developed. What kind of relations there were with Russia? Every second or third person there has always had some ties with Russia. And during the elections in already independent sovereign Ukraine, which gained its independence as a result of the declaration of independence. And by the way, it says that Ukraine is a neutral state, and in 2,008, suddenly the doors or gates to NATO were open to it. Oh, come on. This is not how we agreed. Now all the presidents that have come to power in Ukraine, they relied on electorate with a good attitude to Russia in one way or the other. This is the southeast of Ukraine. This is a large number of people. And it was very difficult to swayed this electorate, which had a positive attitude towards Russia. Viktor Yanukovych came to power and how? The first time he won after president Kuchma, they organized a 3rd round, which is not provided for in the constitution of Ukraine. This is a coup d'etat. Just imagine someone in the United States wouldn't like the outcome. Speaker 1: In 2014. Speaker 0: Before that. No. This was before that, after president Kuchma, Viktor Yanukovych won the elections. However, his opponents did not recognize that victory. The US supported the opposition, and the 3rd round was scheduled. What is this? This is a coup. Treaty too. The US supported it, and the winner of the 3rd round came to power. Imagine if in the US something was not to someone's liking and the 3rd round of election, which the US constitution does not provide for, was organized. Nonetheless, it was done in Ukraine. Okay. Viktor Yushchenko, who was considered a pro western politician, came to power. Fine. We have built relations with him as well. He came to Moscow with the visits. We visited Kyiv. I visited Sue. We met in an informal setting. If he's pro western, so be it. Its fine. Let people do their job. The situation should have developed inside independent Ukraine itself. As a result of Kuchma's leadership, things got worse and Viktor Yanukovych came to power after all. Maybe he wasn't the best president and politician. I don't know. I don't want to give assessments. However, the issue of the association with the EU came up. Of We have always been leaning to this. Suit yourself. But when we read through the Treaty of Association, it turned out ought to be a problem for us since we had a free trade zone and open customs borders with Ukraine, which under this association had to open its borders for Europe, which could have led to flooding of our market. We said, no. This is not going to work. We shall close our borders with Ukraine then. The customs borders, that is. Yanukovych started to calculate how much Ukraine was going to gain, how much to lose and said to his European partners, I need more time to think before signing. The moment he said that, the opposition began to 8 destructive steps, which were supported by the West, it all came down to Maidan and a coup in Ukraine. Speaker 1: So he did more trade with Russia than with the EU. Ukraine did. Speaker 0: Of course. It's not even the matter of trade volume, although, for the most part, it is. It is the matter of cooperation size, which the entire Ukrainian economy was based on. The cooperation size between the enterprises were very close since the times of the Soviet Union. One enterprise there used to produce components to be assembled both in Russia and Ukraine and vice versa. They used to be very close ties. A coup that was committed. Although I shall not delve into details now as I find doing it inappropriate, the US told us. Calm Yanukovych down, and we will calm the opposition. Let the situation unfold in the scenario of a political settlement. We said, alright. Greece, let's do it this way. As the Americans requested, Yanukovych did use neither the armed forces nor the police, yet the armed opposition committed a coup in Kyiv. What is that supposed to mean? Who do you think you are? The key I wanted to ask the then US leadership. Speaker 1: With the backing of whom? Speaker 0: With the backing of CIA, of course, the organization you wanted to join back in the day, as I understand. We should thank God they didn't let you in. Although, it is a serious organization. I understand. My former vis a vis in the sense that I served in the 1st main directorate, Soviet Union's intelligence service. They have always been our opponents. A job is a job. Technically, they did everything right. They achieved their goal of changing the government. However, from political standpoint, it was a colossal mistake. Surely, it was political leadership's miscalculation. They should have seen what it would evolve into. So in 2,008, the doors of NATO were opened poor Ukraine. In 2014, there was a coup. They started persecuting those who did not accept the coup, and it was indeed a coup. They created a threat to Crimea, which we had to take under our protection. They launched the war in Donbas in 2014 with the use of aircraft and artillery against civilians. This is when it all started. There's a video of aircraft attacking Donetsk from above. Of they launched a large scale military operation, then another one. When they failed, they started to prepare the next one. All this against the background of military development of this territory and opening of NATO's doors. How could we not express concern over what was happening? From our side, this would have been the culpable negligence, that's what it would have been. It's just that the US political leadership pushed us to the line, we could not cross because doing so could have ruined Russia itself. Besides, we could not leave our brothers in faith, in fact, a part of Russian people in the face of this war machine. Speaker 1: What was the so but that was 8 years before the current conflict started. So what was the trigger for you? What was the moment where you decided you had to do this? Of Speaker 0: Initially, it was the coup in Ukraine that provoked the conflict. By the way, back then, the representatives of 3 European countries, Germany, Poland, and France, arrived. They were the guarantors of the signed agreement between the government of Yanukovych and the opposition. They signed it as guarantors. Despite that, the opposition committed a coup, and all these countries pretended that they didn't remember that they were guarantors of the peaceful settlement. They just threw it in the stove right away, and nobody recalls that. I don't know if the US know anything about the agreement between the opposition and the authorities and its 3 guarantors who, instead of bringing this whole situation back in the political field, supported the coup, although it was meaningless. Believe me. Because president Yanukovych agreed to all conditions, he was ready to hold an early election which he had no chance of winning, frankly speaking. Everyone knew that. Then why the coup? Why the victims? Why threatening Crimea? Why launching an operation in Donbas? This, I do not understand. That is exactly what the miscalculation is. CIA did its job to complete the coup. Of I think one of the deputy secretaries of state said that it cost a large sum of money, almost 5,000,000,000. But the political mistake was colossal. Why would they have to do that? All this could have been done legally without victims, without military action, without losing Crimea. We would have never considered to even lift a finger if it hadn't been for the bloody developments on Maidan. Because we agreed with the fact that after the collapse of the Soviet Union, our borders should be along the borders of former unions republics. We agreed to that. But we never agreed to NATO's expansion, and Moreover, we never agreed that Ukraine would be in NATO. We did not agree to NATO bases there without any discussion with us. For decades, we kept asking, don't do this, don't do that. Of And what triggered the latest demands? Firstly, the current Ukrainian leadership Blair that it would not implement the Minsk agreements, which had been signed, as you know, after the events of 2014 in Minsk, or the plan of peaceful settlement in Donbas was set forth. But now the current Ukrainian leadership, foreign minister, all other officials and then president himself said that they don't like anything about the Minsk agreements. In other words, they were not going to implement it. A year or a year and a half ago, former leaders of Germany and France said openly to the whole world that they indeed signed the Minsk agreements, but they never intended to implement them. They simply led us by the nose. Speaker 1: Was there anyone free to talk to? Did you call a US president, secretary of state, and say if you keep militarizing Ukraine with NATO forces, this is gonna get this is gonna be a we're gonna act. Speaker 0: We talked about this all the time. We addressed the United States and European countries' leadership to the stop these developments immediately. So implement the Minsk agreements. Frankly speaking, I didn't know how we were going to do this, but I was ready to implement them. These agreements were complicated for Ukraine. They included lots of elements of those Donbas territory's independence. Events. That's true. However, I was absolutely confident, and I'm saying this to you now. I honestly believe that if we managed to convince the residents of Donbas and we had to work hard to convince them to return to the Ukrainian statehood, then gradually, the wounds would start to heal. When this part of territory reintegrated itself into common social environment, when the pensions, social benefits were paid again, all the pieces would gradually fall into place. No. Nobody wanted that. Everybody wanted to resolve the issue by military force only. But we could not let that happen. And the situation got to the point when the Ukrainian side announced, no. We will not do anything. They also started preparing for military action. It was they who started the war in 2014. Our goal is to stop this war. And we did not start this war in 2022. This is an attempt to stop it.
wendyp4545
Posted - February 9, 2024 at 4:15 PM
Saved - February 9, 2024 at 5:20 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
I have mad respect for Tucker Carlson going to Moscow to interview Putin. However, I found some facts that align with what we know. Obama's Secretary of State sold Uranium to Putin, and Hunter Biden received $200 million shortly after Putin took control of Crimea. Additionally, the Biden administration used Russia as negotiating partners with Iran, and Joe Biden himself said a "soft Incursion" by Russia was acceptable. There have been ongoing conflicts between Russia and Ukraine, with no significant gains on either side. Zelensky, the Ukrainian president, used the soft incursion as an excuse to make drastic changes. It's worth noting that Zelensky is a New World Order liberal who embraced communism. Poland also closed its border to Ukraine and stopped aiding Zelensky. Victoria Nuland played a role in selecting Zelensky, who favored the Russian Federation over the EU.

@wendyp4545 - Wendy Patterson

So I have mad respect for @TuckerCarlson going to Moscow to interview Putin. As Tucker said, watch it and decide for ourselves and I knew right away when he started his history lesson that he was going to be full of bullshit. I'm not posting this to change your mind. But I always stand on the side of evidence over words. I have 2 receipts that fit in with the facts as we know them. Fact 1) We know that Obama and Putin got along great. So much so that Obama's Secretary of State sold Putin our Uranium. So much so that Hunter Biden who hung around with Russians rolling them for whatever he could get, Diamonds, cars cash, was given $200 million dollars 6 days after Putin took control of Crimea. 2) That Jante Yellen gave Putin $18 billion dollars out of the covid fun to soft invade Ukraine. 3) That even after Putin Invaded Ukraine, the Biden administration used Russia as negotiating partners to negotiate a deal with Iran. 4) That Joe Biden himself came out and said a "soft Incursion" by Russia was ok as long as they didn't go to far. 5) That Russia entered Ukraine in the border areas that have been at war with Ukraine since 2014. 6) That after 2+ years neither side has gained any ground but have virtually been in a stalemate since Russia entered Donbas. 7) Zelenskey used the soft incursion as an excuse to call off elections, adopt digital currency immediately, banned the media, locked up Journalists and canceled elections. 8) That Zelenskey is a New World Order liberal who embraced communism, the same way that our leaders here are trying to force our country into aligning with the Russian Federation and not the EU who understands this and is not helping Ukraine fend off the Russians. 9) That even Poland under the recent last administration closed it's border to Ukraine and stopped aiding Zelenskey. 10) Victoria Nuland had a part in hand picking Zelenskey who said F*ck the European Union in favor of the Russian Federation. Receipts: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wiMDmtcQEEM https://t.co/QvSRvpVN1z 2015 leaked recording of US State Dept official Victoria Nuland discussing how Washington handpicked the post-coup Ukrainian government. https://t.co/ewF4owP0wo https://t.co/dI4GAAfcjC

@SenJohnKennedy - John Kennedy

The Biden admin just gave Putin $18 BILLION via the IMF. I begged them not to do it. But they just forked the money over, and people might want to ask Sec. Yellen about that.

Video Transcript AI Summary
Secretary Yellen issued special drawing rights worth $18 billion to Vladimir Putin without explaining why she didn't use the funds to help poor countries with vaccines. Most of these special drawing rights went to wealthy countries, leaving smaller countries with very little. The IMF and Secretary Yellen remained silent on the matter, raising questions about their actions.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I need you to to ask my friend secretary Yellen a question. We just gave Putin $18,000,000,000 and special drawing rights. Secretary Yellen said, oh, we gotta issue these special drawing rights. Make the IMF do it. These gift cards. She didn't bother to and why to help the poor countries by vaccines? She didn't bother to explain that most of these gift cards, these special drawn rights are going to the wealthiest countries. The small countries get the little end of nothing. And she just handed Vladimir Putin $18,000,000,000 and we didn't hear a word from her and we didn't hear a word from the I n n f m f. You couldn't have found them on with with a search party. You couldn't found them with Google. They just turned the money over. I I'd be a little curious about that.

@sues86453 - Sue Knows Best

2015 leaked recording of US State Dept official Victoria Nuland discussing how Washington handpicked post-coup Ukrainian government. Hmm, I thought the US gov had nothing to do with other nation’s affairs, others are guilty of that but not them.

Video Transcript AI Summary
The speakers discuss the involvement of Klitschko in the government and the need to keep moderate Democrats together. They agree that Klitschko should stay out and focus on his political work. They also mention the importance of Yats having regular communication with Klitschko and Tani book. They discuss setting up a call with Klitschko as the next step. They mention a meeting with the big three and the possibility of a 3 plus 1 or 3 plus 2 conversation. They mention the UN's involvement in the situation and express the desire for the UN to help resolve the situation, disregarding the EU.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: What do you think? Speaker 1: I think we're in play. The Klitschko piece is obviously the complicated electron here, especially the announcement of him as Deputy Prime Minister. And you've seen some of my notes on the troubles in the marriage right now. So we're trying to get a read really fast on where he is on this stuff. But I think your argument to him, which you'll need to make, I think that's the next phone call we want to set up, is exactly the one you made to Yats. And I'm glad you sort of put him on the spot on where he fits in this scenario. And I'm very glad he said what he said in response. Speaker 0: Good. So I don't think cleats should go into the government. I don't think it's necessary. I don't think it's a good idea. Speaker 1: Yes, I mean, I guess you think in terms of him not going into the government, just let him sort of stay out and do his political homework and stuff. I'm just thinking in terms of sort of the process moving ahead, we want to keep the moderate Democrats together. The problem is going to be tiny book and his guys. And I'm sure that's part of what Yaneko was just calculating on all of this. Speaker 0: I think Yats is the guy who's got the economic experience, the governing experience. He's the guy you know, What he needs is Klitsch and Tani book on the outside. He needs to be talking to them 4 times a week. I just think Klitschko going in, he's going to be at that level working for Yatinuke. It's just not going to work. Speaker 1: Yes. No, I think that's right. Okay. Good. Would you want us trying to set up a call with him as the next step? Speaker 0: My understanding from that call, but you tell me was that the big three were going into their own meeting And that Yats was going to offer in that context a 3 way the 3 plus 1 conversation or 3 plus 2 with you. When I talked to Jeff Feldman this morning, he had a new name for the UN guy, Robert Seri. Did I write you that this morning? Speaker 1: Yes. I saw that. Speaker 0: He's now gotten both Sarri and Bon Ki Moon to agree that Sarri could come in Monday or Tuesday. Speaker 1: Okay. Speaker 0: So that would be great I think to help glue this thing and have the UN help glue it and fuck the EU.

@wendyp4545 - Wendy Patterson

The "war" in Ukraine started in 2014 on the border of Russian speaking territories in Ukraine. Azlov, the Nazi fighting battalion was created by a rich Oligarch to fight them when Ukraine's military was rebuilding. Putin's soft "incursion" into Ukraine was in these war torn… https://t.co/KuPcKsg5di

SirCensorLot
Posted - February 11, 2024 at 8:01 AM
Saved - February 12, 2024 at 4:27 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
In a series of posts analyzing the Tucker Carlson and Putin interview, the author highlights various coincidences and connections. They mention the controversy surrounding Russia obtaining Hillary's emails, Trump's statement about Russia finding the missing emails, and Snowden's presence in Moscow. The author points out timestamps and drops that they believe hold significance, such as references to the Hungarian president's resignation and Hungarian military ships. They also note Putin taking off his watch and speculate on its meaning. The author concludes by mentioning Putin's communication with certain individuals and the issue of pedophilia.

@SirCensorLot - SirOliverPollock (KAIZER) 😎 🧐 🤫

1) A 🧵 REGARDING THE #TUCKER & #PUTIN INTERVIEW HELD ON FEBRUARY 6, 2024 AND AIRED ON FEBRUARY 8, 2024... "THE 8TH" WHAT I AM ABOUT TO SHOW YOU IS MERELY MY OPINION BASED OFF FACTS AND COINCIDENCES BETWEEN THE INTERVIEW, THE DROPS AND THE LAW OF WAR MANUAL... TAKE FROM IT WHAT YOU WILL... AND PLEASE USE DISCERNMENT AND PROPER PERSPECTIVE... AFTER ALL... WE ARE AT WAR AND PRESIDENT TRUMP "IS" OUR WARTIME PRESIDENT NOW, BEFORE I BEGIN… KEEP IN MIND, SEVERAL YEARS AGO, THERE WERE CLAIMS THAT RUSSIA'S INTELLIGENCE SERVICES MIGHT HAVE OBTAINED SOME OF HILLARY’S EMAILS DURING THEIR INVESTIGATION INTO THE ROMANIAN HACKER KNOWN AS "GUCCIFER" AROUND THE SAME TIME, DONALD TRUMP MADE A CONTROVERSIAL STATEMENT, SAYING, "RUSSIA, IF YOU'RE LISTENING, I HOPE YOU'RE ABLE TO FIND THE 30,000 EMAILS THAT ARE MISSING." WOULDN’T IT BE FITTING… PUTIN MENTIONS THE EMAILS IN THE INTERVIEW AND I’D BE REMISS IF I DIDN’T MENTION SNOWDEN IS STILL IN MOSCOW! DID YOU CATCH, PRIOR TO THE INTERVIEW, TUCKER STOOD OUTSIDE IN THE “SNOW” AND GAVE AN INTRODUCTION WHICH LASTED ROUGHLY 1 MIN 17 SEC?

@SirCensorLot - SirOliverPollock (KAIZER) 😎 🧐 🤫

2) DURING HIS INTRODUCTION... HE MENTIONS SHOOTING THE VIDEO ON "FEB 6TH" RIGHT AT THE :06 SEC MARK... AND ADDS EMPHASIS WHEN SAYING IT... LATER IN THE INTERVIEW... PUTIN TELLS TUCKER HE KNOWS ABOUT HIM WANTED TO BE CIA (LIKE HIS FATHER) ONLY... HE IS CIA (IMHO) VIA OPERATION MOCKINGBIRD! DROP #6

@SirCensorLot - SirOliverPollock (KAIZER) 😎 🧐 🤫

3) HE THEN GOES ON TO EMPHASIS THE STATEMENT "WE ENEDED IT" AT THE :58 SEC MARK... DROP #58...

@SirCensorLot - SirOliverPollock (KAIZER) 😎 🧐 🤫

4) AT THE 1:17 MM HE ENDS HIS INTRODUCTION TO BEGIN THE INTERVIEW… DROP #117 DIDN'T THE HUNGARIAN PRESIDENT JUST RESIGN AMIDST ALLEGATIONS OF PARDONING A CHILD SEX ABUSE ACCOMPLICE...

@SirCensorLot - SirOliverPollock (KAIZER) 😎 🧐 🤫

5) WITHIN DROP #117... THERE ARE NUMBERS ON THE "HUNGARIAN" MILITARY SHIPS... 916/981... DROP #916

@SirCensorLot - SirOliverPollock (KAIZER) 😎 🧐 🤫

6) DROP #981

@SirCensorLot - SirOliverPollock (KAIZER) 😎 🧐 🤫

7) THE OFFICIAL INTERVIEW BEGINS AT THE 1:19 MM AFTER A 1 SEC INTERLUDE OF A SLIDE WITH THE TITLE “THE TUCKER CARLSON INTERVIEW” DROP #119

@SirCensorLot - SirOliverPollock (KAIZER) 😎 🧐 🤫

8) 16/17 SEC LATER AT THE 1:35/1:36 MM 6:01:36 (18:01:36) PUTIN BEGINS TO TAKE OFF HIS WATCH... DROPS #16 & #17

@SirCensorLot - SirOliverPollock (KAIZER) 😎 🧐 🤫

9) DROPS #135 & #136

@SirCensorLot - SirOliverPollock (KAIZER) 😎 🧐 🤫

10) THE SIGNIFICANCE OF PUTIN TAKING OFF HIS WATCH IS CRITICAL BC IT FALLS IN LINE WITH THE DROPS POINTED OUT BY MANY OF THE ANONS HERE ON X BUT ALSO BC IT'S AND INDICATION OF HIS "WATCH" ENDING AS FAMOUSLY STATED BY JON "SNOW" THE CHARACTER FROM HIT TV SERIES #GameOfThrones WHEN HE STATED HIS "WATCH" AS LORD COMMANDER HAS ENDED... HAS PUTINS TIME IN THIS "SPECIAL MILITARY OPERATION" COME TO AN END? IS THIS WHY HE HANDED OVER THE FOLDER? AND WHAT WAS IN THE FOLDER? ARE WE TO BELIEVE IT IS MERELY A HISTORY OF RUSSIA? OR DOES IT INCLUDE DETAILS ON THE U1 DEAL?🤔

@SirCensorLot - SirOliverPollock (KAIZER) 😎 🧐 🤫

11) IN THE “AFTER INTERVIEW”… TUCKER SPLITS THE PRESENTATION BETWEEN HIS TIME AT THE KREMLIN AND HIS TIME AT THE HOTEL AT THE 1:53/1:54 MM… DROPS #153 & #154

@SirCensorLot - SirOliverPollock (KAIZER) 😎 🧐 🤫

12) THERE WERE MANY MORE NUGGETS DURING THE INTERVIEW FOR INSTANCE WHEN PUTIN MENTIONED HE SPOKE TO BIDAN BEFORE THE "SPECIAL MILITARY OPERATION" BUT DOESN'T RECALL THE LAST TIME HE SPOKE TO HIM... 🤔 AND HE WENT ON TO SAY HE HAS MAINTAINED COMMS WITH CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS AND THOSE LINES OF COMMS REMAIN "INTACT" AGAIN... THIS IS ALL MY OPINION BASED OFF MY PERSPECTIVE ON THINGS... DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH AND COME TO YOUR OWN CONCLUSIONS BUT YOU HAVE TO ADMIT... THINGS ARE DEFINITELY GETTING SPICEY!

