2024-06-11 Dr. James Fetzer: Europe Rebelling? | Global Freedom TV

Categories
Posted in: Global Freedom TV, News, Patriots
SPREAD THE WORD

BA WORRIED ABOUT 5G FB BANNER 728X90

Summary

➡ Scott Bennett, a reporter in for Global Freedom TV, shares updates on the tense situation between Russia and the West. Russian President, Vladimir Putin, warns that Russia could arm other countries with long-range weapons to strike the West. This comes as Russia declares the United States an enemy state for the first time, amid conflicts over Ukraine. The situation is escalating, with fears of a potential nuclear war being discussed.
➡ The article discusses the ongoing tensions between Russia and Ukraine, with the West’s involvement. It suggests that the West is misreading Russia’s intentions and readiness for negotiations, which could lead to further conflict. The article also mentions the potential for changes in Russia’s nuclear doctrine and the economic impact of sanctions on Russia. Lastly, it highlights the possibility of a nuclear war if the situation escalates, which would not be in the best interest of the US or Europe.
➡ The article discusses the potential of a land war between the U.S. and Russia, highlighting the U.S. army’s lack of preparedness for such a conflict. It suggests that the U.S. army is smaller and less capable than many believe, and that the infrastructure for a large-scale war in Eastern Europe is not in place. The article also points out that the U.S. army’s equipment and organization are outdated, and that the U.S. would be at a disadvantage fighting on Russia’s doorstep. It concludes by urging U.S. policymakers to reconsider any plans for a land war with Russia.
➡ The article discusses the military advantages Russia has over the West, including superior weaponry and a battle-hardened force. It also criticizes the West’s focus on diversity and social issues over combat readiness. The article then
shifts to the situation in Israel, condemning the killing of hundreds of Palestinians during a hostage rescue operation and accusing Israel of violating international laws. It ends by questioning Israel’s claim to Palestinian lands and suggesting a return to a unified Palestine.
➡ Israel chose to be a Jewish state over a democratic one, leading to discrimination issues. French President Macron dissolved parliament and called for a snap election after a significant defeat, which could lead to more negative outcomes for him. Far-right parties in Europe are gaining power, with Marie Le Pen’s National Rally party dominating French polls. This shift in power, along with issues like immigration and inflation, could potentially influence future U.S. elections, with some predicting a return to conservative leadership.
➡ We should avoid conflict with Russia as we wouldn’t win, and it’s better to focus on improving our own country. Despite sanctions, Russia’s economy is strong and growing. We need to heed the advice of our founding fathers and avoid foreign conflicts. It’s crucial we learn this lesson before it’s too late.

Transcript

Welcome to Scott Bennett’s global right of way, Canadians. Scott’s on special assignment in St. Petersburg, Russia. I, Jim Fetzer, I’m very glad to be here with you today. We have multiple developments at the conference. Vladimir Putin has made many important points which I hope will be sobering for the west, including warning that Russia could give long range weapons to others to strike the west. I’ve heard reports that a special small flotilla of russian ships are in the Caribbean. He is making stops along the way in relation to Cuba, Mexico, Venezuela, all of which might very well be provided with russian missiles.

Putin warned Germany Wednesday the use of its weapons to strike targets inside Russia would mark a dangerous death and that Moscow could in turn provide long range weapons to others to strike western targets. Such action by the west will further undermine international security and could lead to very serious problems, all of which have been driven by the west, by its abuse of international law and relations between Russia and Ukraine, where the west is intervening, apparently out of greed, to control the natural resources of Ukraine. Meanwhile, very disturbing. Russia has declared the United States to be an enemy state for the first time.

Amid strains over Ukraine, Russian President Putin’s press secretary Peskov’s remarks come after former american intel officer and UN arms inspector Scott Ritter was prevented from visiting St. Petersburg and his passport confiscated. Responding to this event, Pesky told reporters the latest manifestation of the rabid campaign to stop Americans from communicating with Russia would only be understandable, would only make sense if the move had any connection to his former intelligence status. We are now an enemy country for them, just as they are for us, a reputable russian investigator the website agentstov according to that site, neither Pescop nor Putin have ever referred to the United States or other unfriendly countries as Russia’s enemies in in the past, Britter, a former Marine Corps intel officer, informed task he was taken from a flight from New York to Istanbul, intending to attend the St.

Petersburg conference. He claimed authorities provided no rationale for blocking him, adding they were complying with orders from the State Department, no doubt emanating from Antony Blinken, who represents himself internationally as a jew rather than as the american secretary of state. The Gremlin shift in language now classifying America as an enemy comes after President Biden authorized Ukraine to deploy american supplied weapons to attack targets in Russia, which was a very bad idea. Last week, the Biden admin stated it worked at lightning speed to allow Kiev to use its weapon specific targets within Russia. The Kremlin earlier referred to us and other western nations that backed and weaponized Ukraine while imposing sanctions as unfriendly states or as opponents.