@SirCensorLot - SirOliverPollock (KAIZER) 😎 🧐 🤫

13) ADDED BONUSES... PUTINS MEETINGS WITH CLINTON WHEN HE WAS DUPED INTO BELIEVING [THEY} WOULD ALLOW HIM TO JOIN NATO AND 18:01:36 TIMESTAMP DROP... WHAT EXACTLY IS THE NUMBER #1 PROBLEM WITH THE WORLD? PEDOPHILIA! THOSE WHO SCREAM THE LOUDEST! DASTING!!!

Cancelcloco
Posted - February 12, 2024 at 12:12 AM
Saved - February 12, 2024 at 12:45 AM

@Cancelcloco - Ian Carroll

The real reason the Putin interview terrified mainstream? Because the US backed a Nazi coup of the democratically elected president in 2014. The US and CIA started the war in Ukraine and they knew exactly what they were doing. https://t.co/O2q7IroXng

Video Transcript AI Summary
The video discusses the US's history of overthrowing democratically elected governments and its involvement in Ukraine. It highlights the CIA's support for neo-Nazis and far-right extremists in Ukraine, leading to the 2014 coup and the rise of the Svoboda party. The video also mentions the Azov battalion, a neo-Nazi militia that is part of Ukraine's official armed forces. It criticizes the biased portrayal of the conflict by Western media and highlights the financial gains made by the military-industrial complex. The video argues that Putin's actions in response to the coup were predictable and that much of the information presented about the conflict is propaganda.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Know that one time when the US helped neo nazis overthrow democratically elected president? Do you know what country I'm talking about? But before we get started, you should brush up on basic facts about the US's involvement in regime change throughout history because we've been doing this all over the world for more than a 100 years now. Although, we sped up considerably after World War 2 with the founding of the CIA. That brings us to Allen Dulles, the godfather of the CIA, who was a very wealthy and influential businessman And largely because of his deep ties to big Nazi money before and after World War 2, and I guess during too Actually. And after World War 2, the CIA helped set up a whole bunch of what they call stay behind operations, which is just a way of saying they funded that were mostly leftovers from the Nazi party in Europe because the Nazis hated communism. And so they just, like, yeah, these guys are useful. Let's Keep them around. We also poached all the Nazi scientists during operation paperclip. And so all of that is just to set the stage and remind you That the US is great at overthrowing governments, usually democratically elected ones. Usually because they are too friendly with Russia, And the anecdote is usually to put dictators and far right extremists in power that will bend the need of the US. And also just to remind you, refresh you that The CIA and the US in general have no qualms about working with Nazis and Neo Nazis. So now it's time to learn the real history of the war in Ukraine. Because apparently, Putin nearly bored Tucker to death with a 2 hour long history lesson. So we'll do it faster and with sources. Maybe I'll get my very own Some your article from the Daily Beast. So in 2010, Ukraine elected this guy, Viktor Yanukovych, to be their president. In what were hailed as remarkably democratic elections, It's giving me awful state of Ukraine at the time. Yanukovych happens to be from Donetsk Oblast where he was previously the governor? That would be this dark red one where Russian is the native language of more than 75% of the population. In fact, this whole side of Ukraine is largely ethnically Russian. And he was logically very pro Russia. I mean, like, they are literal neighbors. But anyways, that was not cool with the US. And it was also not cool with all of the Nazis in Ukraine, like Tons of Nazis. And if there's one thing the CIA is good at, it's at not letting a good revolution go to waste. And they actually were totally out in the open this time. John McCain himself went and dined with the opposition leaders including the far right Scoboda party which would eventually take over. He literally shared a stage at the public protest with the leader of this party? This is back in December of 2013 leading up to the US backed coup in 2014. And back then, everyone knew that Ukraine had a real Nazi Here's the EU talking about it back in 2014. The Svoboda party is a far right party launched in 1991 and it took on this swastika like symbol Composed of I and an n, which stood for Idea Nazi or idea of the nation. Literally, that was their logo Until they had a whole rebranding later on. Like for real, this was an actual Nazi symbol used by Nazi divisions called the Wolfsnagel during World War 2 and that is The Svoboda party's symbol. This article is also from 2014 originally, updated in 2017. Regrettably, the vaccine against the virus of Nazism produced at the Nuremberg tribunal is losing its original strength in some parts of European countries. That's a quote from Vladimir Putin. Remember when Canada got all kerfuffle because they accidentally had a standing ovation for a Nazi war criminal when Baby boy Ukraine came to give a little speech and they all stood up and applauded the old Nazi war criminal. If that was confusing to you as to why and how that would happen, the answer is because A ton of people from Ukraine are old Nazi war criminals. Ukraine is full of Nazis. In fact, Most of Ukraine's military fighting power is because of Azov battalion, which is the direct descendant of the Svoboda party that took Over in the 2014 coup, Azov actually reached out around the world and recruited Neo Nazis from foreign countries to come get training to fight in Ukraine. They were banned from Facebook for racist and anti semitic content. They titled one of their pages gas chambers. But when Russia launched a full scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022 and we all wanted to make a lot of money off of it, some media outlets changed the way they describe days off And Ukraine in general. German state owned media outlets like Deutsche Welle, which once described Azov as a Neo Nazi regiment soon began labeling allegations of Neo naz as Russian propaganda. My. That's a familiar story. Because the United States literally openly financially and politically supported A neo Nazi militia terrorist group to take over the government of a democratic Ukraine. And then Crimeans who are ethnically Russian voted overwhelmingly to join Russia, and then the bulk of western media abandoned any hint of even Remotely balanced journalism. And now we're comparing Putin to Hitler and completely ignoring the actual Neo Nazis that are committing pogroms on the streets of Ukraine? The leader of Ukraine's most distinguished fighting battalion, Azov battalion, Once wrote that Ukraine's mission is to quote, lead the white races of the world in a final crusade against the semi led Untermenschen. He is now a deputy in Ukraine's parliament. And the stories of Ukrainian nazism are not coming from Russian media. They're coming from western media like Radio Free Europe, like Jewish Organizations, like the World Jewish Congress, and the Simon Wentz, whatever, Center. Watchdogs like Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and Freedom House. Post mid on Ukraine is the world's only nation to have a Neo Nazi Formation in its official armed forces. And sorry, if you don't know what I mean when I say post Maidan Ukraine, that might be because they decided on a more like Nice sounding Wikipedia name. They called it the revolution of dignity instead of the original name, the Maidan Revolution. Because when Neo Nazis Please take over a democratic government. It should be called the revolution of dignity. So now put yourself in Putin's shoes in 2014. The CIA has just overthrown the government of your next door neighbor. Think Russia overthrowing the government of Mexico. No. And they have installed a Nazi party as the head of it. And then that Nazi party is going through the streets where they're all ethnic Russians and killing people? I mean, not to mention the NATO connection that now NATO is talking about getting in on Ukraine. I'm not trying to say that Putin is a good guy or that he's never done anything bad. I'm trying to say that literally every single thing that you could say that Putin has done that is bad, The United States government also does all the time. And from a geopolitics standpoint, the outcome of that is obvious. It started in 2014, And no shit Putin was gonna do something about it. Everyone knew that Putin was gonna do something about it ever since 2014. But We didn't ignore it because we didn't think it was true. The United States did it because we wanted this outcome. We're gonna briefly skip over the whole part where the Biden family, the Biden vice presidency was actually very distinctly involved in the build up to the Ukraine war throughout his vice presidency and all of the kickbacks that his family got from that involvement? And we'll skip straight To the money that is getting raked in by the military industrial complex ever since the start of the Ukraine war in 2022. US government approved arms sales just to NATO allies Went from 15,000,000,000 to 28,000,000,000. Private sales directly from military contractors to foreign governments went from a 103,000,000,000 to a 153,000,000,000. And all the while, all the corporate shill ass media reports it as though beating Russia in the arms market is part of a wider effort to isolate Moscow and its manufacturing capacity to weaken its forces arrayed against Ukraine? Quick. Enrich the defense contractors for democracy. The only way to save democracy It's to give 1,000,000,000 of dollars to Lockheed Martin. Otherwise, Putin is gonna win. Except that Putin has said many times that he is willing to negotiate. He's happy to negotiate. He doesn't even wanna take over all of Ukraine. He just wants that port right there and these Russians to be safe and NATO to stay the fuck away. He does not give a shit about Ukraine. He definitely doesn't give a shit about invading any other countries. He does not want that. Russia is the biggest country in the world By a long shot. And almost all of it is uninhabited. They have more natural resources than anyone else. They have tons of their own problems to deal with, And they certainly don't want a nuclear conflict with other major world powers. And to this day, basically everything that Americans have been told about this conflict It's complete propaganda. And the number one rule of propaganda is you need a boogeyman. Once the cold war ended, they needed a new one. So we had Osama bin Laden. Once Osama bin Laden ended, they needed a new one. So we went back to Putin. Nancy Pelosi actually tried to claim that Pro Palestine protests were Putin's propaganda machine. Anything that they don't like is because of Putin, Which is why they came out guns blazing against this interview because everything that they have been telling you about this is propaganda and lies.
WarClandestine
Posted - February 26, 2024 at 8:24 PM
Saved - February 27, 2024 at 7:09 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
The MSM now admits that Ukraine is a CIA proxy, implying that Putin's invasion was not unprovoked. The US brought war to Putin's doorstep, contradicting Western media's portrayal. Russia's accusations of Western control in Ukraine were correct, justifying their attack. Russia's attempts at non-violent resolution were denied, and the West censored independent journalists exposing the truth. It's a tough pill to swallow, but Russia is not the villain here. Recognizing this will help clean up the mess.

@WarClandestine - Clandestine

In case you didn’t hear, the MSM are now admitting that Ukraine is a CIA proxy. Meaning Putin’s invasion of Ukraine was NOT unprovoked, and that the US are the expansionists, overthrowing sovereign nations for geopolitical gain. The US brought war to Putin’s doorstep. Meaning that every single thing Western media told you about the war in Ukraine, was based on a lie. All the analysis you heard from pompous MSM talking-heads, was based on the presumption that Putin did this unprovoked, just because he is “literally Hitler”. None of it was true. Turns out, Putin’s accusations of Western intelligence controlling Ukraine were correct, therefore his attack is more than justified. Just imagine if Russia funded Nazi militias in Canada, started a civil war, overthrew the government, then installed their own puppet regime, then put Russian intelligence bases and biolabs all over our northern border. Every American would be calling to flatten Canada and Russia. Well that’s exactly what the US did to Russia, and they are pissed. Russia tried to join NATO, they were denied. Russia tried to negotiate non-violent means to resolve the conflict, they were denied. Russia tried to present their grievances of US bioweapon production and espionage to the UN, they were denied. Russia tried to go the diplomatic route, and the West just cried “Russian disinformation”, while they were the ones pushing disinformation. The West also went out of their way to censor independent journalists like me who have been telling you this from day one, because if the public knew this detail the entire time, they wouldn’t have supported sending our tax dollars there. This is going to be a tough pill to swallow for many Americans, but Russia are not the bad guys in this scenario. The West are, and it’s not even close. The sooner we all recognize this, the sooner we can clean up the mess.

ivan_8848
Posted - March 19, 2024 at 2:13 AM
Saved - March 20, 2024 at 10:19 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
The posts discuss the conflict in Ukraine and the role of various actors, including NATO and the United States. The posts highlight the long-standing tensions and mistakes made by both sides. The focus is on the need for peaceful negotiations and avoiding further escalation. The posts also mention the role of propaganda and misinformation in shaping public opinion. Overall, the posts provide different perspectives on the Ukraine-Russia conflict and its underlying causes.

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

MUST WATCH! ENJOY! Piers Morgan vs Jeffrey Sachs What is your view of Vladimir Putin? Well, I think he's very smart, very tough, and I think he says what he means. In 2007, he said, don't do this. At the Munich security conference, famously, he said, all right, you went violating what I know to be true, by the way, which was not an inch eastward for NATO, promised by James Baker II and by Hans-Dietrich Genscher to Gorbachev in 1990. I know that's for sure the case. The United States expanded NATO to Poland, Hungary, Czech Republic in the Clinton period, and then to seven more countries in 2004. Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Romania and Bulgaria. And then in 2007, Putin said, stop. All right, stop. No more. Not to Ukraine. So what does George W do in 2008? In Bucharest, of course. What does he do? He says, guarantee Ukraine and Georgia. And this is Palmerston's playbook from 1853. So we're going to surround Russia in the Black Sea again. Exactly that. Okay, just to interrupt, though, I just asked you what your view of Putin is, and so far, you've just said he's smart and tough. I told you. Any negatives, professor? I believe that the big mistake of both sides is we should talk this out. And now let me say a word about talking it out. In 2008, when Bucharest happened, european leaders called me because I'm friends with them. They said, what is your crazy president doing, by the way? Some who are in power right now, I won't name names. What is your president doing? Why is he destabilising things? He promised he wasn't going to push Ukraine. That's what european leaders say in private. They don't say it in public. We avoided the negotiations. Then 2014 came, sadly, Piers. I saw some of it firsthand. It was ugly. The United States should not be funding overthrows of governments. We did. I know it. Okay. So I happened to be there soon afterwards with the handpicked government, handpicked by Victoria Nuland. We didn't talk then. Then came the Minsk agreements. And then the United States said privately, even though the UN Security Council has backed both Minsk one and Minsk II, you don't have to do this. And so with Poroshenko. Don't worry about it. Then we heard, of course, Chancellor Merkel say afterwards, yeah, we weren't taking it too seriously, even though Germany and France were the guarantors of that. Then, on December 15, 2021, Putin put it down in a draught. US Russia security agreement. I read it. I called the White House. I said, you know what you can negotiate on this basis? Avoid the war. No. There's going to be no war. Mr. Sachs. I said, just tell them that NATO is not going to enlarge. You'll avoid the war. No, we're never going to say that. We have an open door policy. So. What kind of open door policy? We've had 200 years of the Monroe doctrine. Some open door policy? No, Mr. Sachs. Then the war breaks out. Then immediately Zelensky says, okay, we can be neutral. We can be neutral and negotiations start. As you know, Naftali Bennett, informally, the prime minister of Israel and Turkey with its very skilled diplomacy. I actually flew to Ankara to discuss with the turkish diplomats what was going on. The US stopped the agreement. Why? Because they thought we'll win. We can blade sanctions, you know, cutting them out of the banking system. We're going to bring them to their knees. It's a bunch of terrible miscalculations, is what it is. It's a game. Listen. A terrible game. I hear you. What I'm fascinated by, though, is I've asked you to say what you think of Putin. And so far, like I say, you've only called him tough and smart. This is a guy that kills his political opponents. This is a guy who. This is a guy who rules his country like a gangster. I'm struggling to understand why you can't find any negatives for the guy. He's a dictator. Because I'm trying to find peace, and you don't do it the way that Biden does. Biden said, okay, he's a thug. Biden says he's a crazy sober. That's real good, Joe. That's really getting us to where we want to go. That's hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians dead. Can you not find anything negative to say about Vladimir Putin? I don't think that what I say about Putin negative has anything to do with anything. What I'm saying is, as I know. Well, you were ready to call him smart. You're ready to call him smart and smart and tough, but you can't find anything. I wrote a book about the cuban missile crisis and its aftermath. Kennedy didn't go name calling Khrushchev. He tried to save the world to stop the war afterwards. He didn't insult Khrushchev. What he did was sat down with him and negotiated the partial nuclear test ban treaty. We're not in a game. We're not in name calling. We're not in a cage brawl. We're trying to actually not have the world spiral into nuclear war. So it's not that game. The game is sit down and negotiate.

Video Transcript AI Summary
Vladimir Putin is seen as smart and tough by the speaker, who emphasizes the need for peaceful negotiations rather than name-calling. The speaker criticizes past actions by the US and European leaders regarding Ukraine, urging for dialogue and diplomacy to prevent conflict. The focus is on avoiding war and finding peaceful solutions through negotiation, referencing historical examples like the Cuban Missile Crisis. Peaceful negotiations are emphasized over insults and aggression.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: What is your view of Vladimir Putin? Speaker 1: Well, I think he's very smart, very tough, and, I think he says what he means. In 2007, he said, don't do this at the Munich Security Conference famously. He said, alright. You went violating what I know to be true, by the way, which was not an inch eastward for NATO promised by James Baker the 3rd and by Hans Dietrich Dencher, to Gorbachev in 1990. I know that's for sure the case. The United States expanded NATO to Poland, Hungary, Czech Republic in, in, the Clinton period, and then to 7 more countries in 2004, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Romania, and Bulgaria. And then in 2007, Putin said, stop. Alright? Stop. No more not to Ukraine. So what does George w do in 2008 in Bucharest? Of course. What does he do? He says, guarantee Ukraine and Georgia. And, you know, this is, Palmerston's playbook from, 18 53, so we're gonna surround Russia and the Black Sea again. Exactly that. Speaker 0: Okay. But You know I don't want to interrupt. Just to interrupt, though, I just asked you what your view of Putin is. And so far, you've just said he's smart and tough. Speaker 1: I just I told you. He he he Any any negative? Clearly. Speaker 0: Any negative, professor? Speaker 1: I believe that the big mistake of both sides is we should talk this out. And now let me say a word about talking it out. In 2008, when Bucharest happened, European leaders called me because I'm friends with them. They said, what is your crazy president doing? By the way, some who are in power right now, I won't name names, what is your president doing? Why is he destabilizing things? He promised he wasn't gonna push Ukraine. That's what European leaders say in private. They don't say it in public. We avoided the negotiations. Then 2014 came. Sadly, Piers, I saw I saw some of it firsthand. It was ugly. The United States should not be funding overthrows of governments. We did. I know it. Okay. So I happened to be there soon afterwards, with the handpicked government, handpicked by Victoria Nuland. We didn't talk then. Then came the Minsk agreements. And then the United States said privately, even though the UN Security Council has backed both mince 1 and mince mince 2, you don't have to do this. And so with Poroshenko, don't worry about it. Then then we heard, of course, chancellor Merkel say afterwards, yeah, we weren't taking it too seriously even though Germany and France were the guarantors of that. Then on December 15, 2021, Putin put it down in a draft US Russia security agreement. I read it. I called the White House. I said, you know what? You can negotiate on this basis. Avoid the war. No. No. No. There's gonna be no war, mister Sachs. I said, just tell them that NATO was not going to enlarge. You'll avoid the war. No. We're never gonna say that. We have an open door policy. So what kind of open door policy? We've had 200 years of the Monroe doctrine, some open door policy. No. No. No, mister Sachs. Then the war breaks out. Then, immediately, Zelensky says, okay. Okay. We can be neutral. We can be neutral. And, negotiations start, as you know, Naftali Bennett, informally the prime minister of Israel, and the and and Turkey with its very skilled diplomacy. I actually flew to Ankara to discuss with the Turkish diplomats what was going on. The US stopped the agreement. Why? Because they thought we'll win. We can bleed Russia. Our sanctions, you know, cutting them out of the banking system, we're gonna bring them to their knees. It's a bunch of terrible miscalculations is what it is. It's a game. Speaker 0: Listen. Speaker 1: A terrible game. Speaker 0: I hear you. What I'm fascinated by, though, is I've asked you to say what you think of Putin. And so far, like I say, you've only called him tough and smart. This is a guy that kills his political opponents. This is a guy who Yeah. Speaker 1: What's the the Speaker 0: This is a guy who rules his country like a gangster. I I find it I'm struggling to understand why you can't find any negatives for the guy. He's a dictator. Speaker 1: Because I'm trying to because I'm trying to find peace, and you don't do it the way that Biden does. Biden said, okay. He's a thug. Biden says he's a crazy SOB. That's real good, Joe. That's really getting us to where we wanna go. That's 100 of 1000 of Ukrainians dead. Speaker 0: But do you know what? Can you not find can you not find anything negative to say about Vladimir Putin? Speaker 1: I don't think that what I say about Putin negative has anything to do with anything. What I'm saying is, as I know, you Speaker 0: Well, you were already calling smart you were already calling smart and tough. I'm not sure. And that's Speaker 1: You know, in in You go to smart Speaker 0: and tough, but you can't find anything bad. To say that. Speaker 1: Wrote a book about the Cuban Missile Crisis and its aftermath. Kennedy didn't go name calling Khrushchev. He tried to save the world to stop the war. Afterwards, he didn't insult Khrushchev. What he did was sat down with him and negotiated the partial nuclear test ban treaty. We're not in a game. We're not in name calling. We're not in a cage brawl. We're trying to actually not have the world spiral into nuclear war. So it's not that game. The game is sit down and negotiate.