Back in March, Peskov stated Russia objected to us politicians for disrespecting their president, but added, there’s no anti american sentiment in Moscow. Expressing optimism even went on to say, sooner or later the realization of people of America and Russia are not enemies will eventually come. He’s right about that. The people of Russia and the people of America are not enemies. But the fact of the matter is the governments of the west have made themselves enemies of Russia, and Russia of necessity must take measures necessary to protect and defend its national security from the onslaught that continues to this day.

Meanwhile, Putin raises the specter really deliberate, recalling to mind of the cuban missile crisis by virtue of this modest flotilla visiting the Caribbean. The Admiral Gorshkov frigate, the Kazan nuclear power cruise missile submarine, the academic push replacement whaler and the Nikolai Checker rescue dub are the four vessels scheduled to arrive in Cuba this week. They’re expected to make a port call in at Vienna between June 12 and 17th before heading south of Venezuela later in the month. The US think tank Institute for the Study of War quoted the Russian Ministry of Defense, which stated the objective was to ensure a russian naval presence in an operationally important area of the ocean.

Thursday, Putin spoke at the international forum, made a point to mention Russia’s nuclear doctrine, observing look what it says. If someone’s actions threaten our sovereignty and territorial integrity, we consider it possible for us to use all means at our disposal. This should not be taken lightly or superficially. The assessment noted. Russias decision to visit countries with historically strained us relations such as Cuba and Venezuela, is aimed at persuading the US to self detour, to draw itself back, to not enact policies offering further support for Ukraine. Monday, it was reported Ukraine had used us weapons to strike targets inside Russia.

A senior official claim was used for the purpose of defending Kharkov, Ukraine’s second largest city. But bear in mind, that’s not all Zelenskyy will use those weapons to do Alaska here’s Scott Ritter talking before his attempt to fly to St. Petersburg, where he was taken off his plane at JFK in New York. Listen carefully to what he has to say about the expectation that nuclear war could break out by mid June. Mid June today being the 11 June. How are you tonight, Scott? Are you raring to go or are you tired? What’s the condition over there at Shea Ritter oh, no, we’ve made all the preparations.

I mean, this trip, I’m excited about it, but I’m also a little nervous, not because of the trip we’re getting ready to take, but because of the situation we find ourselves in in the world today. I don’t know how many historians are watching tonight, but if you are a historian, understand that we’re in a situation today that’s orders of magnitude more dangerous than the cuban missiles crisis at its height. We are on the cusp of nuclear war. It could happen right now during this program. That’s how stupid this entire thing is. It could happen while we’re flying over to Russia.

It could happen while we’re in Russia. And some people would say, then why the hell are you going on the trip? And to be honest, I asked myself that same question. Why not just stay home, hang out with my family and wait for it all to end? Because there, if I were a betting man, I could go and find different odds and make money off of this. Because there are, this is a wager that I would take, that there would be a nuclear war by the middle of June. It doesn’t mean it’s 100%, doesn’t mean it’s 90%, but it ain’t zero.

It ain’t even close to 0%. It’s over 50% right now. There’s over 50% chance there will be a nuclear war by mid June because you factor in the stupidity of the western leadership, you got Joe Biden green lighting the use of american weapons to strike Russia. When Russia says that’s an act of war, you have President Macron doing the same thing, Schroder doing the same thing, all of Europe doing the same thing, as if it’s no big deal to attack Russia. It’s a huge deal to attack Russia. It’s as big as it gets. And then NATO says, well, it’s, these are sovereign decisions made by sovereign nations.

It’s not a NATO decision. Oh, really? So when Russia strikes these sovereign nations as Russia will, is NATO going to make a move on article five? Big question. Because I think Dmitry Medvedev, who’s a former president who sits at the right hand of Putin and the National Security Council, said, clearly, if you implement article five, we’re going to assume that you’re going to attack us and then we’re going to nuke you. Boom, bam, bang, gone, finished. We have senior russian policymakers, influencers, who are saying that Russia should do an actual nuclear explosion, have the cameras out there and just blow one up above ground and show the whole world and tell NATO that’s you.

That would be the nice thing for Russia to do. In fact, I would encourage Russia to do that. Screw the test ban treaties. What good are treaties? The west doesn’t respect them. The west doesn’t care. The west thinks Russia is bluffing. So people say, well, then why go? Well, let me tell you why. Because we’re going to Russia, have a conversation with the russian people, and that conversation is going to be about the very things we’re talking about here and about the prospects for peace. And there’s a chance that the conversations we’re going to have will be heard by senior members of the russian government.

And I want to make sure. I want to make sure that before the Russians make the decision to use nuclear weapons, that maybe they heard Skyritter have a conversation with some russian people about the prospects for peace, about giving the american people a chance about one, by exhausting every option, short of war, before going to war. That you don’t want to write America off yet. That there are people in America whose lives are worth living, are worth saving, just like there are people in Russia whose lives are worth living and saving. And maybe, just maybe, instead of rushing to do that, which you would have every right to do, take a pause for the cause, take a deep breath, wait till tomorrow.

Then we saved it. We saved the world by one day. And then if we can do it again the next day and the next day and the next day, just keep having these conversations, hoping that the russian leadership is tuning in and listening, and maybe, just maybe, collectively, we can buy enough time for sanity to prevail in the west. And they back down on this in the middle of June. Zelenskyy is going to have this peace conference in Switzerland. It’s going to fail. It’s already going to fail. But you see, one of the reasons why the west is doing what it’s doing right now is there’s a perception that’s fueled by all our great friends and Applebaum and all those russian experts who say Russia’s bluffing, that Russia is desperately looking for an off ramp.

Why would they say that? I don’t know. Because Vladimir Putin’s government said we’re open to negotiations. They just have to be realistic. Well, Zelenskyy is not about realistic negotiations. Zelenskyy is about imposing this fantasy outcome on Russia, which he can’t do through use of force. He needs the west to engage, to intervene. And so this is the last gambit between now and the swiss summit. Zelensky is going to be pushing every button possible and all of his little pathetic Chihuahua nations in the Baltics and Poland and elsewhere are going to be barking to his tune. And then that empowers Macron, that empowers Schultz, that empowers Biden, to say, maybe we’re onto something here.

If we just push Russia a little bit, make Russia know that the cost they’re going to pay for continuous war is too high, that Russia has to come to the table, even though they weren’t invited to the table in Switzerland. That’s the hope. They’re misreading the Russians. The Russians aren’t saying we’re ready to go, to come to the table at all costs. The Russians are saying we’re ready to come to a table, that we dictate the outcome, that we’ve won this war and we’re willing to end this war now through some sort of negotiation. But it has to be reality based.

The west is taking the advice of people who don’t know Russia, who don’t understand Russia, which is another reason why we have to go to Russia, so that we can experience it, we can collect this data, we can bring it back with us and, you know, through various film products, a documentary film, that we hope to make things of that nature to educate the american people about the reality of Russia, so that in November, maybe the american people can put some pressure on whomever we elect to represent us in higher office to make peace with Russia, not seek war with Russia.

Now, this is one of the most sane, rational voices addressing the Russia Ukraine war. He’s clearly a voice for peace. Why, therefore, would Antony Blinken it not wanted him to travel to St. Petersburg to share his insight? It can only because he and the powers he represents, the Rothschild banking empire, do not want peace with Russia. They want war. Recall, as I’ve observed before, the World Economic Forum has declared, the new world order cannot move forward without Ukraine. This, therefore, is not just a battle over that particular region of geography, it’s a battle over the fate of the world.

And how could you have a peace conference in which your opponent, Russia, is not only is not even invited to participate, clearly a fraud. China, who was invited, has, in the absence of Russia, declined. It’s ill fated from the beginning. How, you suggest. Meanwhile, Putin observes, we wouldn’t even need nukes to defeat a defenseless Europe after months of dropping veiled threats about nukes after he ordered his invasion of Ukraine over two years ago, which, of course, as I’ve explained, was defensive, to protect the Dunbass from an all out slaughter that was about to be launched by Kiev.

Just as vicious as the israeli slaughter of Palestinians in Gaza, where Putin acted properly to intervene, is now saying Europe is defenseless. Russia wouldn’t even need nukes to defeat Ukraine and its allies. During the discussion in St. Petersburg, Putin observes, Russia has more tactical nukes than there are on the european continent, even if the United States were to bring theirs over. He further explained to russian foreign policy expert Sergei Karganov that Europe does not have a developed early warning system. In this sense, they are more or less defenseless. Meanwhile, Putin is not ruling out changes to russian nuclear doctrine, which outlines the conditions for their use of nuclear weapons.

This doctrine is a living tool. We are carefully watching what is happening in the world around us. We do not exclude making changes to the doctrine. The St. Petersburg forum, often referred to as the russian devos, is widely seen as a sign the country is open to cooperation. Russia remains under heavy worldwide sanctions because of the war in Ukraine, where those sanctions have created chaos economically because they now perceive that the dollar can be manipulated to be a weapon of politics in other nations. Don’t want to be subject to the kind of pressure those sanctions represent, seeing how they have been imposed upon Russia notwithstanding, of course, Russia is thriving, flourishing the ruble at an all time high, brics developing.

Even Saudi Arabia is giving up the use of the dollar for oil transactions. NATO has now allowed Ukraine to use western supplied weapons to hit targets inside russian territory. We are not supplying those weapons yet, observed Putin, but we reserve the right to do so in states or legal entities under pressure, including military, from the countries that supply weapons to Ukraine and encourage their use on russian territory. As President Putin has made clear, we’ll investigate these issues. If you’re trying to harm us, you have to be pretty sure we have sufficient opportunity and chances to harm you.

This was being told to a russian state tv post by a russian state tv host, Vladimir Solovoy, who rejected the argument. Such saber rattling is a bluff. It’s always a bluff until a time when it is not. You can keep thinking Russia is bluffing and then one day, poof, there’s no more great Britain to laugh at. Don’t you ever try to push a russian bear thinking that, oh, it’s a kitten and we can play with it. Even Jen stolen Bert acknowledges Russia has exceeded NATO’s expectations. Speaking to Sky News, Jen Stolenberg was asked to comment on a study released last month by the consulting firm Bain and company revealing Moscow was generating artillery shells at more than three times the rate of all NATO members combined.