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

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

Brilliant!!! The best video @0rf ‼️👏👏👏 Watch Matt Orfalea Bitch Slap Those Who Said The Ukraine Invasion Was "Not About NATO" The biggest threat in the world is NATO. NATO exists to solve the problems created by NATO’s existence. NATO is a military alliance that feeds on war. To justify its existence, NATO constantly needs an external enemies and conflicts. NATO DISBAND!

Video Transcript AI Summary
Putin sent a treaty to NATO to stop enlargement, but NATO refused. The conflict isn't about NATO, but democracy in Ukraine. Some compare Putin to Hitler. The main issue is Putin's desire for influence. The war is not about NATO, but Putin's ambitions. It's a complex situation with no easy solution.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: President Putin actually sent a draft treaty that he wanted NATO to sign to promise no more NATO enlargement. That was what he sent us. And that was a precondition for not invade Ukraine. Of course, we didn't sign that. Speaker 1: So he went to war to prevent NATO, more NATO across his borders. Flashback. Speaker 0: This is fundamentally not about NATO expansion. Speaker 1: It's never about NATO enlargement. It's not about NATO. It's not about NATO expanding toward Russia. This was never about NATO? It's absolutely nothing to do with NATO expansionism. And it has nothing to do with NATO. Speaker 2: This is not about NATO. Speaker 1: It's not about NATO. It's not really about NATO. This is not about NATO. Seriously, it's not about Speaker 2: NATO. This was never about NATO. Speaker 3: It was never about NATO. Let's be honest. This doesn't have anything to do with NATO? Speaker 1: Nothing to do with NATO at all. Yeah. He's claiming it's, like, security purposes, but we can see the clear reason. But NATO is not the reason. Speaker 2: This is not about NATO expansion. This is about the democratic expansion. Ukraine bans religious organizations. We are protecting democracy right now. Ukraine is banning political parties. Speaker 1: Because it's a democracy. Speaker 2: Ukraine restricts books and music. It's about democracy. Ukraine won't hold elections. Speaker 1: It's about democracy. And it's not about NATO expansion. Speaker 3: NATO expansion. Speaker 1: Nothing to do with with NATO. It isn't really about NATO. It's not about NATO. It's not about NATO enlargement. In fact, Speaker 2: it has nothing to do with NATO. It's not about NATO encroaching. So it's not about NATO. NATO is just as a fictitious imaginary adversary for for for mister Putin and for Russia. It was never about NATO. Speaker 3: That's not what it's been about. It's been about him trying to expand his sphere of influence. Speaker 4: Hang on. I mean, the 2 are not mutually exclusive. Obviously, Russia has wished for a sphere of influence over Ukraine. But if the west had not challenged Russian interests so directly, I think that there there was a chance to avoid this war. Speaker 1: He wanted us to sign Speaker 0: a promise never to enlarge NATO. We rejected that. Speaker 1: The reason why Putin invaded Ukraine is because of his evil Evil. It's about that Putin wants to rebuild Soviet empire of evil like president Reagan told. It's about Putin being sick. Speaker 2: Because I don't Speaker 1: know how you negotiate peace with a madman, but nobody negotiated with Hitler. Speaker 2: People were comparing him to Hitler. To Hitler. Speaker 1: And remember Hitler? Speaker 2: He's a Hitler. Speaker 1: We're back when the the Nazis invaded Poland. Speaker 2: This is exactly the same what Hitler was doing to choose. This is the same. Putin will not stop. Speaker 4: Putin Speaker 2: Putin is reminiscent of Hitler. Hitler. This reminds me of Hitler. Hitler. Hitler. Speaker 4: He's the new Hitler. Speaker 1: Who Hitler? This is about a butcher trying to kill people everywhere in the world, just not Ukraine, Syria, all over the place. I hear you. Senator Lindsey Graham, always great to talk to you. Thanks so much. Thank you. Alright. Straight ahead.

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

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

Jeffrey Sachs: Conflict in Ukraine has been a 30 year project of the United States. This has been a long standing game, announced, explained Brzezinski laid it all out for us in 1997. MasterClass for Piers Morgan ❗️ Ukraine wanted to be part of NATO and that perhaps the biggest mistake Ukraine made was to give up its nuclear weapons. Well, I think the mistake is that Ukraine should have been a neutral buffer between Russia and NATO. And that's how it started out as an independent state in 1991. And the United States had its eye on getting Ukraine into the US orbit already from 1992. Zbigniew Brzezinski spelled it out in 1997. Many people thought this was a path to disaster and it's turned out to be a path to disaster. So it's very sad. It could have been peaceful and neutral and independent, and that wasn't good enough for the United States. And I understand completely why Russia wouldn't want NATO on the 2000 km border of Ukraine and Russia. So it's just very sad, very predictable. George Kennan called it exactly in 1997. Interestingly, our current CIA director, Bill Burns, who was in 2008, the US ambassador to Russia, sent back a famous memo called Niet means Niet. No, don't do it. It's not just Putin, it's the entire political class that absolutely rejects Ukraine and NATO. And we should have been prudent, but we're not very prudent. We had our designs and we have walked into a disaster. But more than that, we talked Ukraine into a complete disaster. I mean, the other way of looking at this is that Ukraine wanted to be a sovereign, democratic country after the breakup of the Soviet Union. In fact, vast majority of people in Ukraine voted for that and that this was the complete antithesis of how Putin saw the layover of the land and he thought, no, I'm not having that. I'm going to go and grab Crimea, then I'll grab a load of Ukraine, try it in Georgia. I mean, at what point does he do this stuff where even someone who's trying to be fair minded about his intentions, like yourself, might think, I wonder if I'm right and maybe he is just a pathological liar and a homicidal maniac. Piers. The real screw up by the US was not just pushing NATO, but playing real games and participating in the overthrow of Yanukovych in February 2014. We overthrew a government and the United States played a major role in that. I happened to see some of it firsthand. Pretty ugly, but pretty standard stuff. This is what the US does when it doesn't like a government or a government standing in the way. It stirs things up. It puts in a lot of money, it funds unrest, it stokes unrest. And it did that in February 2014. That was really the huge mistake that was a gambit, a typical so called covert, but not very covert US regime change operation. And it was absolutely the path to the disaster that we're in right now. So I think the main point is you have two sides playing a lot of games. But for the United States to be pushing so hard to Russia's border was absolutely premeditated and stupid, really stupid. It got us into this mess, and you could see it coming so clearly for the last ten years. What is your view of I begged the White House many times, avoid the war, stop. Just tell them NATO is not coming, Ukraine will do just fine. And they wouldn't do it because this has been a 30 year project of the United States also. This is how it works. This has been a long standing game, announced, explained Brzezinski laid it all out for us in 1997. So we've seen it.

Video Transcript AI Summary
Ukraine's decision to give up nuclear weapons and pursue NATO membership is criticized as a mistake. The US is blamed for pushing Ukraine towards NATO and overthrowing Yanukovych in 2014, leading to the current crisis. The speaker urges the White House to avoid war by reassuring Russia that NATO will not expand further. The situation is seen as a result of long-standing US foreign policy goals.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Ukraine wanted to be part of NATO and that perhaps the biggest mistake Ukraine made was to give up its nuclear weapons. Speaker 1: Well, I think the mistake is that Ukraine should have been a neutral buffer between Russia and, and NATO, and that's how it started out as an independent state in 1991. The United States had its eye on getting Ukraine into the US orbit, already from 1992. Zbig Brozhinski spelled it out in 1997. Many people thought this was a path to disaster, and it's turned out to be a path to disaster. So it's very sad. It it could have been peaceful and neutral and independent, and that wasn't good enough for the United States. And, I understand completely why Russia wouldn't want NATO on the 2,000 kilometer border, of Ukraine and Russia. So it it's just very sad, very predictable. George Kennan called it exactly in 1997. Interestingly, our current CIA director, Bill Burns, who was in 2008, the US ambassador to Russia, sent back a famous memo called the means. No. Don't do it. It's not just Putin. It's the entire political class that absolutely rejects, Ukraine and NATO. And we should have been prudent, but we're not very prudent. We had our designs, and we have walked into a disaster. But more than that, we talked Ukraine into a complete disaster. Speaker 0: I I mean, the other way of looking at this is that Ukraine wanted to be a sovereign democratic country after the breakup of the Soviet Union. In fact, vast majority of people in Ukraine voted for that and that this was, the complete antithesis of how Putin saw the lay of the land. And he thought, no, I'm not having that. I'm gonna go and grab Crimea and I'll grab a load of Ukraine, try it in Georgia. I mean, at what point does he do this stuff where even someone who's trying to be fair minded about his intentions, like yourself, might think, I wonder if I'm right, and maybe he is just a pathological liar and a homicidal maniac. Speaker 1: Piers, the, the real screw up by the US was not just pushing NATO, but playing real games and participating in the overthrow of Yanukovych in overthrow of Yanukovych in February 2014, we overthrew a government, and the United States played a major role in that. I happen to see some of it firsthand. Pretty ugly, but pretty standard stuff. This is what the US does. When it doesn't like a government or a government standing in the way, it stirs things up. It puts in a lot of money. It funds unrest. It stokes unrest, and it did that in February 2014. That was really the huge mistake. That was a gambit, a typical so called covert but not very covert US regime change operation, and it was absolutely the path to the disaster that we're in right now. So I think the main point is you have two sides playing a lot of lot of games, but for the United States to be pushing so hard to Russia's border was absolutely premeditated and stupid, really stupid. It got us into this mess, and you could see it coming so clearly for the last 10 years. Speaker 0: What is your view Speaker 1: about it? The White House. Many I beg I beg the White House many times. Avoid the war. Stop. Just tell them NATO's not coming. You know, Ukraine will do just fine, and they wouldn't do it because this has been a 30 year project of the United States also. This is how it works. This has been a a long standing game, announced, explained. Brozinski laid it all out for us, in 1997. So we've seen it.

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

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

The Ukraine - Russian War was planned well in advance. The war in Ukraine will stop when it is stopped by the one who organized it, financed and continues to finance it. This war is provoked and inevitable. Zelensky is a puppet.

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

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

OSCE Reports Reveal Ukraine Started Shelling The Donbas Nine Days Before Russia's 'Special Military Operation' The Biden Administration, U.S. political officials, and the corporate media are lying the American public into World War III. https://kanekoa.substack.com/p/osce-reports-reveal-ukraine-started

OSCE Reports Reveal Ukraine Started Shelling The Donbas Nine Days Before Russia's 'Special Military Operation' The Biden Administration, U.S. political officials, and the corporate media are lying the American public into World War III. kanekoa.news

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

https://t.co/rN1rg2bz2C

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

The US/NATO Orchestration of the 2014 Maidan Coup in Ukraine The Ukraine - Russian War Was Planned Understanding The Roots Of The Russia-Ukraine Conflict Explained By Putin https://t.co/YHodnBWoj8 Putin: We immediately said, "Guys, you can't do this, stop. No, nobody even wanted to listen. They could not fail to realise that this was a red line. We said it a thousand times. No, they did it. So here we have today's situation. And I suspect it was no accident. They needed this conflict.

Video Transcript AI Summary
The video discusses the events leading up to the Ukrainian crisis 10 years ago. It highlights the technical decision made by President Yanukovych to delay the signing of the association agreement with the EU, which sparked protests in Kiev. The video also mentions the involvement of Western countries in supporting the anti-government movement and the subsequent armed opposition in Kiev. It emphasizes the impact of these events on the entire continent and the world. The transcript also includes statements from various leaders and politicians, expressing their opinions on the situation. Overall, the video suggests that the crisis could have been resolved earlier if different approaches had been taken.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Трудно даже поверить. С чего все началось? Хотите жить как в Париже? Хотим. Давайте подписывать. А кто бы сказал? Давайте почитаем. Запад поддержал государственный переворот антиконсульцион. Зачем вы раскалываете страну? Только пусть Янукович не применяет силу, но он не применил. А вооруженная оппозиция в Киеве провела Господа. Как это понимать? Вы кто такие вообще? Там попробуйте, объясните фермерам во Франции, в той же Германии, в Испании, в Греции, в Португалии, в странах юга Европы, что нужно им немножко прижаться в интересах Украины. Я посмотрю на их реакцию, но только не каких-то функционеров, а вот работяг, которые на земле работают. Speaker 1: Слова, сказанные ровно 10 лет назад, кадры сделанные в очередной раз в Speaker 0: последние Speaker 1: украинский кризис перешедший в острую фазу ровно 10 лет назад теперь определяет жизни всего континента да и во многом всего мира Speaker 0: трудно даже поверить с чего все началось С технического решения Президента Януковича перенести подписание договора об ассоциации Украины с Евросоюзом. При этом речь шла даже не об отказе от этого документа, а только о переносе сроков с целью его доработки. Это было сделано, напомню, в полном соответствии с конституционными полномочиями абсолютно легитимного международно признанного главы государства Speaker 1: 8 2013 на украине серьезные экономические сложности и за помощью президент страны янукович обращается главному стратегическому партнеру россии систско-украинские переговоры принесли сегодня сенсационные новости, а события развивались следующим образом: буквально до самого последнего момента вообще не было известно, какие именно документы сегодня будут подписаны и вот за пять минут до начала церемонии нам раздали списки подписанных документов и мы увидели что 14 самым последним пунктом стоит документ под названием Дополнение к контрактам на куплю-продажу газа от января 2009 года. Speaker 0: Который дает возможность Газпрому, что он и намерен делать, продавать на Украину газ по цене 268 с половиной долларов за тысячу кубов. Сейчас эта цена около 400 долларов. Была, можно сказать. С целью поддержки бюджета Украины правительство Российской Федерации приняло решение разместить в ценных бумагах украинского правительства часть своих резервов из фонда национального благосостояния объемом 15 миллиардов долларов США. Хочу обратить Ваше внимание и хочу всех успокоить сегодня мы вообще не обсуждали вопрос о присоединении Украины к таможенному союзу. Speaker 1: Эти слова Путин говорит потому, что украинское общество тогда уже изрядно разогрета обещаниями ассоциации с евросоюзом а взаимодействие с таможенным союзом то есть с россией подается там как некий путь назад в киеве начинаются первые митинги Speaker 0: Киев, давай! Киев, давай! Киев, давай! Speaker 1: Украина це Европа! Украина це Speaker 0: Европа! Говорят, что у украинского народа отбирают мечту, Но если посмотреть на содержание этих соглашений, то до этой мечты многие могут просто не дожить, не дотянуть. Потому что условия очень жесткие. Очень легко спекулировать на этих вопросах. Хотите жить, как в Париже? Хотим. Speaker 1: Давайте Speaker 0: подписывать. Кто бы сказал? Давайте почитаем. Вы читали, что там написано? Нет. Вы читали эту бумагу? Нет. Никто же нифига не читает. Вы хоть читать-то умеете? Посмотрите, что там написано. Рынки открыть, денег нет, нормы и торговые, и технические регламенты вести европейские. Ну значит что, промышленность надо закрыть, Это выбор кого-то? Ну хорошо. Вот если всё это посчитать, взвесить, то тогда и молодые люди вполне могут разобраться в этом и сказать: Да, мы хотим европейских стандартов, но давайте это сделаем таким образом, чтобы предприятия завтра не закрылись машиностроительные, чтобы судостроение осталось на плаву, чтобы авиация не померла, чтобы космическая отрасль не сдохла. Все эти рынки и кооперация в Speaker 1: России. Эти кадры разобраны посекундно, что фиксируют действительно судьбоносные моменты. Лидеры стран Евросоюза, до этого годами рассказывавшие о демократии и праве выбора, устраивают публичную порку президенту независимой страны януковичу за принятые им решения Speaker 0: украина приостанавливает, не прекращает, а приостанавливает процесс подписания договора с Евросоюзом и хочет все, что называется, посчитать как следует. По сути, мы услышали угрозы со стороны наших европейских партнеров в отношении Украины, вплоть до способствования проведению акций протеста. Вот это и есть давление, вот это и есть шантаж. Speaker 1: Многие жители украины россии недоумевают по поводу все новых и новых кадров из Киева митинги становятся все агрессивнее в центре столицы неприкрыто начинают действовать боевики. Speaker 0: Все что сейчас происходит говорит о том что это не революция, а хорошо подготовленная акция. Эти акции, на мой взгляд, были подготовлены не к сегодняшнему дню, они готовились к президентской выборной кампании весны 2015 года. Просто это небольшой фальш-старт, но это все заготовки к президентским выборам. Хорошо подготовленные и обученные группы боевиков, на самом деле. Вы за или против подписания Украиной соглашения об ассоциации с Европейским Союзом? Мы не за и не против, это вообще не наше дело, это суверенное право украинского народа, украинского руководства, лице президента, парламента и правительства. Правительства. Если бы нам сказали, что Украина в НАТО вступает, тогда мы были бы против реально, потому что продвижение к нашим границам инфраструктуры военного блока для нас представляет опасность Speaker 1: экономические вопросы раз за разом подчеркивает путин суверенное дело украинского руководства но невозможно не учитывать серьезнейшие связи предприятия России и Украины. Speaker 0: Я бы попросил наших друзей в Брюсселе воздержаться от резких выражений, Что, нам для того, чтобы им понравиться, нужно удавить целые отраслью нашей экономики? И я бы полагал, что нужно деполитизировать эту тему, согласиться с предложением Президента Януковича и в трехстороннем формате как следует и обстоятельно на эти все темы поговорить. Speaker 1: В здании европейской комиссии на множестве телевизоров с пометкой горячая новость постоянно идут трансляции с украины январь 14 года руководство Еврокомиссии призывают януковича к сдержанности настаивает на неприменении силы против боевиков на улицах но не видит ничего странного в том что в акциях на майдане против легитимной власти участвуют высокопоставленные западные политики и Speaker 2: меньше на украина ди всем утичкима Люди на Украине, которые так мужественно вышли на улицы и провели демонстрации, вызывают у нас огромное уважение. Впечатляет сколько людей демонстрируют, что они хотят быть ближе к Европейскому Союзу в рамках закона на основе демократических процессов. Speaker 3: Все, что происходит это воплощение надежд Сирии и Украины, их жажды свободы, честных выборов и усталости от взяточничества. Я могу себе представить, как Speaker 0: бы наши европейские партнеры отреагировали, если бы в разгар кризиса, скажем, в Греции либо на Кипре на одном из митингов антиевропейских появился бы наш министр иностранных дел и начал бы обращаться с какими-то призывами. Наши друзья, европейские тоже, обратились с призывом к Президенту, к Правительству не допускать применения силы и так далее. Применение силы это всегда крайняя мера, я с ними согласен абсолютно. Но, знаете, мы сегодня в ходе беседы, я тоже об этом сказал, на Западной Украине священнослужитель призывает толпу ехать в Киев и громить правительство и дальше аргументация чтобы в нашем доме не командовали негры москали то есть русские и жиды вы знаете, это крайне удивительно, что это делает представитель религиозной деятельности а во-вторых это ведь крайнее проявление национализма абсолютно неприемлемое в цивилизованном мире и призывая украинское правительство и президент Януковича действовать цивилизованными методами мы должны обратить внимание и на его политических противников призвать и их тоже придерживаться методов цивилизованной политической борьбы Speaker 1: сейчас почему-то не принято вспоминать но вообще-то массовые беспорядки еще в январе 14 года начались не на донбассе а на западе украины винница штурм здания областной администрации и здесь и в же томире параллельно погромы в Ровно Захват административного здания в Черновцах. Драки и штурм в Черкассах. И вот уже половине страны захвачена власть донбасс тогда молчит наблюдает ждет когда по закону будет наведен порядок в россии тоже надеются на нормализации обстановки в братской стране сочи стартуют олимпийские игры которым россии готовилась долгие 7 лет. Украинские, белорусские и российские спортсмены в олимпийской деревне живут все вместе. Белорусскую сборную на Олимпиаде поддержит президент Александр лукашенко украинский лидер также приедет сочи путин проводит отдельную встречу с украинской олимпийской сборной желает спортсменам успехов Speaker 0: очень хорошая атмосфера создается болельщиками вот конечно болеет за своих но в целом очень желательно и поддерживать всех спортсменов в том числе и других команд страшно все подобрано неожиданно Speaker 1: из Киева начинают приходить совсем уж страшные кадры стрельба убийства массовые Speaker 0: жертвы Speaker 1: С Киева начинают приходить совсем уж страшные кадры стрельба убийства массовые жертвы с момента переворота в Киеве это первый большой публичный комментарий российского президента о произошедшем и происходящем. Speaker 0: Это антиконституционный переворот и вооруженный захват власти. А что было проще сказать в тот момент времени? Вы там переворот совершили? Нет, мы же гаранты, министр иностранных дел Польши, Франции, Германии, как гаранты подписали документ соглашение между президентом Януковичем и оппозицией. Через три дня все это растоптали. А где гаранты? Спросите у них, где они эти гаранты. Почему они не сказали: Ну-ка, пожалуйста, назад все вернитесь. Януковича верните назад! И проводите конституционные демократические выборы. Speaker 4: Я подписал это соглашение, вместе с ними поставил свою подпись, Но я не услышал от них даже слов осуждения в сторону бандитов, которые стреляли в мой кортеж, в мою охрану, и не один раз. Speaker 0: Нам все время говорили, только пусть Янукович не применяет силу, только пусть не применяет силу, но он не применил. Speaker 3: Важно также убедиться в том, что украинские военные не будут вовлечены в кризис, который должен быть разрешен гражданским обществом. Speaker 0: 21 числа вечером мне президент Обама позвонил, мы с ним обсудили эти вопросы, сказали о том, как мы будем способствовать исполнению этих договорённостей, Россия взяла на себя определённые обязательства. Я услышал, что мой американский коллега готов взять на себя определенные обязательства. Это все было 21 вечером. В тот же день мне позвонил Президент Янукович, сказал, что он подписал, считает, что ситуация стабилизировалась, и он собирается поехать в Харьков на конференцию. Не скрою, это не секрет, я выразил определенную озабоченность, сказал, возможно ли в такой ситуации покидать столицу. Он ответил, что считает возможным, поскольку есть документ, подписанный с оппозиции, и министр иностранных дел европейских стран выступили гарантами исполнения этой договоренности. Скажу вам еще больше. Я ему ответил, что я сомневаюсь в том, что все так будет хорошо, но это его дело, он же в конце концов президент, он чувствует ситуацию, ему виднее, как поступать. Во всяком случае, мне кажется, нельзя выводить силу правопорядка из Киева, сказал ему я. Он сказал: Да, конечно, это я понимаю. Уехал и дал команду вывести все силы правопорядка из Киева. Красавец Леша. Я Speaker 4: верил в порядочность иностранных посредников. Меня не просто обманули, меня цинично обманули, но не меня обманули, обманули весь украинский народ. Speaker 0: Янукович свою власть практически сдал. Он согласился на все, что требовала оппозиция. Он согласился на досрочные выборы парламента, на досрочные выборы Президента, согласился вернуться к Конституции 2004 года. Вы там Януковича успокоите, а мы успокоим оппозицию. Янукович не применил, как просили нас американцы, ни вооруженных сил, ни полиции. А вооруженная оппозиция в Киеве провела госпереворот. Как это понимать? Вы кто такие вообще? Неохота здесь камеры работают, жесты определенные показывать. Вы понимаете, какие жесты мне сейчас хочется показать. Вот что они нам показали. Поняли, что окончательно свинтить Украину под себя исключительно политическими средствами не удается, совершили госпереворот, лишили нас шансов нормальным политическим образом выстраивать отношения с этой страной. Они действовали и пошли, как у нас в народе говорят, простите за моветон, по беспределу просто. Уже началась гражданская война и хаос. Кому это, зачем это надо было делать, если Янукович и так со всем согласился? Надо было пойти на выборы, и те же люди пришли бы сейчас к власти только легальным путем. Мы, как идиоты, платили бы 15 миллиардов, которые обещали, держали бы низкие цены на газ, дальше продолжали субсидировать экономику. И давайте прямо, здесь же все взрослые люди, правильно, умные, грамотные люди. Запад поддержал государственный переворот антиконстуционный. Что дальше? Вот смотрите, госпереворот совершили, с нами разговаривать не хотят, у нас какие мысли? Следующий шаг Украина в НАТО. Мы считаем, что с нами пытались разговаривать с помощью силы, и что мы, именно действуя в такой логике, дали адекватные ответы. Мы не создавали этого кризиса, мы были противниками такого развития событий. Не мы же там пирожки раздавали повстанцам на этот счет. Да, мы понимаем, там сложные процессы, но не таким же образом их нужно решать, причём где? Прямо у наших границ. Но вы где находитесь? За тысячи километров? А мы здесь? Это наша Земля. Вы за что хотите там бороться? Не знаете? А мы знаем, и мы на это готовы. Я бы никогда не стал этого делать, если бы не считал, что мы обязаны поступить именно таким образом. Что касается хронологии событий, то сначала произошел государственный переворот и захват власти, и вот с этого момента наши взгляды и пути с руководством Украины стали диаметрально противоположными. С этого момента мы с ними разошлись. Но после этого Крым вернулся в состав Российской Федерации, а не наоборот. Так что у нас отношения испортились с Украиной, с Крымом в принципе не связано. Мы разве какие-то операции в Крыму или где-то еще проводили с нормальной страной и с нормальной властью? Нет, никогда этого не делали, в голове даже этого не держали. Но зачем же западные страны поддержали государственный переворот? С этого момента для нас власть на Украине источник власти, госпереворот, а не воля народа. Speaker 1: Откуда вам это известно? Очень просто, Speaker 0: потому что люди, которые живут на Украине, у нас с ними тысяча совместных всяких контактов и тысяча связей И мы знаем, кто, где, когда встречался, работал с теми людьми, которые свергали Януковича, как их поддерживали, сколько платили, как готовили, на каких территориях, в каких странах и кто были эти инструкторы. Мы все знаем. Speaker 1: Вы уважаете суверенитет Украины? Speaker 0: Конечно. Но мы хотели бы, чтобы и другие страны уважали суверенитет других стран, в том числе и Украины. А уважать суверенитет это значит не допускать государственных переворотов. Это кто делал? Американские наши дружки. А европейцы, которые подписались как гаранты договоренности между властью и оппозицией, сделали вид, что вообще ничего не знают. С этого всё началось. Сейчас говорят: ну давайте об этом не будем вспоминать. Нет, будем помнить об этом всегда, потому что в этом причина, и причина в тех людях, которые способствовали этому перевороту. Но Speaker 1: даже после сотен жертв, документальных кадров кровавых побоищ, та же Меркель, и спустя годы, публично говорила: Speaker 2: Мы считаем, что украинское правительство пришло к власти демократическим путем. Speaker 0: Если мы будем вот так вот с разными стандартами подходить к одинаковым явлениям, что мы никогда ни о чем не сможем договориться. Мы должны утвердить, в конце концов, не право сильного и право кулака в международных делах, а нормы международного права. Speaker 1: -Конфликт на Украине и вокруг нее, который разгорелся ровно 10 лет назад, который сейчас поставил мир на грань третьей мировой войны, мог быть урегулирован еще тогда, в феврале 14-го. Speaker 0: Вы же сразу сказали: ребята, так нельзя, остановитесь. Нет, никто ее слушать не хотел. Они же не могли не понимать, что это красная черта, мы тысячу раз об этом сказали, нет, полезли. Вот мы получили сегодняшнюю ситуацию. Я подозреваю, что не случайно им нужен был этот конфликт. Speaker 1: В результате сша разорвали связи россии и европы разожгли вооруженный конфликт между братскими народами но и по своему положению в мире нанесли такой удар от которого некогда глобальный лидер уже вряд ли когда-либо оправиться

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

https://t.co/VdXEQCpDok

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

They promised NATO would not expand to the East! At the🇩🇪reunification meeting (GDR and FRG) in 1990,🇩🇪Foreign Minister Hans-Dietrich Genscher told his US counterpart, James Baker, that NATO would not expand to the East. Present also is E. Schevardnadze, Soviet Foreign Minister. https://t.co/pIvSMNMQfi

Video Transcript AI Summary
The West promised not to expand NATO eastward in exchange for German reunification. The then Foreign Minister in Washington made significant commitments, stating that there was no intention to extend the defense area to the east, not just in relation to East Germany, but in general.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Im Gegenzug zur deutschen Einheit verspricht der Westen, die NATO nicht weiter nach Osten vorrücken zu lassen. In Washington macht der damalige Außenminister weitreichende Zusagen. Speaker 1: Wir waren uns einig, dass nicht die Absicht besteht, das Radioverteidigungsgebiet auszudehnen nach Osten. Das gilt übrigens nicht nur in Bezug auf die DDR, die wir da nicht einverleiben wollen, sondern das gilt ganz generell.
EdKrassen
Posted - April 17, 2024 at 1:14 PM
Saved - November 22, 2024 at 1:04 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
I've noticed many Republicans defending Putin, claiming he has no intentions of rebuilding the Soviet Union and that NATO is provoking him. However, former President George W. Bush has clearly debunked this. Putin's true goal is to rebuild Russia by reclaiming former Soviet territories. Ignoring this is disingenuous.

@EdKrassen - Ed Krassenstein

Many Republicans seemingly defend Putin and Russia by claiming that Putin doesn't have any goals to rebuild the Soviet Union and instead it's NATO that is forcing his hand. Recently former President George W. Bush completely debunked that ridiculous myth. We all know what Putin wants. He wants to rebuild Russia. He wants to build his nation by invading former Soviet territory and getting it back. That's his main goal. If you pretend otherwise, you are being disingenuous.

Video Transcript AI Summary
The notion that Ukraine's potential NATO membership triggered Putin's invasion is misleading. This idea serves as a convenient excuse for both Putin's supporters and critics of U.S. policy. Putin's ambitions have long been evident; he has always sought to restore Russia's power and glory. His motivations are rooted in a desire for empire-building rather than a reaction to NATO. The narrative that NATO provoked this aggression is far from the truth.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Some people would say that the idea that, Ukraine might become a member of NATO is what propelled Putin forward from this invasion. Yeah. They have looked in his eyes and seen his soul, you know. He he he this is an empire builder. It had nothing to do. It's a convenient excuse for, Putin's people and, and critics of US policy. And now this was not provocative. He he he told me that his dog was bigger than my dog way before, the opportunity to get to NATO, and I say that seriously that this this has been on his mind. The the fact that he was part of a diminished power, and he wanted to, reinstate Russian glory. And so I I find that I don't think that's anything close to the truth.
dbenner83
Posted - November 12, 2024 at 12:13 AM
Saved - November 12, 2024 at 7:57 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
I watched Jeffrey Sachs explain how the US and NATO provoked the war in Ukraine, tracing back to promises made in 1990 that NATO wouldn’t expand eastward. He detailed the NATO expansion starting in 1999, US actions in Serbia, and the regime change in Ukraine in 2014. He emphasized that the narrative of Putin as a madman is misleading. Supporting evidence includes documents confirming the US's commitment against NATO expansion, which has been overlooked by the media. Even NATO's own leaders acknowledged Russia's concerns about NATO's eastward movement.

@dbenner83 - Dave Benner, Nemesis of Neocons

🚨 WATCH: Jeffrey Sachs tells the cold, hard truth how the US and NATO provoked war in Ukraine in 4 minutes "It started in 1990, when US Secretary of State James Baker said to Mikhail Gorbachev that NATO would not move one inch eastward... The US then cheated on this, starting in 1994, when Clinton signed off on a plan to expand NATO all the way to Ukraine. The expansion of NATO started in 1999 with Poland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic. Then, the US led the bombing of Serbia in 1999. That was the use of NATO to bomb a European capital for 78 straight days to break the country apart. The Russians didn't like that very much, but even Putin started out pro-European and pro-American. He considered whether to join NATO when there was still the idea of some kind of mutually respectful relationship. In 2002, the US unilaterally walked out of the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty. What it did was trigger the US putting in missile systems in Eastern Europe that Russia views as a dire, direct threat to national security, by making possible a decapitation strike of missiles that are a few minutes away from Moscow. In 2004-2005, the US engaged in a soft regime change in Ukraine, the so-called First Color Revolution. In 2009, Yanukovych won the election and became president in 2010 on the basis of neutrality in Ukraine. In 2014, the US participated actively in the overthrow of Yanukovych. Nuland and the US Ambassador to Ukraine...talked about regime change. So they made the new government! The US then said 'now NATO's really going to enlarge.' Putin kept saying 'stop, you promised no NATO enlargement.' Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Bulgaria, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, seven more countries in the 'not one inch eastward.' In 2021, Putin put on the table a draft Russian-US security agreement. The basis of it was no NATO enlargement. The special military operations started, and five days later Zelenskyy said 'okay, okay, neutrality.' And then the US and Britain said no way, you guys fight on. We've got your back. That's 600,000 deaths now of Ukrainians since Boris Johnson flew to Kyiv to tell them to be brave. Absolutely ghastly. We're not dealing with, as we're told every day, this madman like Hitler. This is complete bogus, fake history that is a purely PR narrative of the US government. We're playing games here. So God forbid a nuclear power comes at us. I don't know what's going to happen, but we came at them."

Video Transcript AI Summary
The Ukraine war's roots trace back to 1990, when the U.S. promised not to expand NATO eastward in exchange for German unification. However, NATO began expanding in 1999, leading to tensions with Russia. Initially, Putin was open to cooperation, but U.S. actions, including withdrawing from the anti-ballistic missile treaty and supporting regime change in Ukraine, heightened distrust. In 2014, the U.S. played a role in the overthrow of Ukraine's elected president, Yanukovych, despite Russian objections to NATO's expansion. In December 2021, Putin proposed a security agreement to halt NATO enlargement, but the U.S. rejected it. The conflict escalated, resulting in significant Ukrainian casualties, while the narrative of a madman in Putin is seen as misleading. The situation reflects a complex geopolitical struggle rather than a simple attack.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Let me just explain in 2 minutes the Ukraine war. This is not an attack by Putin on Ukraine in the way that we are told every day. This started in 1990. James Baker the 3rd, our secretary of state, said to Mikhail Gorbachev, NATO will not move 1 inch eastward if you agree to German unification. The US then cheated on this already starting in 1994 when Clinton signed off on a plan to expand NATO all the way to Ukraine. This is when the so called neocons took power. The expansion of NATO started in 1999 with Poland, Hungary, and Czech Republic. Then, the US, led the bombing of Serbia in 1999. That was a use of NATO to bomb a European capital, Belgrade, 78 straight days to break the country apart. The Russians didn't like that very much. But even Putin started out pro European, pro American, actually asked maybe we should join NATO, when there was still the idea of some kind of mutually respectful relationship. 911 came, then came, Afghanistan, and the Russians said, yeah. We'll support you. We understand to root out terror. In 2002, the United States unilaterally walked out of the anti ballistic missile treaty. What it did was trigger the US putting in missile systems in Eastern Europe that Russia views as a dire direct threat to national security by making possible a decapitation strike of missiles that are a few minutes away from Moscow. In 2,004, 5, we engaged in a soft regime change operation in Ukraine, the so called first color revolution. But in 2009, Yanukovych won the election, and he became president. And in 2010, on the basis of neutrality for Ukraine. So in February 22, 2014, the United States participated actively in the overthrow of Yanukovych. They intercepted a really ugly call between Victoria Nuland and the US ambassador to Ukraine, Jeffrey Piatt, who's a senior state department official till today. And they talked about regime change. So they made the new government. The US then said, okay. Now NATO's really gonna enlarge, and Putin kept saying, stop. You promised no NATO enlargement. Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Bulgaria, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, 7 more countries in the not 1 inch eastward. On December 15, 2021, Putin put on the table a draft Russia US security agreement. The basis of it is no NATO enlargement. The special military operation started, and 5 days later, Zelensky says, okay. Okay. Neutrality. And then the United States and Britain said, no way. You guys fight on. We got your back. We don't have your front. You're all gonna die, but we got your back. That's 600,000 deaths now of Ukrainians since Boris Johnson flew to Kyiv to tell them to be brave. Absolutely ghastly. We have to understand we're not dealing with, as we're told every day, with this madman like Hitler. This is complete bogus fake history that is a purely PR narrative of the US government. We're playing games here. So God forbid, a nuclear power comes at us. I don't know what's gonna happen, but we came at them.

@dbenner83 - Dave Benner, Nemesis of Neocons

Neocons and NATO shills insist that Gorbachev denied that the US promised not to move NATO eastward, and he did...at times. At other points, he said the opposite, like in this quote. Thankfully, we still have the minutes from the conference to prove it was indeed promised. https://t.co/hUQEEsil2d

Video Transcript AI Summary
Gorbachev has made various statements that seem contradictory. While he has quoted promises made by Americans regarding NATO not expanding beyond Germany after the Cold War, the reality is that many Central and Eastern European countries are now NATO members. This raises questions about trustworthiness. Gorbachev's comments suggest he acknowledges these broken promises, though he may not directly reference Baker’s quote. Ultimately, there are documented minutes from meetings that clarify what was discussed, providing a clearer understanding of the commitments made at that time.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Okay. So here's listen. I get your point there, and particularly the Gorby quote I've heard a lot. There's lots of other, quotes from Gorbachev. So here's another one. Okay? Yeah. And this is it just flies in the face of that one. Right? So clearly, he's on both sides, and I'll send you the link if you want. No. There is there are there are other Gorbachev. Go ahead. The Americans promised that NATO would wouldn't move beyond the boundaries of Germany after the Cold War, but now half of Central and Eastern Europe are members. So what happened to their promises? It shows they cannot be trusted. So Gorbachev the Gorbachev may not be referring exactly to that Baker quote. Well, okay. But he's making the point that this was promised. Okay. So Now he's so he's kind of contradicted himself in several different areas. The fact is that you can look at what he said here or look at what he said there. But this is Or you can read the minutes of the meeting, which we have. This So we know exactly what we said. Might be for you.