It’s correct that Russia has been able to build up their defense industry faster than we expected. And it’s correct that NATO allies have spent more time than they should in wrapping up our production. The reason western nations have lagged behind is that after the Cold War, meaning after the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991, we actually built down our defense industry. However, according to Stollenberg, the situation is now improving, with all the NATO allies increasing their capacity to produce ammunition and weapons. There were delays and gaps in deliveries to Kiev in recent months, but this is really changing and the flow of ammunition into Ukraine has increased over the last few weeks.

Russias advances in Kharkov demonstrate the need for us to step up our support for Kiev. The secretary general of NATO added his support will continue even if former President Trump wins the election in November because its in the interests of both Europe and the US, Stolenberg insisted. I, Adam Serdley, it is most certainly not in the interests of US or the United States to engage in a nuclear war with Russia, which is inevitable if we continue to poke a bear. Scott Ritter predicting it could happen as early as within the next week or so mid June.

Trump has expressed skepticism on donating arms to Ukraine, arguing the US should stop giving foreign aid unless it’s structured as a loan, insisting the bulk of the support should come from Europe. Trump remembers a businessman. He likes to conduct business. Business is successful when it’s not hostile. Hes a good man for dealing with many of these issues. A russian victory over Ukraine will make the world more dangerous and us more vulnerable in Stahlenberg, but its not at all obvious that that is the case. The paper by Bain and company said russian factories are projected to make a refurbishment approximately 4.5 million artillery rounds this year compared to the west combined output of about 1.3 million.

The figures given by the firm also suggest the average production cost of a 152 millimeter shell from Moscow. It runs about $1,000, while the price of the 155 millimeter round used by NATO is up to 4000. In late May, Russian President Putin sent domestic ammo output an increase by a factor of 14 drone manufactories, a fourfold surge. The assembly of tanks and armored vehicles risen by a factor 3.5 since the outbreak of the conflict. Here we have some reflections from Colonel MacGregor on the current state of affairs. Could the United States army be destined for a war against Russia? It’s hard to even imagine.

I’m saying that, and it’s, and it’s not just some hyperbole or some just crazy statement, but it’s becoming more and more real. Something that has to be given legitimate shot. It shouldn’t happen this way. There should be even no consideration of this. But the facts on the ground are requiring it. Earlier today, there was an article in the Telegraph which was, was titled NATO Land Corridor could rush us troops to frontline an event of european war with Russia. Now listen, that, that is just a crazy thing to think of, that the US military, US army in particular, could fight the russian army in this current environment here.

Now, of course, the bigger threat is and the more troubling threat is if there was a nuclear confrontation between the two sides. But let’s look at the situation. What might happen if what’s depicted in this Telegraph article were to come into vogue and to happen, and the US army would go in there. Now, I’ve fought in several deployments in my time to include large scale tank on tank warfare in the past. And one of my commanders at that time was then Major Doug McGregor, who’s now retired colonel. Of course, you know him very well. He’s been on our show many times.

That guy literally wrote the book on how to do future war, how the, the modern wars can fight based on things that had happened in the past and the capabilities, how to project these things out. So I wanted to bring him in to talk about this because there’s nobody better. And I promise you. And he was not available today to come on camera, but he was able to come on the telephone. So I had him on earlier today on a recording so that we can bring it to you live right now. And I’m telling you, this is something you need to pay a lot of attention to.

I always want to bring you quality programming here. But this thing here with Doug is he brings up some incredibly salient points. And the bottom line that, as you’re about to hear, is that the United States army is nowhere near as capable as to what people think it is. And our policymakers, especially the president in Washington, needs to pay a lot of attention to this because if he even has any fantasies about engaging in a land warfare against Russia, he needs to rethink. And here’s the reason why. Talk specifically about some things. And Doug, actually, I’m going to, I’m going to read a part here from your book, Margin of Victory, because I think that it’s very, very, very much appropriate for what we’re going to discuss today.

And if I can just bring this up. There it is right here. You wrote that each chapter of this book is going to be a clearing call to recognize that wars are decided in the decades before they begin, not by the sudden appearance of a new technological silver bullet or presence of a few strong personalities in the senior ranks during a senior battle. How effectively national, political and military leaders of just a framework of organization, technology and human capital to relentless change in society, technology and world affairs, determines whether the nation state prevails or perishes in defeat.

So if that be true, if, if basically what you were doing in the decade before the battle is what’s going to determine how you do in the battle? The question is going to be what is the United States army going to do if it goes into a full scale war with Russia right now? And just to kind of set the stage, this is, there’s news out that NATO was looking at how it would rush large numbers of american troops if we got into a ground war with Russia. And for the purpose of this conversation, we’re going to say that it doesn’t go nuclear if it just stays conventional.

I want to look at what might happen with that. Nukes is a very possibility, and that can go elsewhere. But I want to discuss, first of all, what could the US army do? And first of all, I want to ask you over the past decade, let’s just look at the premise of your book. If we look back the past decade, going back to 2014, the US military primarily has had experience in Afghanistan, in Iraq, in Libya, in Somalia, several places like that, all small scale stuff. So if that’s what we have prepared up to this point, what kind of army do we have right now if we had to fight a large scale army? Well, first, we have a very small army.