@dbenner83 - Dave Benner, Nemesis of Neocons

Thanks to a document that resurfaced in 2022, we know that the German diplomat made clear that the Western alliance promised not to move NATO beyond the Elbe and excluded "Poland and the others." This destroys the claim that Baker's comments pertained only to Germany. https://t.co/Hw8rOKHBzq

@dbenner83 - Dave Benner, Nemesis of Neocons

Baker's promise not to move NATO "one inch eastward" is a documented fact in the public record. Source: George H.W. Bush Presidential Library, NSC Scowcroft Files, Box 91128, Folder “Gorbachev (Dobrynin) Sensitive.” https://t.co/8NP3ZJOIOs

@dbenner83 - Dave Benner, Nemesis of Neocons

This fact was widely acknowledged until recent years, when the corporate media swept it under the rug or called it "disinformation." There was a time when the top diplomats and the coldest Cold Warriors in the US warned against NATO expansion. https://t.co/0wxFeS553n

@dbenner83 - Dave Benner, Nemesis of Neocons

NATO, Ukraine, and the revival of Cold War tensions with Russia have been hot topics recently, but did you know that prominent diplomats and the coldest US Cold Warriors warned against expanding NATO before the first wave of expansion in the 1990s? 🧵 https://t.co/xvDv5WmPXh

@dbenner83 - Dave Benner, Nemesis of Neocons

Even the head of NATO at the time, Jens Stoltenberg, admitted that Putin drew up a draft treaty insisting on no NATO expansion eastward. Then he bragged about how NATO defied his wishes. Basically what they call us "conspiracy theorists" for saying. https://t.co/nAcZLAVNQi

@dbenner83 - Dave Benner, Nemesis of Neocons

"Putin sent a draft treaty that he wanted NATO to sign to promise no more NATO enlargement, and that was a precondition for him not to invade Ukraine." Said by a Russian agent, right? Nope, that was NATO General Secretary Jens Stoltenberg. https://t.co/bcJsDjK0qS

Video Transcript AI Summary
In autumn 2021, President Putin proposed a draft treaty demanding NATO promise not to expand further and to withdraw military infrastructure from Eastern European member states. This was presented as a condition to avoid invading Ukraine. NATO rejected these demands, leading to increased military presence in Eastern Europe instead. Ultimately, Putin's actions resulted in the opposite of his intentions, with NATO expanding closer to Russia's borders.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: President Putin declared in the autumn of 2021 and actually sent a draft treaty that they wanted NATO to sign to promise no more NATO enlargement. That was what what he sent us. And that was that that was a precondition for not invade, Ukraine. Of course, we didn't sign that. The opposite happened. He wanted us to sign a promise never to enlarge NATO. He wanted us to remove our military infrastructure in in all allies that have joined NATO since 1997, meaning half of NATO, all the Central and Eastern Europe. We should remove NATO from from that of of our alliance, introducing some kind of E and B or second class membership. We rejected that. So he went to war to prevent, NATO, more NATO close to its borders. He has he he has got the exact opposite. He has got more NATO presence in the eastern part of the alliance.
MyLordBebo
Posted - January 24, 2025 at 9:33 PM
Saved - January 26, 2025 at 10:52 AM

@MyLordBebo - Lord Bebo

🇷🇺🇺🇦Full interview with Putin today. He talks about that the war wouldn’t have happened if Trump’s election wouldn’t be stolen, willingness to negotiate with Ukraine and the problems with it, sanctions and much more. https://t.co/Xheth1kad6

Video Transcript AI Summary
Вопрос о возможной встрече с президентом США Трампом и украинском урегулировании остается актуальным. Россия не отказывалась от контактов с США, хотя предыдущая администрация их избегала. Трамп и я имели деловые, доверительные отношения. Если бы он был президентом в 2020 году, возможно, кризиса в Украине удалось бы избежать. Однако его администрация также вводила санкции против России, что не способствовало интересам обеих стран. Мы открыты к переговорам по украинской проблематике, но действующий запрет на переговоры со стороны Киева создает препятствия. Существуют точки соприкосновения между нашими странами в вопросах стратегической стабильности и экономики. Мы готовы к диалогу, но это зависит от выбора американской администрации. --- The question of a possible meeting with President Trump and the Ukrainian settlement remains relevant. Russia has not refused contacts with the US, although the previous administration avoided them. Trump and I had business, trusting relations. If he had been president in 2020, the crisis in Ukraine might have been avoided. However, his administration also imposed sanctions on Russia, which did not serve the interests of both countries. We are open to negotiations on the Ukrainian issue, but the current ban on negotiations from Kyiv creates obstacles. There are points of convergence between our countries on strategic stability and economic issues. We are ready for dialogue, but this depends on the choice of the American administration.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Пожалуйста, можно один очень важный вопрос, Владимир Владимирович? Извините, пожалуйста, капитан Анатольевич. За последние дни вступивший в должность президент США Трамп сделал множество самых разных заявлений о возможной встрече с вами и о перспективах украинского урегулирования. Хотелось узнать Speaker 1: ваше мнение. Действительно, президент сделал Соединенные Штаты много по этому поводу заявлений. Во-первых, хочу сказать, что Россия никогда не отказалась от контактов с администрацией Соединенных Штатов. И не наша вина в том, что прежняя администрация от этих контактов отказалась. С нынешним президентом США у меня всегда были деловые, исключительно деловые, но в то же время прамматические отношения и доверительные, я бы сказал. Я не могу не согласиться с ним в том, что если бы он был президентом, если бы у него в 2020 году не украли победу, то может быть и не было бы того кризиса на Украине, который возник в 2022 году. Хотя известно, что Трамп, будучи президентом, в первой своей итерации ввел тоже значительное количество на тот момент самое большое количество ограничений, санкций против России. Не думаю, что это было решением, которое соответствовало интересам не только России, но и самих Соединенных Штатов. Кстати говоря, Байден подхватил эту эстафетную палочку и вводил еще больше ограничений, а результат известен. Очень много решений вредных для экономики самих Соединенных Штатов, например, подтачивание могущества самого доллара, потому что запрет России использовать доллар, а мы не отказывались от доллара, это администрация прежняя не дала нам возможность использовать доллар в качестве расчетной единицы. Он, на мой взгляд, наносит это решение наносит очень серьезный урон самим Соединенным Штатам. Но сейчас вдаваться в это не будем, но могу только сказать, что что мы видим заявление действующего президента о готовности к совместной работе. Мы всегда для этого открыты. Что касается вопроса связанного, скажем, с переговорами, тоже в этом смысле мы всегда говорили, хочу это подчеркнуть еще раз, мы готовы к этим переговорам по украинской проблематике, но здесь тоже есть вопросы, которые требуют особого внимания. Например, как известно, действующий глава режима в Киеве, когда еще был достаточно легитимным главой государства, издал декрет о запрете ведения переговоров. Как же сейчас можно возобновлять переговоры, если они запрещены? Вот мы сейчас находимся в стенах Московского университета, я по базовому образованию, как известно юрист, закончил юридический факультет Петербургского, тогда Ленинградского университета. Я могу вам сказать, что если в рамках действующей нормативной базы переговоры начнутся, то они будут, строго говоря, нелегитимными. А это значит, что и результаты этих переговоров можно будет объявить нелегитимными. Действующий режим в Киеве с удовольствием получает сотни миллиардов от своих спонсоров. Извините за простоту выражений, за простоту народных выражений, как у нас говорят в народе хомячат с удовольствием эти сотни миллиардов за обе щеки, но выполнять указания своих спонсоров а мы знаем, что такие указания есть отменять принятый указ о запрете переговоров не спешит. Я думаю, что в конце концов те, кто платит деньги, должны все-таки заставить его это сделать. И думаю, что ему это сделать придется. Но пока этот декрет не отменен, говорить о том, что могут быть начаты и, самое главное, закончены должным образом эти переговоры, достаточно сложно. Какие-то предварительные наметки, конечно, можно сделать, но серьезных переговорах, о серьезных переговорах, конечно, в условиях запрета с украинской стороны вести эти переговоры, конечно, в условиях этого запрета говорить о чем-то серьезном достаточно сложно. А в целом у нас, конечно, с действующей администрацией может быть достаточно много точек соприкосновения, поиска решения по ключевым вопросам сегодняшнего дня. Это и вопросы стратегической стабильности, это вопросы экономики, кстати говоря. Ну почему? Мы одни из крупнейших производителей в мире, скажем, нефти. США сейчас вообще занимает первое место, потом Саудовская Аравия, Россия. Но что характерно для российской и, допустим, американской экономик: мы не просто одни из крупнейших производителей энергоресурсов, мы еще и крупнейшие потребители энергоресурсов. А это значит, что как для нашей, так и для американской экономики И слишком высокие цены плохо, потому что производить надо внутри страны. Используя это используя энергоносители, нужно производить другие товары внутри страны. И слишком низкие цены тоже очень плохо, потому что это подрывает инвестиционные возможности энергетических компаний. Здесь есть о чем нам поговорить, есть и другие вопросы в сфере энергетики, которые могут представлять взаимный интерес. Я, кстати говоря, в этом смысле сомневаюсь, чтобы действующий президент Соединенных Штатов господин Трамп, повторяю, еще мы с ним работали в первый его период президентства, чтобы он принял какие-то решения, даже если мы слышим о возможности введения дополнительных санкций в отношении России. Я сомневаюсь, что он будет принимать такие решения, которые будут наносить вред самой американской экономике. Он человек не только умный, он прагматичный человек. Я с трудом себе представляю, что будут решения приняты, наносящие ущерб самой американской экономике. Поэтому, скорее всего, действительно, нам лучше встретиться, опираясь на реалии сегодняшнего дня, поговорить спокойно по всем тем направлениям, которые представляют интерес как для США, так и для России. Мы готовы, но, повторю, это прежде всего, конечно, зависит от решения и выбора действующей американской администрации.
RT_com
Posted - July 20, 2025 at 2:22 PM
Saved - July 21, 2025 at 11:52 AM

@RT_com - RT

US is running out of options in Russia because its economy is not what we thought it was — Tucker Carlson 'We underestimated and just didn't really understand the nature of the Russian economy, Russian civilization' 'In the end, we hurt ourselves more than we hurt Russia' https://t.co/Uso6iBQe4z

@RT_com - RT

Putin has done a great job for Russia. Much better job than any German leader — Tucker Carlson 'Your country is going down. Russia's going up. You should be mad at your own leaders. You're mad at Putin instead' Adds that 'Merkel wrecked Germany through mass migration' ‘ by https://t.co/gUEcNfLu5o

JohnMcCloy
Posted - August 15, 2025 at 5:54 PM
Saved - August 17, 2025 at 7:14 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
In an interview with Oliver Stone, Putin expressed his belief that the Cold War had ended but revealed U.S. support for Muslim Chechens to destabilize Russia. He recounted how George Bush was upset upon learning this but received a dismissive response from the CIA. Putin criticized Gorbachev for not securing a written agreement on NATO expansion. He emphasized the desire for a unipolar world led by the U.S. This context fuels my belief that forces are working against President Trump’s peace efforts, as he embodies a threat to the elite. I believe Trump will be remembered as a great president and that the upcoming Anchorage summit will be historic.

@JohnMcCloy - Johnny St.Pete

🔥WOW. Putin tells Oliver Stone during an interview that he believed that Cold War was over but then reveals that our United States OPS were supporting the MUSLIM Chechens to destabilize Russia. When he brought it up to George Bush w/ names & proof he said Bush was upset to find this out and said he would look into it. Instead he got a letter from the CIA that told him to kick rocks lol. He then goes on to criticize Gorbachev for never getting in writing the agreement for NATO promising to stop expanding. One of the most telling parts is at the end when giving a speech in Munich in 2007 to Security Conference w/ European and American leaders he highlights the desire for implies essentially the U.S./NATO/EU to have ONE UNIPOLAR CENTER OF AUTHORITY, FORCE & DECISION MAKING…ONE MASTER..ONE SOVEREIGN… This is why I firmly believe there are many forces trying to Prevent President Trump making peace. And it also underscores why they hate populism and Trump represents a threat to the elite cabal. Nothing else explains WHY he has been treated this way for decades. He also represents US and our freedoms and liberty. President Trump will go down as our greatest President & I believe he learned so much from his first term that we will make peace despite the forces against him. Anchorage is going to be a historic summit and we are WALKING IN HISTORY.

Video Transcript AI Summary
Автор утверждает, что во времена проблем на Кавказе США поддержали эти процессы и что, хотя Холодная война прошла, американские спецслужбы якобы поддерживали террористов для раскачки внутри России. Партнёры на словах обещали сотрудничество и борьбу с терроризмом, но на деле использовали террористов; есть доказательства оперативной и финансовой поддержки, включая случаи, когда называли фамилии сотрудников США, перемещавших боевиков. Буш заявил: «Я с этим разберусь». Позже пришло письмо из Центрального управления США, где коллеги считают себя вправе поддерживать отношения со всеми представителями оппозиции и будут это делать дальше. Речь идёт о террористических структурах, а не об оппозиции. Об объединении Германии: восточная граница НАТО не зафиксирована на бумаге; Горбачёв сделал ошибку. НАТО нужен внешний враг; создаётся образ противостояния между блоками: Варшавский договор и Советский Союз исчезли. The author argues that during problems in the Caucasus the United States supported these processes and that, although the Cold War has ended, American intelligence allegedly supported terrorists to destabilize Russia from within. Partners publicly promised cooperation and the fight against terrorism, but in reality used terrorists; there is evidence of operational and financial support, including cases where the names of U.S. personnel moving fighters were cited. Bush stated: 'I will deal with this.' Later came a letter from the Central Administration of the United States, where colleagues claim they are entitled to maintain relations with all opposition figures and will continue to do so. The discussion concerns terrorist structures, not opposition. On German reunification: the eastern border of NATO was not fixed on paper; Gorbachov made a mistake. NATO needs an external enemy; a confrontation between blocs is being constructed: the Warsaw Pact and the Soviet Union disappeared.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Когда у нас начались проблемы в Чечне, на Кавказе на Северном, к сожалению, американцы поддержали эти процессы. Холодная война вошла в прошлое, у нас ясные, прозрачные отношения со всем миром, с Европой, с Соединенными Штатами. И, конечно, мы рассчитывали на поддержку. Вместо этого мы увидели, что американские спецслужбы как раз поддерживают террористов. И я вам сейчас скажу, на мой взгляд, важную вещь. У нас сложилось абсолютно устойчивое мнение, тогда, не нам, тогда, Что наши партнеры американские на словах говорят о поддержке России, говорят о необходимой готовности к сотрудничеству, в том числе о борьбе с терроризмом, а на самом деле используют этих террористов для раскачки внутриполитической ситуации в России. Ведь вторая, так называемая, Вторая чеченская война началась с того, что именно народ, гражданские лица в Дагестане, а это тоже мусульманская республика, взяли в руки оружие и Speaker 1: оказали сопротивление, дали отпор. Speaker 0: Конечно, но что касается информационной и политической поддержки, то это не доказательствах, это было очевидно для всех. Это же публично делалось открыто. А что касается оперативной поддержки, финансовой, у нас есть такие доказательства. Более того, некоторые из мы представили нашим американским коллегам. Был даже такой момент, когда я к президенту Бушу сказал об этом и показал им. Он назвал даже фамилии сотрудников спецслужб США, которые работали на Кавказе и не просто оказывали какую-то общую политическую поддержку, а оказывали техническую поддержку. Перебрасывали боевиков из одного места на другой шанс. Реакция президента США была очень правильной и очень негативной. Она сказала: Я с этим разберусь. Мы позднее получили по партнерским каналам действительно письмо из Центрального развития управления США, в котором было указано, что наши коллеги считают себя вправе поддерживать отношения со всеми представителями оппозиции и будут это делать дальше. Ясно было, что речь-то идет не просто об оппозиционных силах, речь идет о террористических структурах организации. Но тем не менее их представляли в виде какой-то обыкновенной оппозиции. Speaker 1: И Speaker 0: я Я думаю, что это было бы не очень прилично достаточно, так что я сказал. Я думаю, что Джордж помнит наши и Speaker 1: Литвия, Литвауэния, Румыния, Словакия и Словения, мы благодарим и Speaker 0: Тогда, когда решался вопрос об объединении Германии и о последующем выводе советских войск из Восточной Европы, тогда официальные лица и в Соединенных Штатах и генеральный секретарь НАТО, по-моему это был господин Вернер, тогда все говорили, что в одном Советский Союз может быть уверен восточная граница НАТО не будет отодвинута дальше, чем сегодняшняя восточная граница германской демократической республики. Это не было зафиксировано на бумаге. Это ошибка, но уже со стороны Горбачева. В политике нужно вещи фиксировать, даже фиксированные вещи часто нарушают. А он просто поговорил и решил, что всё на этом закончено. Это не так. Speaker 1: Она была создана, когда шла конфронтация между двумя блоками Восточной блоком Западной, между двумя лагерями. Теперь нет Варшавского договора, нет никакого восточного блока, даже нет Советского Союза. Или это вопрос о надо узнать? Создается впечатление, что для того, чтобы оправдать сам факты своего существования, НАТО нужен внешний враг. И осуществляется постоянный поиск этого врага или какие-то провокационные действия для того, чтобы кого-то назвать этим врагом. Speaker 0: И Speaker 1: я центр власти, Speaker 0: принятие решения. Это мир одной из этих технологий. Это мир одной из этих технологий. Это и я
Uncommonsince76
Posted - August 20, 2025 at 3:38 PM
Saved - August 21, 2025 at 12:00 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
I explore the complex relationship between Putin and Jewish influence in global politics. I trace Putin's rise from the collapse of the Soviet Union and the perceived exploitation by Jewish oligarchs under Yeltsin, leading to Putin's crackdown on them. I argue that Western media and politicians, often linked to Jewish interests, have portrayed Putin as a dictator while ignoring his efforts to protect Russian sovereignty. I suggest that the ongoing conflict in Ukraine and the portrayal of Putin are influenced by these dynamics, advocating for a leader like him to counter perceived external control.

@Uncommonsince76 - Uncommon Sense

Why do the jews hate Putin? Why does the mass media spend so Much time trying to rile up the masses to go to war with him? Why does Mark Levin, Brian Krassentein, and Ben Shapiro do everything they can to tell us opposing Putin is in “our interest.” I’ll tell you why. 🧵 1/18 https://t.co/DWNNXAhn73

@Uncommonsince76 - Uncommon Sense

First we must go back and see the roots of what led to Putins rise to power. Remember that the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991. The process of “liberalization” and turning Russias communist economy into a capitalist economy was left up to the planted Jewish puppet, Boris Yeltsin. As you can see he was president from 1991-1999. 🧵 2/18

@Uncommonsince76 - Uncommon Sense

Here is one Jewish puppet besides another… (Yeltsin/ Clinton) and you can see how they were working together for the “new world order of the west. -discussions of economic prosperity for Russia -American investment -Nuclear arms deals -Expansion of NATO.. Many may not remember, but when Bill Clinton was not sleeping with Mossad spy Monica Lewinsky, he was very much serving Jewish foreign policy with his overrepresented Jewish leadership in that area… (Madeline Albright, Sandy Berger, William Cohen, Victoria Nuland, etc) 🧵 3/18

Video Transcript AI Summary
"Our position is that we're going to have an operation that works." "We want Russia to be involved in it." "We made some progress today consistent with both of our objectives with neither side giving up the things that were most important to it." "We made some progress today on that, and we recognized that some of the things that needed to be decided, neither of us could in good conscience decide without giving our military leaders the chance to work through that." "So we agreed that this week this week, our military leaders would be keep working." "That is all I can tell you." "The more we say about it, the worse it'll be." "We are moving toward peace." "The first and most important thing is make peace in Bosnia." "That has not been done yet." "There is no relationship between two"
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Our position is that we're going to have an operation that works. We want Russia to be involved in it. We made some progress today consistent with both of our objectives with neither side giving up the things that were most important to it. We made some progress today on that, and we recognized that some of the things that needed to be decided, neither of us could in good conscience decide without giving our military leaders the chance to work through that. So we agreed that this week this week, our military leaders would be keep working. That is all I can tell you. The more we say about it, the worse it'll be. We are moving toward peace. The first and most important thing is make peace in Bosnia. That has not been done yet. There is no relationship between two
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 outlines three outcomes: (1) there will be a NATO-Russia agreement that all the leaders will support; although they disagree on expansion, they agree that there must be a partnership between NATO and Russia going forward into the future. (2) the notion that Russia should play a larger role in international economic institutions, and that if certain internal changes are made, which president Yeltsin has already announced his support for, then The United States will make a more vigorous effort to facilitate investment in Russia. (3) they resolved a number of roadblocks relating to START II and other related issues which permitted us to say that president Yeltsin would seek a prompt ratification of START II and we would together support guidelines for START III, which we would hope could be negotiated quickly after that, which would reduce the Cold War arsenals by, over 80% from their Cold War height to more or less 80%. These are dramatic and very substantial results. Speaker 1: Just a moment. you've touched on a very current issue which has to be clarified all the way. well, you understand, of course, why is it that the state DOMA has not yet ratified START two?
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Different. One, the idea that there will be a NATO Russia agreement that all the leaders will support. That's a significant thing. We agree to disagree about the question of expansion, but we agree that there must be a partnership between NATO and Russia going forward into the future. Two, the the notion that that Russia should play a larger role in international economic institutions. And that if certain internal changes are made, which president Yeltsin has already announced his support for, then The United States will make a more vigorous effort to facilitate investment in Russia. And third, and I think almost unexpected even among us, we were working along here hoping this would happen. We resolved a number of roadblocks relating to start two and other related issues which permitted us to say that president Yeltsin would seek a prompt ratification of start two and we would together support guidelines for START three, which we would hope could be, negotiated quickly after that, which would reduce the Cold War arsenals by, over 80% from their Cold War height to more or less 80%. These are dramatic and very substantial results, and I'm very pleased with them. Wolf? Speaker 1: Just a moment. I'd like to continue for a second longer. You've touched on a very current issue which has to be clarified all the way. Well, you understand, of course, why is it that the state DOMA has not yet ratified START two?
Video Transcript AI Summary
“I I commend president Yeltsin for his commitment to continuing the path of economic reform.” He notes that in 1993 versus 1992 “the deficit was reduced as a percentage of annual income,” “inflation was brought down,” and “the stabilization of the currency was improved.” He supports further integrating the Russian economy into a global market system, acknowledges dislocations, and urges assistance so the Russian people know there is effort to address these problems. He predicts benefits will flow in the coming year as trade and investment expand and stresses the need for a social safety net and retraining. He says the people of Russia have to define their own future and rejects the idea that the US directs policy, declaring that as long as we share “the same values and the same vision” he wants to be “an equal partner” because “the world, the whole world and particularly Europe has a real interest in seeing Russia succeed and seeing this reform movement succeed.”
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I I commend president Yeltsin for his commitment to continuing the path of economic reform. If you look at 1993 as compared with 1992, If you look at how much the deficit was reduced as a percentage of annual income, if you look at how much inflation was brought down, if you look at how much the stabilization of the currency was improved. I think that the continued work toward hooking the Russian economy into a global economic system based on markets is a very sound thing. The we had great long talks about what could be done and what kind of assistance The United States and others could provide to recognize that there are certain dislocations which come from these changes so that the the people of Russia will know that there is an effort being made to deal with those problems. But I also have to tell you that I believe that that the people will begin to benefit in ways that they could not see perhaps last year in the coming year when we have more trade and more investment. And as people around the world and and in The United States in particular see that the president is serious about this, I think the benefits will begin to flow. That plus constructing the kind of social support system and job retraining, unemployment, all those things that just have to be put together and are not easy to put together when you don't have one. I think these things will help a lot. The other point I'd like to make to you sir, is that from my point of view, President Yeltsin has been unfairly criticized in some quarters for his relationship with The United States. The implication that somehow we have tried to direct the course of Russian policy or it is just not accurate and not true. The people of Russia have to define their own future. All I have tried to do is to say that as long as we share the same values and the same vision, as long as we share a dream of of political freedom and economic freedom and respect for our neighbors, I want to be an equal partner because I believe this is a very great nation and that the world, the whole world and particularly Europe has a real interest in seeing Russia succeed and seeing this reform movement succeed. So I think our relationships in that sense have been quite correct all along and some have sought to miss, characterize them in a way that I think is not accurate.
Video Transcript AI Summary
Presidents, one near the end of his term, the other being Putin seemed indifferent to the American president, who had championed Yeltsin and liberalization and expanded NATO. Putin conveys a huge amount through body language. He tries to show you that he's the alpha male in the room through the way he spreads his legs, through the way he slouches a bit in his chair. And this is not what Clinton was used to when it came to Russia. He was used to having somebody he could relate to, and Putin is a cold fish. And Clinton didn't respond well to him. If mister Clinton was hoping for a foreign policy triumph, he won't get it here.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Presidents, one near the end of his term, the other being Putin seemed indifferent to the American president, who had championed Yeltsin and liberalization and expanded NATO. Speaker 1: Putin conveys a huge amount through body language. He tries to show you that he's the alpha male in the room through the way he spreads his legs, through the way he slouches a bit in his chair. Speaker 2: And this is not what Clinton was used to when it came to Russia. He was used to having somebody he could relate to, and Putin is a cold fish. And Clinton didn't respond well to him. If mister Clinton was hoping for a foreign policy triumph, he won't get it here. Speaker 0: Later that day, Clinton received a warmer reception from Boris Yeltsin Yeltsin and issued a warning about Putin. Speaker 3: Bill Clinton looked hard into Yeltsin's eyes and said, I'm a little bit concerned about this young man that you have turned over the presidency to. He doesn't have democracy in his heart. And I will never forget the fa the expression that came over Yeltsin. Speaker 0: Yeltsin's confidants say by the end of his life, he would come to agree with Clinton. Speaker 3: Before Boris Yeltsin died, he told intimates that it was a great mistake for him to have selected Putin as his successor.

@Uncommonsince76 - Uncommon Sense

Well what’s the problem? Didn’t the Russian people love NATO expansion, economic liberalism, and de-nuclearization? As usual, the United States “sells liberalism” but what they mean is economic exploiting by Jewish capitalist. And Russia was no different. It didn’t take long for the “Semibankirschina” (7 bankers) to own a majority of the assets, and they exploited the Russian people accordingly. And yes most of them were Jews. 🧵 4/18

@Uncommonsince76 - Uncommon Sense

This led into the Russian financial crisis, and ultimately paved the way for a more nationalistic leader to come in. The people were aware of who their exploiters were. They also saw how chummy Yeltsin was with these Jewish oligarchs. Yeltsin was nervous he would be killed during the political unrest, so he needed a strong leader to take over for him, that would also agree to “pardon him.” That politically savvy, and strong leader, was Vladimir Putin. 🧵 5/18

@Uncommonsince76 - Uncommon Sense

One of the first things Putin did as president was meet with 20 or so of the rich men in Russia. (The predominantly Jewish oligarchs.) He told them flat out, the days of exploitation are done. They could still be rich, but they would have to stay out of his way, and the people would be served first. 🧵 6/18

@Uncommonsince76 - Uncommon Sense

Now, these Jewish billionaires did not take to that too kindly, but they shortly found out that Putin was not someone they could simply buy with money, or blackmail with Jeffrey Epstein schemes. Putin started dismantling these Jewish oligarchs from power one by one… -Vladimir Gusinsky -Jew ✡️ -Mikhail Khordorkovsky- Jew ✡️ -Boris Berezovsky- Jew ✡️ -Mikhail Prokhorov- Jew ✡️ This isn’t to say, he randomly singled out Jewish oligarchs. There are still Russian Jewish oligarchs today, but they respect the power that Putin holds. He only went after the ones that were undermining him and Russia, and in doing so he was able to return some assets to the state, and take control of some Of the media companies. 🧵 7/18

@Uncommonsince76 - Uncommon Sense

Now some of you are thinking, well those are dictatorial actions. And “he should allow those oligarchs to exploit the people since you know that’s what democracy works.” But you still believe that democracy is “rule of the people.” It is not. Our modern day democracies are rule by media bosses with a mixture of lobbyist during the political process. (Rule of money rather) As such, the interest of a nation are ground down, and the nation is ran by “oligarchs” or in the case of the United States we call them Jewish billionaires. In 2007, Putin lays out his criticisms of NGO’s, the U.S. abuse of power and continued military intervention, the need to refrain from “nato expansion”, and called for a multipolar world. Effectively, after turning Russia around, he told the Jewish led west, he was not going to be pushed around. He also opposed their Talmudic new world order goal, and he has been correct about the detrimental effects of foreign intervention that the U.S. continues to engage in at the behest of the jews… From then on, our Jewish media bosses, state department, and war lords, had it out for Putin.. and they have been trying to overthrow him ever since. 🧵 8/18

Video Transcript AI Summary
Спикер подчёркивает, что безопасность охватывает военно-политические, экономические и гуманитарные аспекты, и баланс явно нарушен. Он говорит: "ОБСЕ пытаются превратить в вульгарный инструмент обеспечения внешнеполитических интересов одной или группы стран в отношении других стран", и что "вскрыли бюрократический аппарат ОБСЕ" и "формально независимых, но целенаправленно финансируемых, а значит подконтрольных" НПО. По его словам, "гуманитарная сфера ОБСР призвана оказывать странам-членам по их просьбе содействие в соблюдении международных норм в области прав человека", но "это не означает вмешательство во внутренние дела других стран, тем более не навязывание этим государствам того, как они должны жить и развиваться." Такое вмешательство, по его мнению, "не способствует вызреванию подлинных демократических государств и наоборот делает их зависимыми и как следствие нестабильными." Он призывает ОБСЕ действовать по задачам и строить отношения с суверенными государствами на основе уважения и доверия. Россия, с тысячелетней историей, сохраняет независимую внешнюю политику и хочет сотрудничать с ответственными партнерами ради справедливого мироустройства для всех. Speaker notes: English translation of the Russian summary: Speaker emphasizes that security encompasses military-political, economic, and humanitarian aspects, and the balance is clearly broken. He states: "OSCE is trying to turn into a vulgar instrument of pursuing external political interests of one or a group of countries against others," and notes that "the bureaucratic apparatus of the OSCE has been exposed" and that "formally independent, but purposefully financed, and thus controlled" NGOs exist. According to him, "the humanitarian sphere of the OSCE is to assist member states at their request in upholding international norms in the field of human rights," but "this does not mean interference in internal affairs of other countries, and certainly not forcing these states how they should live and develop." Such interference, in his view, "does not contribute to the maturation of genuine democratic states and, on the contrary, makes them dependent and, as a consequence, unstable." He calls on the OSCE to act according to its tasks and to build relations with sovereign states on the basis of respect and trust. Russia, with a thousand-year history, maintains an independent foreign policy and wants to cooperate with responsible partners for a just world order for all, not for the chosen ones.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Я подчеркну это все аспекты безопасности: военно-политические, экономические, гуманитарные, причем в их взаимосвязи. Сегодня что мы видим на практике? Мы видим, что этот баланс явно нарушен. ОБСЕ пытаются превратить в вульгарный инструмент обеспечения внешнеполитических интересов одной или группы стран в отношении других стран. И под эту задачу вскрыли и бюрократический аппарат ОБСЕ, который абсолютно никак не связан с государствами и учредителями. Вскроили под эту задачу процедуры принятия решений и использования так называемых неправительственных организаций. Формально независимых, но целенаправленно финансируемых, а значит подконтрольных. Согласно основополагающим документам, в гуманитарной сфере ОБСР призвана оказывать странам-членам по их просьбе содействие в соблюдении международных норм в области прав человека. Это важная задача, мы ее поддерживаем. Но вовсе это не означает вмешательство во внутренние дела других стран, тем более не навязывание этим государствам того, как они должны жить и развиваться. Очевидно, что такое вмешательство отнюдь не способствует вызреванию подлинных демократических государств и наоборот делает их зависимыми и как следствие нестабильными в политическом и в экономическом плане. Мы рассчитываем на то, что ОБСЕ будет руководствоваться своими непосредственными задачами и выстраивать отношения с суверенными государствами на основе уважения, доверия. Уважаемые дамы и господа, в заключение хотел бы отметить следующее. Мы очень часто, и я лично очень часто, слышу призывы к России со стороны наших партнеров, в том числе и со стороны европейских партнеров, играть более и более активную роль в мировых делах. В этой связи позволю себе сделать одну маленькую ремарку вряд ли нас нужно подталкивать и стимулировать к этому. Россия страна с более чем тысячелетней историей, и практически всегда она пользовалась привилегией проводить независимую внешнюю политику. Мы не собираемся изменять этой традиции и сегодня. Вместе с тем, мы хорошо видим, как изменился мир, реалистично оцениваем свои собственные возможности и свой собственный потенциал. Конечно, нам бы также хотелось иметь дело с ответственными и тоже самостоятельными партнерами, с которыми мы вместе могли бы работать над строительством справедливого и демократического мироустройства, обеспечивая в нем безопасность и процветание не для избранных, а для всех.

@Uncommonsince76 - Uncommon Sense

In 2008, Jewish puppets John McCain (funded by the bronfman family) and Barrack Obama both have the same foreign policy and talking points when it comes to dealing with Putin. He’s a dictator, and the “west” needs to stand up to him… Meanwhile they slyly discuss how more Eastern European nations need to come under NATO (world Jewish control.) A no go for a nationalist like Putin. 🧵 9/18

Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker argues Russia is a nation fueled by petrodollars and a KGB apparatchik run government, saying, "I looked into mister Putin's eyes, and I saw three letters, a k, a g, and a b." He calls Georgia's aggression unacceptable and links it to energy, noting "a pipeline that runs from the Caspian through Georgia through Turkey" and that "the Russians control other sources of energy into Europe." He cites solidarity from Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland, and Ukraine in Tbilisi, and warns Russia aims to revive the "old Russian empire." The United States will "support the inclusion of Georgia and Ukraine" into NATO, while Russia is "in violation of their ceasefire agreement" and has stationed troops in Abkhazia and South Ossetia. He recalls a Georgian poster "Vladimir Putin, our president" and says "watch Ukraine" as Crimea and Sevastopol are cited; "we are their friend and ally." Senator McCain and I agree.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: And Russia has now become a nation fueled by petrodollars that is basically a KGB apparatchik run government. I looked into mister Putin's eyes, and I saw three letters, a k, a g, and a b. And their aggression in Georgia is not acceptable behavior. I do believe that we need to bolster our friends and allies, and that wasn't just about a a problem between Georgia and Russia. It had everything to do with energy. There's a pipeline that runs from the Caspian through Georgia through Turkey. And, of course, we know that the Russians control other sources of energy into Europe, which they have used from time to time. It's not accidental that the presence of Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland, and Ukraine flew to Georgia, flew to Tbilisi, where I have spent significant amount of time with a great young president, Misha Sakashvili. And they showed solidarity with them, but also they are very concerned about the Russian threats to regain their status of the old Russian empire. Now I think the Russians ought to understand that we will support. We, The United States, will support the inclusion of Georgia and Ukraine and and the the natural process inclusion into NATO. We also want to make it very clear that the Russians are in violation of their ceasefire agreement. They have stationed additional troops in Abkhazia and South Ossetia. By the way, I went there once, and we went inside and drove in, and there was a huge poster. And this is this is Georgian territory, and there was a huge picture of Vladimir Putin, and it said, Vladimir Putin, our president. It was very clear, the Russian intentions towards Georgia. They were just waiting to seize the opportunity. So this is a very difficult situation. We wanna work with the Russians, but we also have every right to expect the Russians to behave in a fashion in keeping with a with a with a country who respects international boundaries and the norms of international behavior. And watch Ukraine. This whole thing is a got a lot to do with Ukraine, Crimea, the base of the Russian fleet in Sevastopol, and the breakdown of the political process in Ukraine between Temushchenko and Yushchenko is a very serious problem. So watch Ukraine, and let's make sure that we that the Ukrainians understand that we are their friend and ally. Senator, do you have a major difference with what he just said? No. Actually, think senator McCain and I agree for

@Uncommonsince76 - Uncommon Sense

In 2012, when Hillary Clinton and our state department was lying to our faces about what Assad was doing and why, Putin and Russia were backing Assad. Saying that if Assad fell, Syria could fall into a perpetual civil war, and that they didn’t believe the reports of Assad using “chemical weapons.” Fast forward to now where Syria is a mess and the only country that benefited from Assads fall was Israel. Now it’s easy to see why the jews in our government wanted to get rid of Putin. 🧵 10/18

Video Transcript AI Summary
Where we both remain acutely concerned about the Assad regime's campaign of violence against their own citizens. The Assad regime's continued brutality is galvanizing international opinion. The United States will continue to work with our partners to turn this growing consensus into increased pressure and isolation for the Assad regime. President Assad has lost the legitimacy to lead, and it is clear that Syria would be better off without him. Yesterday, The United States imposed new sanctions, and ambassador Ford delivered a clear message to the Syrian government. Immediately stop the violence, withdraw your security forces, respond to the legitimate aspirations of the Syrian people for a democratic transition in concrete and meaningful ways.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Where we both remain acutely concerned about the Assad regime's campaign of violence against their own citizens. Norway and our other European allies have been strong, consistent voices on behalf of the Syrian people, and I commend them for their advocacy. The Assad regime's continued brutality is galvanizing international opinion. There has been a crescendo of condemnation, not only from the world, but in particular from the region. After the Security Council statement, we've seen movement in rapid succession from the Arab League, the GCC, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and others. The United States will continue to work with our partners to turn this growing consensus into increased pressure and isolation for the Assad regime. In particular, we urge those countries still buying Syrian oil and gas, those countries still sending Assad weapons, those countries whose political and economic support give him comfort in his brutality to get on the right side of history. President Assad has lost the legitimacy to lead, and it is clear that Syria would be better off without him. Yesterday, The United States imposed new sanctions, and ambassador Ford delivered a clear message to the Syrian government. Immediately stop the violence, withdraw your security forces, respond to the legitimate aspirations of the Syrian people for a democratic transition in concrete and meaningful ways. Now it is something that we are
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0: In gears to Syria. Our president has said that you're backing an evil guy there. He said Assad is an evil guy. Do you believe that? Speaker 1: what? That Assad is an evil person? Speaker 0: Yes. Speaker 1: Let's talk objectively. Has Assad made mistakes? Yes, probably. And more than a few. What about the people who oppose him? Are they angels or something? Who is it that's killing people over there? Executing children? Who's cutting off heads? Are these the kind of people we should support? Speaker 0: We all saw the video of the suffering, dying children. Do you deny? Because Assad denies that those tapes are real. Do you believe those tapes are fake? Speaker 1: That's false information. As of now, we're absolutely convinced that this was a provocation. Assad did not use those weapons, and all of this was done by people who then wanted to blame him. Speaker 0: The bodies of the victims were autopsy. The autopsies were witnessed by officials from the World Health Organization and from the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, and they concluded that the victims were attacked with sarin gas. Are are we really to believe that the whole thing was staged, that everybody was in on it? Speaker 1: The answer is very simple, and you know it. It could have been used by someone, but not Assad.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: In gears to Syria. Our president has said that you're backing an evil guy there. He said Assad is an evil guy. Do you believe that? In Speaker 1: what? That Assad is an evil person? Speaker 0: Yes. Speaker 1: Let's talk objectively. Has Assad made mistakes? Yes, probably. And more than a few. What about the people who oppose him? Are they angels or something? Who is it that's killing people over there? Executing children? Who's cutting off heads? Are these the kind of people we should support? Speaker 0: We all saw the video of the suffering, dying children. Do you deny? Because Assad denies that those tapes are real. Do you believe those tapes are fake? Speaker 1: That's false information. As of now, we're absolutely convinced that this was a provocation. Assad did not use those weapons, and all of this was done by people who then wanted to blame him. Speaker 0: The bodies of the victims were autopsy. The autopsies were witnessed by officials from the World Health Organization and from the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, and they concluded that the victims were attacked with sarin gas. Are are we really to believe that the whole thing was staged, that everybody was in on it? Speaker 1: The answer is very simple, and you know it. It could have been used by someone, but not Assad.