We’re down to less than about 450,000. We’re in no position to fight a land war in eastern Europe, which has a front of hundreds of miles and a depth of 1000 miles at least. The infrastructure in the theater is not developed beyond Germany. There’s surprisingly little in Poland, though. The point is, I can’t imagine the use of the United States army to do much more than potentially defend. And you’re talking about offensive operations because you have to move into eastern Europe. Now, having said that, remember that the vast majority of the equipment that the army is using and the organization that we see on the battlefield today was developed in the seventies and the eighties for use in the nineties, and we’re now in the year 2024.

We’re talking about a very different mix of technologies, different organizational constructs. The Russians have adapted. They’ve had to adapt because they were thrust into a war for which they, too, were really not prepared. You’ll recall when the Russians first went into Ukraine, their force was too small, wasn’t really organized to deal with the robust ukrainian army. All of that has changed. So on the tactical level, we’re an anachronism. We’re not really prepared. We don’t have sufficient air defense and missile defense capabilities, which would mean that we’re naked in the face of. Of the enemy. In other words, the Russians.

Now, having said that, the Rusi in London just published a report saying that the combined air defenses in western Europe could protect, at most 5% of the infrastructure. Yeah, yeah, I just saw that, actually, which puts us in a very difficult position. Now, let’s start at the top. Strategically, we’re operating on the opponent’s doorstep, where the opponent has every advantage logistically, in terms of range, weapons, ammunition, resupply, and so forth. We’re at the end right now in Poland, on the border with Ukraine, of our logistical support structure. Now you want to move this lilliputian force, frankly, into an area where it’ll face probably 800,000 russian troops.

You have the same thing with the Europeans. The worst part is that our force has very little unity of command, which means no unity of effort. Why? Because we’re dealing with multiple foreign contingents. The Russians have one language of command, Russian. They have one uniform command and control structure, and they have both operational as well as strategic ISR. Our strategic ISR in space is very formidable. We do have operational ISR from the fleet as well as the shore, but it’s very vulnerable to attack. The one area where we do have an advantage is air power. We outnumber the numbers of russian aircraft that could be hurled against us by five, six, seven times.

However, we would have to fight our way through integrated air defenses that would involve some losses. We have to fly from vulnerable airfields that are relatively close to the battlefront because they’re short range fighters. And, Doug, let me. Let me. Just as you’re talking right now, I have a map on the screen that shows, from the Telegraph, which was talking about there would be five different locations from Norway, Germany, Italy, Turkey, I’m sorry, the Netherlands in Italy, down in the south, actually, where they would come into it shows relatively limited or narrow constrained areas here in that same article, because I think this is related to exactly what you’re talking about.

Lieutenant General Solfrank, who’s the NATO logistics chief, makes the point here, and this is something you’ve been really talking about for decades, frankly, is that the vulnerability of these large logistics bases, these large concentrations of troops and equipment, etcetera, that we did like in Desert Storm, we had these huge bases that were never touched. But he’s saying that because of the Russia’s long range missile systems, now that’s a thing of the past. But here’s the big problem. All we’ve ever done is practice with these large scale movements. What kind of difficulties would we have moving in these five directions, even try to get to the battlefront? Well, you look at the distances that are on the map, you’re talking about hundreds of kilometers, in other words, 100 and 5200, 300 miles, trying to operate in areas where you don’t have nearly enough pre positioned ammunition supplies and yet we haven’t even talked about medical evacuation.

All of those things are a nightmare. We’re simply not prepared to launch offensive operations into eastern Europe. If you go back to 1941, very rapidly the Germans discovered they were on a front of 1100 miles with about anywhere from 600 to 1000 miles deep. We’re not prepared for that. We don’t have the numbers, we don’t have the logistical infrastructure. And as you point out, the air power has to be positioned forward. If it’s forward, it’s going to be vulnerable. We haven’t even discussed something else which has to be mentioned. And if we’ve listened to the Russians over the last several weeks, repeatedly they’ve said, look, if you attack us, attack us on our soil, if you launch strikes against us, we reserve the right to return the favor with tactical nuclear weapons.

Now, very specifically, we’re very reliant on f is a brilliant aircraft fighter bomber, and the Russians know that it is capable of carrying and launching nuclear weapons. This is the same thing with B 52s. If the Russians see large numbers of f 15s headed in their direction and we would use large numbers of aircraft because we’re not going to allow our forces to go forward into Ukraine without air cover, then the Russians would feel probably compelled to immediately attack all of those airfields and airports with tactical nuclear weapons. Why bother with conventional weapons? One or two tactical nuclear weapons of five kiloton or less will annihilate the airfields in the space of an hour.

And why would you wait around for us to attack and destroy them? So I think it’s not just conventional. They definitely have the edge in conventional military power. But why risk the arrival of f 15s with nuclear weapons over your soil? I don’t think the Russians would do that. I think the Russians are telling us they’re ready. And remember, the Russians have a battle hardened force. They’ve been fighting for several years. They’ve eliminated a lot of weak officers, weak commanders at every level. We have no such experience. As you mentioned earlier, Dan, if you go back over the last 30 years, when have we relieved anyone in the field for failure to perform well? If you’re performing against opponents that have no armies, no air forces, no naval forces, the general officer is really never tested and the troops rely excessively on firepower as opposed to maneuver.