@Uncommonsince76 - Uncommon Sense

In 2014, the U.S. state department led by jews like Victoria Nuland, staged a coup against the duly elected president Victor Yanukovych. What was Yanukovychs crime? He was too pro Russian, and was not necessarily going to push the boundaries for NATO expansion. So you can see the international jews went to work, with George Soros funding dissidents, the Jewish American media machine saying Yanukovych was not elected properly, and Jewish state department rep Victoria Nuland even handing out cookies to Ukrainian dissidents. This led to Putin invading and annexing the Crimea. 🧵 11/18

Video Transcript AI Summary
During the 1989 revolutions, you funded dissident activities and civil society groups in Eastern Europe, including Poland and the Czech Republic; are you doing similar work in Ukraine? He replies that he set up a foundation in Ukraine before its independence from Russia, and that the foundation has functioned ever since and played an important part in events now. He says Ukraine can assert independence from Russia and move toward the West, though Putin will try to destabilize it; the large majority of Ukrainians are determined to be independent, and with freedom, free media, and a flourishing economy, his regime would be unsustainable. He is asked about antisemitism in Ukraine; he notes antisemitism is part of the DNA of that part of the world, and there is antisemitism.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: That many people recognized about you was that you, during the revolutions of nineteen eighty nine, funded a lot of dissident activities, civil society groups in Eastern Europe and Poland, The Czech Republic. Are you doing similar things in Ukraine? Speaker 1: Well, I set up a foundation in Ukraine before Ukraine became independent of, Russia, and the foundation has been, functioning ever since. And it played an important part in events now. Speaker 0: Do you think Ukraine will be able to assert a kind of independence from Russia, and an alignment, with the West? Not not a specific alignment as a NATO, but a kind of orientation toward the West, or will the Russians always stop them? Speaker 1: No. Putin will try to destabilize, Ukraine, but the Ukrainians, the large majority of Ukrainians are determined to be independent of of Russia. It won't be easy because Putin, has, staked his regime on destabilizing Ukraine because it's a threat to to his regime in Russia. If you have freedom, free media, and so on, and a flourishing economy, that would, make his regime, unsustainable. Speaker 0: He accuses the Ukrainians of being antisemitic, of them being full of antisemitic fascists. You operate in Ukraine. You're of Jewish origin. Have you detected virulent antisemitism in Ukraine? Speaker 1: Well, antisemitism is part of the DNA of that part of the world. So there is antisemit

@Uncommonsince76 - Uncommon Sense

Remember the “Russian Collusion hoax” of 2017? Did you know that research was funded by a Jew named Paul Singer?? 🧐 Obviously Trump was acquitted, but the intended effect was missed by many. It was to be associated with Russia, is a crime. Remember that Trump ran on “warming relations” With the Russians. Well that was pretty much iced by this fake scandal, and so it worked. 🧵 12/18

@Uncommonsince76 - Uncommon Sense

Then we have the 2nd impeachment hoax. Also involving Ukraine/Russia, but what was the crux of the matter? That Trump was going to withhold weapons from Ukraine…. A no no for our Jewish oligarchs. Thus this scandal provided the same effect yet again. Trump affirms his support of Ukraine, and distances himself from Russia, and everyone is afraid to tell the truth about Russia, or they will be labeled a “foreign agent” because Ukraine is our potential NATO ally. Well it’s not our ally. It’s manufactured state created by NATO and currently ran by a coke head Jew Zelensky …. Did you also know that the guy that “leaked” scandalous phone call for Trumps 2nd impeachment was also Jewish? What are the odds…. 🧵 13/18

@Uncommonsince76 - Uncommon Sense

Never forget how Zelensky came to power in Ukraine and who funded his rise… Before he was killed in Ukraine, American journalist Gonzalo Lira laid out exactly how Zelensky was manufactured and funded by Israeli Jewish billionaire Kolomoisky. And that same billionaire Kolomoisky, was the Jew who had a controlling interest in Burisma… the gas company that was paying Hunter Biden 50k a month. Oh a tangled web the Jews weave to blackmail/ buy influence… 🧵 14/18

Video Transcript AI Summary
Zelensky is 'the cokehead of Kyiv' and 'a manufactured political figure' created by Ukrainian Israeli Cypriot oligarch Igor Kolomoyski, owner of OnePlusOne Media, which financed and produced 'Servant of the People.' 'Servant of the People' hired Zelensky, a well known actor with zero political experience or even any political interest, to play the role of the President. Kolomoyski created a party called 'Servant of the People' and financed Zelensky to the point that Zelensky today is a billionaire; 'he's the finger puppet of Kolomsky.' Kolomoyski also financed Hunter Biden to the tune of $50,000 a month on Burisma's Board of Directors in 2014. 'Hunter Biden' and Zelensky are 'spiritual cousins' bankrolled by the same guy. The laptop mentions a 10% kickback to 'the old man.' The White House is freaking out over Ukraine; Westerners exploited Ukraine; Ukraine is one of the poorest countries in Europe due to corruption.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: You see, Zelensky, the president of Ukraine, well, the cokehead of Kyiv, because he is a cokehead, the cokehead of Kyiv is actually a manufactured political figure. He was manufactured by a Ukrainian Israeli Cypriot oligarch called Igor Kolomoyski. Igor Kolomoyski was the man who owns OnePlusOne Media here in Ukraine, And OnePlusOne Media is the company that financed and produced the TV show Servant of the People. Servant of the People hired Zelenskyy, a well known actor in Ukraine, an actor with zero political experience or even any political interest, well, they hired him to play the role of the President in this show Servant of the People. Servant of the People had huge ratings, but a lot of people say that it was really weird the amount of propaganda and PR that was done for the show. It was disproportionate to any other show of any channel. The amount of PR positive press and all the rest of it, it was really pushed on the people. Some people say it was completely astroturf. Some people who know how to speak Ukrainian and who have watched the show have told me that it's a mildly enjoyable show, but no big deal. But anyway, the show was hugely popular, and it ran from 2015 to 2018, and almost seamlessly. Kolomoisky, the oligarch, created a party called Servant of the People, same name as the TV show, and their candidate was Zelensky, a man with no previous political experience and indeed no previous political interest. Kolomoisky financed Zelensky to the point that Zelensky today is a billionaire. How many actors do you know are billionaires? I don't think that Tom Cruise is a billionaire and he's the most successful actor in the world, if he's just an actor. Zelensky is more than just an actor. He's the finger puppet of Kolomoisky, this oligarch. And do you know who Kolomoisky also financed, to the tune of $50,000 a month, plus additional benefits of different sorts? Hunter Biden. Yes, in 2014, Burisma, the Ukrainian oil company gas company, hired Hunter Biden to be on its Board of Directors to the tune of $50,000 a month. Who do you think controls Burisma? Kolomovsky, the same guy who manufactured Zelensky as President of Ukraine. Yeah, I bet you didn't know that. Zelensky and Hunter Biden are spiritual cousins. They are bankrolled by the same guy. It's funny because both of them have drug addictions, pretty serious ones, both of them get their money from Kolomovsky, and both of them are intimately involved in Ukraine. But here's the difference, of course: Zelenskyy doesn't have a dad who's President of The United States, now does he? Why do you think the White House is freaking out so badly over Ukraine? In Ukraine, there are all kinds of secrets. In Ukraine, well, see, the more unsavory people in the Washington establishment have used Ukraine as their private piggy bank, to the detriment of the Ukrainian people. They have financially raped Ukraine, stripping it of monies and assets, monies and assets needed by the people of Ukraine. This is part of the reason that Ukraine is one of the poorest countries in Europe, if not the poorest country in Europe, of the corruption, because of how Westerners have exploited it, Western politicians have exploited it. Hunter Biden? $50,000 a month. And you say to yourself, well, thousand isn't that much. Yeah, but $50,000 a year is the median household income in The United States. In Ukraine, a much poorer country, $50,000 a year, easily solve the problems of a good four or five families in Ukraine, the financial problems of those four or five families in Ukraine, for a year. And Hunter Biden was getting that money per month, just for himself. Although, of course, in the Hunter Biden emails there's talk that seems to be true that the old man would get a 10% kickback of whatever Hunter Biden was getting. That was in the laptop. Oh yeah. Look it up. You don't have to take my word for it. You don't have to take my word for any of what I'm telling you. Look it up yourself and you'll find it. It's very easy to find. Kolomovsky, the Ukrainian Israeli Cypriot oligarch, was financing Zelensky, was financing Joe Biden. God alone knows who else he was financing, and he was just one. There's a whole rotten bunch of these people here in Ukraine, and they were all busy paying off the West so that they could carry on their little evil deeds and whatnot. If you want to know why the West is freaking out over Ukraine, you have to understand that they are all terrified that the truth will come out in Ukraine.

@Uncommonsince76 - Uncommon Sense

After the Jews had their Zelensky puppet installed, and they their Jewish Secretary of State Anthony Blinken, they finally pushed Putin to the breaking point. He then invaded Ukraine in 2022. And the lying Jewish controlled mass media tells us, “Putin is crazy” and he is slaughtering Slavs. But he’s not. He’s been very strategic in trying to limit loss of life. And our lying media leaves out the fact that this was a totally Jewish provoked war, for NATO power expansion. They also always leave out the fact that the jews and the U.S. state department (one and the same) overthrew the Ukrainian regime in 2014…. 🧵 15/18

@Uncommonsince76 - Uncommon Sense

And if Putin is such an oppressive awful leader, like our Jewish media tells us, why then is Russia still allowed to be Russian? Putin has outlawed Gay Marriage, Transgender madness, and no one is going to jail for being proud to be a “White Russian.” In other words, Putin has shielded his people from the pernicious Jewish influence that is destroying the west right now. Under Putin, the Russian economy has done quite well from where it was in 1999. Also the debt situation and natural resource situation in Russia is great. Further the Russian Orthodox Church has done exceptionally well under Putins leadership. Meanwhile many brainwashed Christians in the west are serving Jews for the expansion of Israel while our nation fails. Putin even allowed for Edward Snowden to seek Asylum in Russia and has protected him against our blood thirsty government and its Jewish controllers… 🧵 16/18

@Uncommonsince76 - Uncommon Sense

Is Putin an out an out antisemite? No. He is not. He even has Jewish friends and the like, but clearly he is a nationalist, and he is opposed to the Jewish new world order. While he may not name them explicitly, he names them implicitly…. Like in these 2 clips where he describes the “American media propaganda machine” the “bankers”, and who really blew up Nordstream… 🧵 17/18

Video Transcript AI Summary
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. 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.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: 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.
Video Transcript AI Summary
The Germans clearly know that their NATO partner did this, but they and it damaged their economy greatly. It may never recover. Why are they being silent about it? That's very confusing to me. Why wouldn't the Germans say something about it? This also confuses me. But today's German leadership is guided by the interests of the collective West rather than its national interests. Otherwise, it is difficult to explain the logic of their action or inaction. After all, it is not only about Nord Stream 1, which was blown up, and the Nord Stream 2 was damaged, But one pipe is safe and sound, and gas can be supplied to Europe through it. But Germany does not open it. We're ready, please.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: But but here's a question you may be able to answer. You worked in Germany, famously. The Germans clearly know that their NATO partner did this, but they and it damaged their economy greatly. It may never recover. Why are they being silent about it? That's very confusing to me. Why wouldn't the Germans say something about it? Speaker 1: This also confuses me. But today's German leadership is guided by the interests of the collective West rather than its national interests. Otherwise, it is difficult to explain the logic of their action or inaction. After all, it is not only about Nord Stream 1, which was blown up, and the Nord Stream 2 was damaged, But one pipe is safe and sound, and gas can be supplied to Europe through it. But Germany does not open it. We're ready, please.

@Uncommonsince76 - Uncommon Sense

So the jews and the west will continue do what they can to “pray for Putins death” as Krassenstein says below. But America should see through the propaganda. We need a leader very much like Putin if we are to ever overcome our Jewish overlords. If not, we will continue to see non white immigration, transgender lunacy, and wars in the Middle East (and Ukraine) for Israel… If you enjoyed this thread, Consider subscribing to the page! 🧵 18/18

afshinrattansi
Posted - February 14, 2026 at 10:31 PM
Saved - February 15, 2026 at 7:46 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
I recall Putin’s 2007 Munich warning that Russia would resist NATO expansion, exposing the hypocrisy of the post-Cold War “rules-based order.” He criticised a unipolar world and US wars, warned Europe’s missile defense could upset the nuclear balance and spark a new arms race, and noted those concerns were ignored, with Ukraine’s war and rising Russia–NATO tensions the result.

@afshinrattansi - Afshin Rattansi

If you’ve seen the circus at the Munich Security Conference this year, here’s a throwback to a speech with actual consequence: Vladimir Putin’s 2007 Munich Security Conference speech represented Russia🇷🇺 openly exposing the hypocrisy of the post-Cold War ‘rules-based order’ and Russia declaring that it would not tolerate NATO expansion onto its borders to encircle Moscow. As NATO expansion steamrolled ahead with Moscow’s concerns ignored for years, Putin warned Russia would resist the expansion. He criticised the emergence of a unipolar world, where the US abused its power with endless wars and military interventions. He warned that the US’ missile defence plans in Europe were a threat to the nuclear strategic balance, which could trigger a new arms race. Russia’s concerns were ignored or ridiculed for years, the Ukraine proxy war and the current dangerous tensions between Russia and NATO are the consequences.

Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker argues that international security is broader than military-political stability and includes global economic stability, poverty reduction, economic security, and civilizational dialogue. He emphasizes the principle that security of each is security of all, recalling Franklin Roosevelt’s idea that “wherever peace is violated, peace everywhere is threatened.” He asserts that two decades ago the world was split ideologically and economically, with security provided by the large strategic potential of two superpowers, and that global confrontation has moved to the periphery of international relations, leaving acute economic and social issues unresolved. He criticizes the unipolar world as not achievable or acceptable, defining it as one center of power and one center of decision-making, a model he says is not democracy and ultimately destructive for both the ruled and the ruler. He notes that unilateral, illegitimate actions have not solved problems and have caused new tragedies and tens of thousands of civilian deaths. He points to the increasing and unchecked use of force in international affairs, the neglect of core principles of international law, and the tendency to resolve issues on the basis of political expediency. The speaker highlights new threats such as weapons of mass destruction and terrorism, arguing for a balanced approach that considers the interests of all international actors. He notes the rapid changes in the international landscape, including the rise of China and India, whose combined GDP (at PPP) surpasses the US, and BRICS collectively surpassing the EU, predicting that economic power will increasingly translate into political influence and strengthen multipolarity. He calls for multilateral diplomacy, openness, transparency, and predictability, with force used only as an exceptional measure and in accordance with the UN Charter, not as a substitute for collective security institutions such as the UN, NATO, or the EU. The speaker defends adherence to international treaties on nonproliferation and disarmament, recalling Russia’s agreement with the US to cut strategic nuclear weapons to 1700–2200 deployable warheads by December 31, 2012, and emphasizes Russia’s commitment to the NPT and multilateral controls on missile technologies. He critiques the proliferation of missile systems in various countries and the existence of new high-tech weapons, including space-based systems, warning that militarization of space could have consequences comparable to the nuclear era. He announces a Russian proposal for a Space Weapons Prevention Treaty and discusses concerns about missile defense deployments in Europe, arguing they provoke a new arms race and distrust. Regarding conventional forces in Europe, he criticizes the Adapted CFE Treaty for insufficient ratification and notes NATO’s expansion near Russian borders, arguing that such expansion reduces mutual trust. He recalls a 1990 NATO secretary-general statement about not placing troops beyond Germany’s borders and stresses that Russia seeks an independent foreign policy with responsible partners to build a fair and democratic world order for all. He also discusses energy cooperation, arguing that energy prices should be market-driven and that foreign capital participates significantly in Russian oil production, with investments in Russia exceeding Russian investments abroad by about 15:1. He mentions Russia’s ongoing WTO accession and criticizes double standards in poverty alleviation, noting how aid and subsidies can perpetuate economic underdevelopment and fuel radicalism and conflict. Finally, he defends the OSCE as a body intended to address security in a holistic way but contends it has been used to serve external interests and to finance NGOs that may interfere in internal affairs. He calls for the OSCE to respect sovereignty and for cooperation based on mutual trust. He closes by reaffirming Russia’s longstanding tradition of independent external policy and expresses a desire to work with responsible, independent partners to build a just, democratic world order that ensures security and prosperity for all.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Спасибо большое, уважаемая госпожа Федеральный канцлер, господин Тельчик, дамы и господа! Весьма признателен за приглашение на столь представительную конференцию, собравшую политиков, военных, предпринимателей, экспертов из более чем 40 стран мира. Формат конференции даёт мне возможность избежать излишнего политеса и необходимости говорить округлыми, приятными, но пустыми дипломатическими штампами. Формат Конференции позволяет сказать то, что я действительно думаю о проблемах международной безопасности. И если мои рассуждения покажутся нашим коллегам излишне полемически заострёнными либо неточными, я прошу на меня не сердиться, это ведь только Конференция. И надеюсь, что после двух-трех минут моего выступления господин Тельчик не включит там красный свет. Итак, известно, что проблематика международной безопасности много шире вопросов военно-политической стабильности. Это устойчивость мировой экономики, преодоление бедности, экономическая безопасность и развитие межцивилизационного диалога. Такой всеобъемлющий неделимый характер безопасности выражен и в её базовом принципе. Безопасность каждого это безопасность всех. Как сказал ещё в первые дни разгоравшейся Второй мировой войны Франклин Рузвельт, где бы ни был нарушен мир, мир повсюду оказывается в безопасности и под угрозой. Эти слова продолжают сохранять актуальность и сегодня. Об этом свидетельствует и тема нашей конференции, которая здесь написана Глобальные кризисы, глобальная ответственность. Всего лишь два десятилетия назад мир был идеологически и экономически расколот, а его безопасность обеспечивали огромные стратегические потенциалы двух сверхдержав. Глобальное противостояние отодвигало на периферию международных отношений и повестки дня крайне острые экономические и социальные вопросы. И как всякая война, война холодная, оставила нам и не разорвавшиеся снаряды, образно выражаясь. Имею в виду идеологические стереотипы, двойные стандарты, иные шаблоны блокового мышления. Предлагаевшийся же после холодной войны однополярный мир тоже не состоялся. История человечества, конечно, знает и периоды однополярного состояния, и стремления к мировому господству. Чего только не было в истории человечества. Однако что же такое однополярный мир? Как бы ни украшали этот термин, он в конечном итоге означает на практике только одно это один центр власти, один центр силы, один центр принятия решения. Это мир одного хозяина, одного суверена, и это в конечном итоге губительно не только для всех, кто находится в рамках этой системы, но и для самого суверена, потому что разрушает его изнутри. И это ничего общего не имеет, конечно, с демократией. Потому что демократия это, как известно, власть большинства при учёте интересов и мнения меньшинства. Кстати говоря, Россию нас постоянно учат демократии, но те, кто нас учат, сами почему-то учиться не очень хотят. Считаю, что для современного мира однополярная модель не только неприемлема, но и вообще невозможна. И не только потому, что при единоличном лидерстве в современном, именно в современном мире не будет хватать ни военно-политических, ни экономических Но, что ещё важнее, сама модель является неработающей, так как в её основе нет и не может быть морально-нравственной базы современной цивилизации. Вместе с тем всё, что происходит сегодня в мире и сейчас мы только начали дискутировать об этом, это следствие попыток внедрения именно этой концепции мировые дела, концепции однополярного мира. А какой результат? Односторонние, нелегитимные часто действия не решили ни одной проблемы. Более того, они стали генератором новых человеческих трагедий и очагов напряжённости. Судите сами: войн, локальных и региональных конфликтов меньше не стало. Господин Тельчик об этом очень мягко упомянул. И людей в этих конфликтах гибнет не меньше, а даже больше, чем раньше. Значительно больше. Сегодня мы наблюдаем почти ничем не сдерживаемое гипертрофированное применение силы в международных делах, военной силы, ввергающей мир в пучину следующих один за другим конфликтов. В результате не хватает сил на комплексное решение ни одного из них. Становится невозможным и их политическое решение. Мы видим все большее пренебрежение основополагающими принципами международного права. Больше того, отдельные нормы, да по сути чуть ли не вся система права одного государства, прежде всего конечно Соединённых Штатов, перешагнула свои национальные границы и по сути во всех сферах и в экономике, и в политике, и в гуманитарной сфере навязывается другим государствам. Но кому это понравится? В международных делах всё чаще встречается стремление решить тот или иной вопрос, исходя из так называемой политической целесообразности, основанной на текущей конъюнктуре. И это, конечно, крайне опасно и ведёт к тому, что никто уже не чувствует себя в безопасности. Я хочу это подчеркнуть никто не чувствует себя в безопасности, потому что никто не может спрятаться за международным правом как за каменной стеной. Такая политика является, конечно, катализатором гонки вооружений. Доминирование фактора силы неизбежно подпитывает тягу ряда стран к обладанию оружием массового уничтожения. Больше того, появились принципиально новые угрозы, которые и раньше были известны, но сегодня приобретают глобальный характер, такие как терроризм. Убежден, мы подошли к тому рубежному моменту, когда должны серьезно задуматься над всей архитектурой глобальной безопасности. И здесь надо отталкиваться от поиска разумного баланса между интересами всех субъектов международного общения. Тем более сейчас, когда международный ландшафт столь ощутимо и столь быстро меняется, меняется за счёт динамичного развития целого ряда государств и регионов. Госпожа Федеральный Канцлер упомянул уже об этом. Так, суммарный ВВП Индии и Китая по паритетной покупательной способности уже больше, чем у Соединённых Штатов Америки. А рассчитанные по тому же принципу ВВП государств группы Бразилия, Россия, Индия, Китай превосходят совокупный ВВП Евросоюза. И по оценкам экспертов, в обозримой исторической перспективе этот разрыв будет только возрастать. Не стоит сомневаться, что экономический потенциал новых центров мирового роста будет неизбежно конвертироваться в политическое влияние и укреплять будет многополярность. В этой связи серьезно возрастает роль многосторонней дипломатии. Открытость, транспарентность и предсказуемость политики безальтернативны, а применение силы должно быть действительно исключительной мерой, так же как и применение смертной казни в правовых системах некоторых государств. Сегодня же мы, наоборот, наблюдаем ситуацию, когда страны, в которых применение смертной казни запрещено даже в отношении убийц и других преступников, опасных преступников. Несмотря на это, такие стороны легко идут на участие в военных операциях, которые трудно назвать легитимными. А ведь в этих конфликтах гибнут люди, сотни, тысячи мирных людей. Но в то же время возникает вопрос: разве мы должны безучастно и безвольно взирать на различные внутренние конфликты в отдельных странах, на действия авторитарных режимов, тиранов, на распространение оружия массового уничтожения? Именно по сути это и лежало в основе вопроса, который был задан федеральному канцлеру нашим уважаемым коллегой господином Либерманном. Можем ли мы безучастно смотреть на то, что происходит? Я попробую ответить на ваш вопрос тоже. Конечно, мы не должны смотреть безучастно, конечно, нет. Но есть ли у нас средства противостоять этим угрозам? Конечно, есть. Достаточно вспомнить недавнюю историю. Ведь произошел же мирный переход к демократии в нашей стране. Ведь состоялась же мирная трансформация советского режима, мирная трансформация. И какого режима? С каким количеством оружия, в том числе ядерного оружия? Почему же сейчас при каждом удобном случае нужно бомбить и стрелять? Неужели в условиях отсутствия угрозы взаимного уничтожения нам не хватает политической культуры, уважения к ценностям демократии и к праву? Убеждён, единственным механизмом принятия решения по использованию военной силы как последнего довода может быть только устав ООН. И в этой связи я или не понял то, что было сказано совсем недавно нашим коллегой, министром обороны Италии, либо он выразился неточно, я, во всяком случае, услышал, что легитимным применение силы может считаться только в том случае, если решение принято в НАТО, или в Евросоюзе, или в ООН. Если он действительно так считает, то у нас с ним разные точки зрения. Или я ослышался. Легитимным можно считать применение силы, только если решение принято на основе и в рамках ООН. И не надо подменять Организацию Объединённых Наций ни НАТО, ни Евросоюза. И когда ООН будет реально объединять силы международного сообщества, которое действительно может реагировать на события в отдельных странах. Когда мы избавимся от пренебрежения международным правом, то ситуация может измениться. В противном случае ситуация будет заходить лишь в тупик и умножать количество тяжелых ошибок. При этом, конечно, нужно добиваться того, чтобы международное право имело универсальный характер и в понимании, и в применении норм. И нельзя забывать, что демографический образ действий в политике обязательно предполагает дискуссию и кропотливую выработку решений. Уважаемые дамы и господа, потенциальная опасность дестабилизации международных отношений связана и с очевидным застоем в области разоружения. Россия выступает за возобновление диалога по этому важнейшему вопросу. Важно сохранить устойчивость международно-правовой разоруженческой базы, при этом обеспечить преемственность процесса сокращения ядерных вооружений. Мы договорились с Соединёнными Штатами Америки о сокращении наших ядерных потенциалов на стратегических носителях до 1700-2200 ядерных боезарядов к 31 декабря 2012 года. Россия намерена строго выполнять взятые на себя обязательства. Надеемся, что и наши партнеры будут действовать также транспарентно и не будут откладывать на чёрный день лишнюю пару сотен ядерных боезарядов. И если сегодня Новый Министр обороны США здесь нам объявят, что США не будут прятать эти заряды лишние ни на складах, ни под подушкой, ни под одеялом. Я предлагаю всем встать и стоя это поприветствовать. Это было бы очень важным заявлением. Россия строго придерживается и намерена в дальнейшем придерживаться Договора о нераспространении ядерного оружия и многостороннего режима контроля за ракетными технологиями. Принципы, заложенные в этих документах, носят универсальный характер. В этой связи хотел бы вспомнить, что в восьмидесятых годах СССР и Соединённые Штаты подписали договор о ликвидации целого класса ракет средней и малой, но универсального характера этому документу предано не было. Сегодня такие ракеты уже имеет целый ряд стран: Корейская Народно-Демократическая Республика, Республика Корея, Индия, Иран, Пакистан, Израиль. Многие другие государства мира разрабатывают эти системы и планируют поставить их на вооружение. И только Соединённые Штаты Америки и Россия несут обязательства не создавать подобных систем вооружений. Ясно, что в этих условиях мы вынуждены задуматься об обеспечении своей собственной безопасности. Вместе с тем нельзя допустить появления новых дестабилизирующих высокотехнологичных видов оружия. Я уже не говорю о мерах по предупреждению новых сфер конфронтации, особенно в космосе. Звёздные войны, как известно, уже не фантастика, а реальность. Ещё в середине 80-х годов наши американские партнёры на практике провели перехват собственного спутника. Милитаризация космоса, по мнению России, может спровоцировать непредсказуемые для мирового сообщества последствия, не меньшие, чем начало ядерной эры. И мы не раз выступали с инициативами, направленными на недопущение оружия в космос. Сегодня хотел бы проинформировать Вас о том, что нами подготовлен проект Договора о предотвращении размещения оружия в космическом пространстве. В ближайшее время он будет направлен партнерам в качестве официального предложения. Давайте работать над этим вместе. Нас также не могут не тревожить планы по развертыванию элементов системы противоракетной обороны в Европе. Кому нужен очередной виток неизбежной в этом случае гонки вооружений? Глубоко сомневаюсь, что самим европейцем. Ракетного оружия, реально угрожающего Европе, с дальностью действия порядка пяти-восьми тысяч километров нет ни у одной так называемой проблемных стран. И будущем в обозримой перспективе и не появится, и не предвидится даже. Гипотетический пуск, например, северокорейской ракеты по территории США через Западную Европу это явно противоречит законам баллистики. Как говорят у нас в России, это всё равно что правой рукой дотягиваться до левого уха. Находясь здесь, в Германии, не могу не упомянуть и о кризисном состоянии Договора об обычных вооружённых силах в Европе. Адаптированный Договор об обычных вооружённых силах в Европе был подписан в 1999 году. Он учитывал новую геополитическую реальность ликвидацию Варшавского блока. С тех пор прошло семь лет, и только четыре государства ратифицировали этот документ, включая Российскую Федерацию. Страны НАТО открыто заявили, что не ратифицируют договор, включая положение о фланговых ограничениях, о размещении на флангах определенного количества вооруженных сил, до тех пор, пока Россия не выведет свои базы из Грузии и Молдавии. Из Грузии наши войска выводятся, причём даже в ускоренном порядке. Эти проблемы мы с нашими грузинскими коллегами решили, и это всем известно. В Молдавии остаётся группировка в полторы тысячи военнослужащих, которые выполняют миротворческие функции и охраняют склады с боеприпасами, оставшиеся со времён СССР. И мы с господином Саланой обсуждаем постоянно этот вопрос, он знает нашу позицию, мы готовы и дальше работать по этому направлению. Но что же происходит в это же самое время? А в это самое время в Болгарии и Румынии появляются так называемые легкие американские передовые базы по пять тысяч штыков в каждой. Получается, что НАТО выдвигает свои передовые силы к нашим государственным границам, а мы, строго выполняя договор, никак не реагируем на это действие. Думаю, очевидно, процесс натовского расширения не имеет никакого отношения к модернизации самого альянса или к обеспечению безопасности в Европе. Наоборот, это серьёзно провоцирующий фактор, снижающий уровень взаимного доверия. И у нас есть справедливое право откровенно спросить, против кого это расширение, и что стало с теми заверениями, которые давались западными партнёрами после роспуска Варшавского договора. Где теперь эти заявления? О них даже никто не помнит, но я позволю себе напомнить в этой аудитории. Хотел бы привести цитату из выступления Генерального секретаря НАТО господина Вернера в Брюсселе 17 мая 90 года. Он тогда сказал: Сам факт, что мы готовы не размещать войска НАТО за пределами территории ФРГ, дает Советскому Союзу твердые гарантии. И бетонные блоки Берлинской стены давно разошлись на сувениры. Но нельзя забывать, что её падение стало возможным в том числе и благодаря историческому выбору в том числе нашего народа, народа России, выбору в пользу демократии и свободы, открытости и искреннего партнёрства со всеми членами большой европейской семьи. Сейчас же нам пытаются навязать уже новые разделительные линии стены, пусть виртуальные, но все-таки разделяющие, разрезающие наш общий континент. Неужели вновь потребуются долгие годы и десятилетия, смена нескольких поколений политиков, чтобы разобрать и демонтировать эти новые стены? Уважаемые дамы и господа, мы однозначно выступаем и за укрепление режима нераспространения. Существующая международно-правовая база позволяет создать технологии по выработке ядерного топлива для использования его в мирных целях. И многие страны с полным на то основанием хотят создавать собственную ядерную энергетику как основу их энергетической независимости. Но мы также понимаем, что эти технологии могут быть быстро трансформированы в получение оружейных материалов. Это вызывает серьёзное международное напряжение. Яркий тому пример ситуация с иранской ядерной программой. Если международное сообщество не выработает разумного решения этого конфликта интересов, мир и дальше будет потрясать подобные дестабилизирующие кризисы, потому что пороговых стран больше, чем Иран, и мы с вами об этом знаем. Мы будем постоянно сталкиваться с угрозой распространения оружия массового уничтожения. В прошлом году Россия выступила с инициативой создания многонациональных центров по обогащению урана. Мы открыты к тому, чтобы подобные центры создавались не только в России, но и в других странах, где на легитимной основе существует мирная ядерная энергетика. Государства, желающие развивать атомную энергетику, могли бы гарантированно получать топливо через непосредственное участие в работе этих центров, конечно же, под строгим контролем МГАТЭ. С российским предложением созвучны и последние инициативы президента Соединённых Штатов Америки Джорджа Буша. Считаю, что Россия и США объективно и в одинаковой степени заинтересованы в ужесточении режимов нераспространения оружия массового уничтожения и средств его доставки. Именно наши страны, являющиеся лидерами по ядерному и ракетному потенциалу, должны стать и лидерами в разработке новых, более жёстких мер в сфере нераспространения. Россия готова к такой работе, мы ведём консультации с нашими американскими друзьями. В целом речь должна идти о создании целой системы политических рычагов и экономических стимулов. Стимулов, при которых государства были бы заинтересованы не создавать собственные мощности ядерного топливного цикла, но имели бы возможность развивать атомную энергетику, укрепляя свой энергетический потенциал. В этой связи подробнее остановлюсь на международном энергетическом сотрудничестве. Г-жа Федеральный Канцлер тоже об этом коротко, но упомянула, затронула эту тему. В энергетической сфере Россия ориентируется на создание единых для всех рыночных принципов и прозрачных условий. Очевидно, что цена на энергоносители должна определяться рынком, а не являться предметом политических спекуляций, экономического давления или шантажа. Мы открыты для сотрудничества. Зарубежная компания участвует в наших крупнейших энергетических проектах. По различным оценкам, до 26 процентов добычи нефти в России вдумайтесь в эту цифру, до двадцати шести процентов добычи нефти в России приходится на иностранный капитал. Попробуйте привести мне пример подобного широкого присутствия российского бизнеса в ключевых отраслях экономики западных государств. Нет таких примеров, таких примеров нет. Напомню также о соотношении инвестиций, поступающих в Россию и идущих из России в другие страны мира. Соотношение примерно 15:1 вот вам зримый пример открытости и стабильности российской экономики. Экономическая безопасность это сфера, где всем следует придерживаться единых принципов. Мы готовы честно конкурировать. Для этого у российской экономики появляется всё больше возможностей. Такую динамику объективно оценивают эксперты и наши зарубежные партнёры. Так, недавно был повышен рейтинг России в УС, и с четвёртой группы риска наша страна перешла в третью. И хотел бы, пользуясь случаем, здесь, сегодня, в Мюнхене, поблагодарить наших немецких коллег за содействие в принятии вышеназванного решения. Далее, как вы знаете, процесс присоединения России к ВТО вышел на финальную стадию. Отмечу, что в ходе долгих, непростых переговоров слова о свободе, мы не раз слышали слова о свободе слова, о свободе от торговли, о равных возможностях, но почему-то исключительно применительно к нашему, к российскому рынку. Еще одна важная тема, прямо влияющая на глобальную безопасность. Сегодня много говорят о борьбе с бедностью. Что здесь происходит на самом деле? С одной стороны, на программы помощи беднейшим странам выделяются финансовые ресурсы и подчас не маленькие финансовые ресурсы, но по-честному, и здесь многие тоже это знают, зачастую под освоение компаниями самих же стран-доноров. Но в то же время, с другой стороны, в развитых странах сохраняются субсидии в сельском хозяйстве, ограничивается для других доступ к высоким технологиям. И давайте называть вещи своими именами. Получается, что одной рукой раздается благотворительная помощь, а другой не только консервируется экономическая отсталость, а еще и собирается прибыль. Возникающее социальное напряжение в таких депрессивных регионах неизбежно выливаются в рост радикализма, экстремизма, подпитывает терроризм и локальные конфликты. А если всё это вдобавок происходит, скажем, на Ближнем Востоке, в условиях обостренного восприятия внешнего мира как несправедливого, то возникает риск для глобальной дестабилизации. Очевидно, что ведущие страны мира должны видеть эту угрозу и, соответственно, выстраивать более демократическую, справедливую систему экономических отношений в мире, систему, дающую всем шанс и возможность для развития. Выступая на конференции, уважаемые дамы и господа, нельзя обойти молчанием и деятельность организации по безопасности и сотрудничеству в Европе. Как известно, она была создана, чтобы рассматривать все, я подчеркну это, все аспекты безопасности: военно-политические, экономические, гуманитарные, причем в их взаимосвязи. Сегодня что мы видим на практике? Мы видим, что этот баланс явно нарушен. ОБСЕ пытаются превратить вульгарный инструмент обеспечения внешнеполитических интересов одной или группы стран в отношении других стран. И под эту задачу вскроили и бюрократический аппарат ОБСЕ, который абсолютно никак не связан с государствами и учредителями. Вскроили под эту задачу процедуры принятия решений и использования так называемых неправительственных организаций. Формально независимых, но целенаправленно финансируемых, а значит подконтрольных. Согласно основополагающим документам, в гуманитарной сфере ОБСФ призвана оказывать сторонам-членам по их просьбе содействие в соблюдении международных норм в области прав человека. Это важная задача, мы её поддерживаем. Но вовсе это не означает вмешательство во внутренние дела других стран, тем более не навязывание этим государствам того, как они должны жить и развиваться. Очевидно, что такое вмешательство отнюдь не способствует вызреванию подлинно демократических государств и, наоборот, делает их зависимыми и, как следствие, нестабильными в политическом и в экономическом плане. Мы рассчитываем на то, что ОБСЕ будет руководствоваться своими непосредственными задачами и выстраивать отношения с суверенными государствами на основе уважения, доверия. Уважаемые дамы и господа, в заключение хотел бы отметить следующее. Мы очень часто, и я лично очень часто, слышу призывы к России со стороны наших партнеров, в том числе и со стороны европейских партнеров, играть более и более активную роль в мировых делах. В этой связи позволю себе сделать одну маленькую ремарку. Вряд ли нас нужно подталкивать и стимулировать к этому. Россия страна с более чем тысячелетней историей, и практически всегда она пользовалась привилегией проводить независимую внешнюю политику. Мы не собираемся изменять этой традиции и сегодня. Вместе с тем мы хорошо видим, как изменился мир, реалистично оцениваем свои собственные возможности и свой собственный потенциал. И, конечно, нам бы также хотелось иметь дело с ответственными и тоже самостоятельными партнёрами, с которыми мы вместе могли бы работать над строительством справедливого и демократического мироустройства, обеспечивая в нем безопасность и процветание не для избранных, а для всех. Благодарю вас за внимание.
Twitermytweet
Posted - February 8, 2024 at 12:27 AM
Saved - February 8, 2024 at 3:20 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
Putin believes that President Biden is not running the country and that the US has unaccountable leadership. He also mentions that his embassy reported the southern border was better run than the 2020 election. Putin does not meddle in US elections and believes that the same people end up running things anyway. He had good relations with Trump and sees the US as an ally, but not the people in DC. Putin believes that there are financial entities that benefit from keeping Russia and the US as adversaries. He champions the BRICS as a counterweight to the western trading block and believes that Russia has vast natural resources that make it economically strong.

@Twitermytweet - Mr. Bigglesworth 𝕏

Bombshell: Tucker Carlson’s Exclusive Interview with Vladimir Putin in Moscow – Full Transcript Released! TUCKER: What would you tell the people running America? PUTIN: Our message is Russia is not your enemy. We don’t want war. We’re ready for peace. Your leaders seek conflict. This is not what we want. Russia stands for its own people. We do not want what is not ours. TUCKER: Would you visit Washington? PUTIN: Yes, of course. I’ve been to the United States Before. I enjoy visiting and have met with every president except Joe Biden. If invited I would go. Yes. TUCKER: What is your opinion of President Biden? PUTIN: We’re convinced he is not running the country. Let’s say we have good sources that confirm that but it’s plain for anyone to see for themselves. The US has now entered into a dark period. It has unaccountable leadership. TUCKER: Do you think Joe Biden won fair and square? PUTIN: I would rather not get into domestic American politics but will say my embassy reported your southern border was better run than that 2020 election. (chuckles) TUCKER: One poll in America shows you more popular than Biden – any reaction? PUTIN: (laughs) I don’t know if that should be taken seriously but Russian ideals have support. We believe in traditional values; marriage is between a man and a woman: men are men and women are women. TUCKER: Who would you like to see as the next president of the United States? PUTIN: Once again it is not for us to say or get involved. Contrary to longstanding accusations we do not meddle in your elections. We don’t need to because the same people end up running things anyway. TUCKER: Why did you invade Ukraine? PUTIN: Did we invade or were we invaded? Look at the history. Look at the people living there. Historically it’s we who were invaded and are simply fighting back now. The lands and people are Russian and we will have again what was always ours. TUCKER: How will you fee lol if Trump won again? PUTIN: We had good relations when Mr. Trump was president. There was no war. Our relations were at a high point. That said nothing is predictable or stats the same. We will have to see. PUTIN: I remember laughing to his jokes when he was a comedian in Russia. Let’s go back to laughs. TUCKER: Why is that? PUTIN: There are strong financial entities in whose interest it is to keep us as adversaries. One of your presidents warned against that. We Russians do not have that problem. TUCKER: Do you see the United States as an enemy? PUTIN: No. Categorically no. We were allies in WWII. Russians helped settle Alaska, California and we were in Hawaii too. Our people are not enemies but those in DC are certainly not our friends. TUCKER: Can you be more specific and name names? PUTIN: It would be pointless. It is not up to us to solve your domestic issues. Besides, I’m sure you know the names better than us. TUCKER: So are you saying your adversary is not Joe Biden but the people behind him? PUTIN: Exactly. Joe Biden may not even be aware of what’s going on. He may not understand the level of sanctions thrown at Russia. Who put those sanctions together? Those our the adversaries. TUCKER: Is that why you are championing the BRICS? PUTIN: The BRICS would exist anyway. It’s a natural reaction to the western trading block. It’s a counterweight. When the dollar is weaponized against states there will be a natural alternative to it. That’s what we want. TUCKER: Is that why you and Russia have been targeted? PUTIN: It’s more complicated than that but I’m sure it’s a good part of the reason. Whenever the dollar is endangered the United States takes extreme measures. It cannot afford to have the dollar fail. TUCKER: But isn’t Russia weaker and more vulnerable economically than the US? PUTIN: When you look at the size of economies we are small. But few people take into account our vast natural resources. Russia has over $80 trillion in the ground. No country even comes close to us. TUCKER What is your opinion of President Biden?

View Full Interactive Feed