There’s no agility in terms of thinking and behavior. There’s no experience to base anything on. So the Russians have a decided advantage strategically, operationally and tactically. I don’t think we can overcome those. Doug, let me ask you this question, because I remember, let me just say Colonel MacGregor nails it again and again. The Russians have all the advantages. They have the closest supply lines, no logistic problems. They’re out producing the west militarily by many orders of magnitude. They have a hard military. We have a lilliputian force by comparison, that’s gone woke. Our people are more experienced in dealing with diversity issues and transgenderism than they are in actually conducting combat.

Have no doubt in a conventional war, it would be impossible for the west even have all the american military forces at its disposal to defeat Russia. It’s impossible. What that means is if the west is going to launch an attack, it has to be nuclear. And I reiterate what many commentators have observed before. Russia has superior ICBM’s, Russia has superior anti missile missiles. Russia has superior anti ship missiles, Russia has superior anti submarine torpedoes. The Russians know their existence depends upon their ability to conduct warfare. They have been lean and mean. Their military industrial complex operates to benefit Russia, the American to fat their pocketbook.

They even put out deliberately inferior arms. So just as Bill Gates learned with windows, if it’s defective, then you can get additional contracts for new versions or for maintenance contracts and double or triple your profits. They have never had the national interests of America at heart. With the Russians, it’s been completely the opposite. Now, mind you, the situation is developing even in Israel, where it grows worse and worse virtually by the day as a genocide continues. Us most recently, four hostages were freed, but at the cost of 274 Palestinians killed. As antivore.com observes, if you have to kill 274 to prep war penal hostage.

Is that a success? According to the israeli and us governments, it is. Israel, with a little help from the United States, attacked the Nuserat camp in Gaza, freeing four hostages seen by Hamas. In doing so, however, the israeli forces killed and wounded hundreds, hundreds of unarmed men, women and children. It’s a brutal calculus that these Palestinians have been in the way essentially as worthless and therefore expendable. Put differently, Israel sees all Palestinians as guilty as terrorists. Therefore there are no innocent Palestinians. Israel can kill as many as they need, without guilt or remorse, to achieve its desired end.

Coverage by the mainstream in the west have been glowing, praising Israel for rescuing four while downplaying the palestinian debt as collateral damage. Hardly worth a mention. Here’s a BBC story about it. Big caps four hostages seized at Nova festival freed in Gaza small type Hamas claims more than 200 Palestinian were killed in the densely populated area where the raid took place. You see a hamburger woman freed by israeli forces. You don’t say any images of the more than 200 Palestinians killed by Israel. Note how the palestinian dead are consigned to a subheading and smaller font using a passive voice.

Were killed as if it’s unclear who killed them and why. Yes, it’s good to see four hostages free, but if hundreds of other innocent must die or suffer grievous wounds in the process, that’s not a successful operation. It’s a massacre. Meanwhile, Red Crescent says the israeli troops came in an aid truck to free the hostages. Jabroo Salam, the Palestinian Red Crescent said Monday israeli troops used an aid drop to infiltrate central Gaza’s new Zerat camp, where they rescued four israeli hostages over the weekend. I’d observe this is a violation of the laws of war. This is a violation of the Geneva Convention.

This is a violation of the United nations charter, the Red Cross local palestinian branch said. A ward of the danger of occupation forces use of such a vehicle to infiltrate the camp. The occupation forces deceive people by disguising themselves under the comrade civilians desperately need amid their suffering from severe food insecurity. They’re starving. Severe food insecurity is quite the euphemism. They are being deliberately starved to death. This endangers the safety of relief team, to put it mildly. Such a precedent raises the prospect of humanitarian aid workers being perceived with suspicion in the future. Asked about a Red Crescent statement, israeli army referred to a June 8 tweet where a spokesman dismissed such allegations as lies.

Well, we know who lies and we know who speaks the truth. Virtually every single claim made by the palestinian side has turned out to be true. Virtually every allegation or defense advanced by Israel has turned out to be false. Four hostages held in Gaza since October 7 were released. Amagmir Jean, 22, Noah Argamani, 26, Andrei Geslop, 27 and Shalomi Zib, 41, were kidnapped from the Nova festival on October 7, Hamas run Gaza health ministries. At least 274 Palestinians had been killed. Meanwhile, the Cradle reports Israel perpetrated the Nuseret massacre to block a ceasefire deal with Hamas.

Ismail Hanyai, head of the Hamas movement political bureau, said Israel launched its bloody massacre to block a ceasefire deal speaking with al Jazeera Arabic on the 10 June about the US proposed ceasefire deal and prospects were ending the war, Aliyah said Israel attack the Nuserat camp, killing at least 274 Palestinians and retrieving four israeli captives to block any agreement that would end the war. Israeli forces bombed various civilian areas at Gaza from the air to create chaos and pave the way while executing Palestinians in cold blood in their homes where no Israeli Catholics were present. He also accused the US of bearing being a part of the attack that the Biden White House is no less criminal than the israeli leadership, with which I completely agree.

Sunday, us national security adviser Jake Sullivan said the US offered help with a rescue but did not specify how. A senior white House official said the operation will likely complicate efforts to reach a ceasefire in Captiv exchange between Israel and Hamas. Katrina, the four israeli captives, has strengthened prime Minister Netanyahus determination to continue pursuing military operations rather than agreeing to a ceasefire. Before Saturday’s massacre, the US had been pushing Israel to accept a ceasefire proposal announced by President Biden on 31 May. Us officials claim Israel put forward the proposal, but net, Yahoo and other ministers stated they would refuse any deal that would force them to permanently end their seven month bombing and demolition campaign in the besieged Gaza Strip.

I have no doubt about it. For Israel, the final solution to the palestinian problem would be to load all the Palestinians aboard a ship loaded out to sea and sinkhe. Absent that alternative, theyre doing their best to kill or expel every single Palestinian from Palestine. The situation is completely outrageous, as one of the callers to my radio show on RBN is observed, paralleling Trump’s motto make America great again. He proposed make Israel Palestine again, with which I 100% agree. Israel has no legitimate claim to the lands of Palestine. That’s been made clear already by the International Court of Justice.

And brilliant critiques of the absence of a legal foundation for establishing the apartheid state of Israel have no doubt is a jewish state that treats those of other ethnic orientation with gross discrimination, just as apartheid as was South Africa in its time. And by choice, Israel voted within the last 15 years or so between becoming a jewish state in a democratic state and they chose to be a jewish state. There’s nothing going on here that has anything to do with freedom or democracy. Meanwhile, Europe appears to be rebelling. Macron is dissolved parliament after a humiliating defeat by the french right, President Emmanuel Macron has dissolved the French National assembly.

Called a snap election in response to his humiliating defeat in the european election. The decision is a significant gamble that could backfire spectacularly for him because the outcome may be even more overwhelmingly negative for him. In preliminary results from the european election, Marie Lopennes National Rally have won 30 seats with 31.5% of the vote. A stunning victory for the french right. By contrast, Macrons Renaissance party manages secured just 15.2% of the vote. Less than half. Macron addressed the french people directly. As the scale of the defeat became clearer. I have decided to give you back the choice of our parliamentary future.

Through the vote, I am dissolving the National assembly this evening. The first round of election is set for June 30, the 2 July 7th. Macron referred to his decision as serious and weighty. But it is before all an act of confidence. The result in Macron’s announcement of a snap election were greeted with jubilation by Marie Le Pen and her supporters ready for power. If french people put their trust in us, Le Pen said Le Pen observe her party and won because it best represented France and the concerns of ordinary french people which are immigration, inflation because of living in gronk and of course the war in Ukraine where Emmanuel Macron has declared he’s sending french forces to fight there.

When the people vote, a people win. Her party’s victory is expected to be a prelude to an even greater victory in the national election. The party is already the largest opposition party in parliament, with 88 members. It’s going to be very hard to stop us now, said a national rally senator, we’re everywhere now. There’s no more fortress impossible for us to take. We have voters in every sector of life, every profession. If Macron should be roundly defeated in the national election, which I predict his legislative agenda will be stymied for his final two years in office, and he will be unable to run for reelection in 2027 because of term limits.

Meanwhile, far right Gaines in the EU election deal stunning defeats Francis Macron and Germany Schultz, another supporter of the Ukraine war. Sensing a threat from the far right, the Christian Democrats of EU commissioner president Ursula von der Layden had already shifted further to the right on immigration and climate ahead of the elections and were rewarded. I remain by far the biggest group in the 720 seat european parliament and de facto brokers of the ever expanding powers of the legislature. Undoubtedly, however, the star on a stunning electoral night was a national rally party of Marie Le Payne, which dominated the french polls to such an extent.

Macron immediately dissolved the national parliament and called for new elections. It was a massive political risk, since its party could suffer more losses. Hobbling the rest of his term, which ends in 2027. Le Pen was delighted to accept the challenge. Ready to turn the country around, ready to defend the interests of the French, ready to put it into mass immigration, echoing the rallying cry of so many far right leaders in other countries who are also celebrating substantial wins. Meanwhile, brawsols far right parties rattled the traditional powers in the European Union and made major gains in parliamentary election Sunday, dealing an especially humiliating defeat of President Emmanuel Macron on a night where the 27 member bloc pal bubbly shifted to the right, italian Prime Minister Georgia Meloni more than doubled her seats in the EU parliament.

And even if the alternative for Germany extreme right party was touted by scandal involving candidates, it still rallied enough seats to sweep past the sloping social democrats of Chancellor Olaf Schultz. Meanwhile, the former ambassador to Germany Rick Grinnell observes EU and throws out immigration revolt former ambassador to Germany Rick Grinnell said the United States should heed what’s happening across Europe. Toy Newsmax is a backlash in progressive and woke policies. And I dare say add, though these stories aren’t emphasizing to the pro Ukraine war policies that being advocated by their leaders. Fed up european set progressives packing in parliamentary election the past four days, replacing traditional power brokers with conservatives.

French President Macron is all parliament pulver snapped national elections in three weeks. Grinnell joined Rob Schmidt tonight to say the revolts across western Europe could be a harbinger of things to come for the United States. That Americans could drive President Biden out of the White House in November in favor of Donald Trump and his policies. You don’t need a crystal ball to make that prediction. You really have to look at what’s happening in Europe and really progressive policies are under attack. People realize the woke left, where they put together their governments and put together their policies they can’t produce, Brunell told Schmidt.

People are unhappy. The economy’s tank. So you look from Germany to France to Belgium, everywhere there’s a republican conservative style sweep. Now, I hope that’s going to happen in our country as well, but we’ve got some work to do. The Europeans have watched inflation take over. They’ve watched their economies go to the bottom. Suddenly now you have countries like France that are scaring Macron because the conservatives are marching toward a takeover, and he just called for elections. He’s that scared. Renell also highlighted the rise of the ultra conservative alternative for Germany, now the second largest party in Germany.

What’s happening in Europe is really a backlash. And remember, the European Union became smaller because of Brexit. The British said, we’re out of here because the rest of Europe couldn’t control the immigration issue. We need to learn from the Europeans on immigration, where a leader cannot handle the immigration issue in a proper way, that people revolt. I think we’re seeing that in America as well. Grinnell spoke of illegal immigration in the United States, reacting to a weekend poll showing 62% of Americans across a political spectrum want illegals booted from the country. Grinnell, who would figure to have a prominent role in a new Trump administration, carries a basic approach to it.

I view it as enforcing the law. If someone has broken the law, then they need to have consequences for that. We have rules, and so when we find people who have broken the rule, who have cut the line, who are unvetted, of course we have to kick them out. We have to get people out of this country who broke our laws. The Department of State does it every single day. It’s also about being very realistic, about those people waiting. I know people who’ve been waiting years, spending lots of money on attorneys, waiting in line, doing the right thing to get a green card.

We owe it to the people who have followed the rules to make sure the rule breakers have punishment for what they have done. Let me say I regard immigration as by far the biggest issue. But the lawlessness that has consumed the country, inflation, economic meltdown, the destruction of the middle class, are all taking a toll. I believe anti war sentiment is growing in this country, and the way in which student protesters are being abused is tragic. I’m hoping against hope that Donald Trump can rise to the occasion, contrary to some of his most recent pronouncements, which seem to provide wholehearted support for genocide, if only it is carried out faster.

His only complaint seeming to be that the Israelis aren’t killing the Palestinians fast enough, that he could become a president for all of America, that he could stand up for the constitution, that he could assert the primacy of the First Amendment, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, the right to peaceably assemble from redress of grievances. I have no doubt, for all my misgivings about his attitude toward Israel and his failure to stand up for the Palestinians, that Donald Trump is going to experience a landslide reelection. I frankly believe, in spite of the Democrat best efforts.

It’s going to be all but impossible to deny him that outcome. His rallies around the country are drawing massive support, even in areas like the Bronx, out in Las Vegas, even in California. It’s Trump. Trump, Trump. Trump. The crowds are fed up with Biden. Most don’t even realize. It’s not even the real Joe, who appears to have died in 2017. But will we get there? Will we make it to November 5? I believe Russia ought to demonstrate its seriousness by declaring its intention to strike NATO headquarters in Brussels at a specific date and time. Notify NATO in advance, have them evacuate a building, have them prepare their best anti missile defense, and Russia, with one of its hypersonic missiles, will take it out.

Maybe that will be the equivalent of a glass of ice water in the face of the politicians in Europe and America who are so enthusiastic about going to war with Russia. Because I guarantee that would be a war we could not win. The only outcome acceptable is that it should not be fought at all. Listen to Colonel MacGregor. All the king’s horses, all the king’s men. We cannot cope with Russia militarily or even economically. America is falling apart. All the sanctions on Russia have redounded to Russia’s benefit. The ruble is stronger than ever. Brics is becoming more and more powerful.

The petrodollar is on the verge of extinction. We need to take care of matters at home and follow the founding father’s advice to not become engaged in foreign entanglements. When will we learn? If we’re lucky, it won’t be too late. We look forward to Scott Bennett’s return, and I’m very grateful for the opportunity to share these programs with.
[tr:tra].

See more of Global Freedom TV on their Public Channel and the MPN Global Freedom TV channel.

Author

BA WORRIED ABOUT 5G FB BANNER 728X90

Sign Up Below To Get Daily Patriot Updates & Connect With Patriots From Around The Globe

Let Us Unite As A  Patriots Network!


SPREAD THE WORD

Tags

economic impact of sanctions on Russia large-scale war infrastructure in potential nuclear war fears potential US Russia land war Russia declares United States enemy Russia nuclear doctrine changes Russia Ukraine ongoing tensions Russia West tension updates Scott Bennett Russia reporter US army preparedness for conflict US Europe nuclear war risk Vladimir Putin long-range weapons warning West misreading Russia intentions

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *