Sept. 30, 2022 - Bannon's War Room
47:37
Participants
| 
| Speaker | Time | Text |
|---|---|---|
| This is what you're fighting for. | ||
| I mean, every day you're out there. | ||
| What they're doing is blowing people off. | ||
| If you continue to look the other way and shut up, then the oppressors, the authoritarians, get total control and total power. | ||
| Because this is just like in Arizona. | ||
| This is just like in Georgia. | ||
| It's another element that backs them into a corner and shows their lies and misrepresentations. | ||
| This is why this audience is going to have to get engaged. | ||
| As we've told you, this is the fight. | ||
|
unidentified
|
All this nonsense, all this spin, they can't handle the truth. | |
| War Room Battleground. | ||
| Here's your host, Stephen K. Bannon. | ||
| Do we really want to have in our schools, starting from elementary school, do we want our kids to be imposed to the pervert values that lead to degradation and extinction? | ||
| Do we want them to impose this understanding that instead of males and females there are some genders? | ||
| And do we really want them to go through Gender change operations, do we really want it for our children? | ||
| It is unacceptable for us, because we have the future of our own, which is different. | ||
| And the Western elites, they are working against all the communities, against the peoples of the Western countries as well. | ||
|
unidentified
|
It is against everyone. | |
| They want to bring back all the traditional values, traditional faith, and it's like the religion So the rhetoric continues from President Putin. | ||
|
unidentified
|
The reality is, and there are concerts now in Moscow, crowds brought in. | |
| encouraged to come, you could say, by the Kremlin in order to sort of celebrate this moment of annexation, just the same as we saw in 2014 when Crimea was annexed. | ||
| So all of that is happening, but it doesn't really disguise the reality that this is the biggest political crisis for President Putin that he's ever faced. | ||
| The simple political challenge for him, really, the thing that goes to the heart of his problem, to be honest, is the mobilization that he announced. | ||
| Because we are hearing from villages and towns in Russia a deep, deep disquiet. | ||
| Places that I have been to many times, just to paint a picture, Winnie, the kinds of places where people watch Russian version of cable or satellite TV, the Russian channels that are piping out propaganda and are very much in support of President Putin. | ||
| Those kinds of places are now learning that their sons and brothers and fathers are going to have to go to fight. And of course politics it can be so simple in many ways can't it? | ||
| And everybody will recognize that. | ||
| politically when a decision by a leader reaches right into your family into the heart of your community has a real impact in the people around the people that you love that has a real impact on what people think now president Putin still has a lot of support in Russia but again this is a you could easily say a crisis for him the question the question for the world and it is a deeply disturbing question is what does he do us do I see | ||
| Dear friends, we will do everything we can to ensure that the situation in the region is not only the result of the war, but also the result of the war. We will do everything we can to ensure that the situation in the region is not only the result of the war, but also the result of the war. | ||
| We'll do it again. | ||
| Let's go ahead and let's come in on this. | ||
| It's Friday 30 September in the year of our Lord 2022. | ||
| A historic day and we want to finish the last show of the last day of the third quarter of a historic year and tomorrow we start the fourth quarter which we said on the morning show will be even I think more more historic Then even what we've gone through so far, remember it's been said that there are, what is it? | ||
| There are weeks in which years happen and there are years in which nothing happens. | ||
| And so we're living one of those what the months feel like years. | ||
| We're going to talk about the geostrategic implications of what has happened over the last couple of days, really a tale of two cities, and really the interpretation coming from that. | ||
| I guess a tale of three cities. | ||
| I would say Moscow, Kiev, and Washington, D.C. | ||
| I want to bring in Rebecca. | ||
| We've got Rebecca Koffler, Jack Pasovic, I want to start with Rebecca. | ||
| Rebecca, just put it in perspective. | ||
| You're the Putin watcher. | ||
| You wrote Putin's secret plan, which a lot of people when it first came out said, hey, why should we even care about Putin? | ||
| He's obviously now inserted himself into the geostrategic equation. | ||
| These annexations, they had a plebiscite. | ||
| Of course, people are saying it was corrupt and, you know, they were forcing people to vote. | ||
| But they had a plebiscite or a referendum overwhelmingly passed. | ||
| They are now in the process and now say they're annexing it. | ||
| And I think it's up to 25, almost a third of 30 percent of the Ukraine or 25 percent of the Ukraine, all the eastern Russian speaking provinces. | ||
| How big a deal is that? | ||
| And is there any possibility? | ||
| This is a huge deal, Steve, of strategic significance, because the minute that he has proclaimed that these four territories that Putin seized in his special operations are now part of Russia, | ||
| He has cleared the justification based on the Russian doctrine to defend these newly Russian territories with nuclear weapons. | ||
| That's implication number one. | ||
| Implication number three, about which he actually just warned us last week in a veiled threat that he will indeed use those weapons if he is faced with the defeat the defeat in this war and if these regions are attacked. | ||
| The second implication is this. | ||
| Putin drew the red line for Ukraine as far as NATO membership. | ||
| And now with this annexation, Ukraine cannot be part of NATO because there's a requirement in order to be a member that you cannot as a country, you have to have sovereignty and territorial integrity, meaning an absence of an ongoing conflict. | ||
| So in this way, yes, Zelensky wants Ukraine to become a NATO member, but he can't unless they change the law. | ||
| And then the final implication, he basically announced an outright war onto the West. | ||
| He called out the Western elites who are causing the degradation of our society. | ||
| He called it Satanism. | ||
| He called out the woke ideology and there's no stopping back. | ||
| He basically is on a warpath. | ||
| Rebecca, by the way, the book is Putin's Playbook, and it's quite, you do an amazing psychological and really action analysis of Putin, so you really feel like you get to know him. | ||
| I recommend everybody. | ||
| If people had read this maybe at the White House early on, we wouldn't have put Ukraine in this situation, because I think Ukraine is the ones that suffered here because of Western aggression. | ||
| Rebecca, hang on, we're gonna get, let's get Darren Beattie into this mix. | ||
| Darren, you've been following this very closely. | ||
| I know you have very strong opinions over Revolver. | ||
| Give us your assessment of the speech and the action today, sir. | ||
| Well, I'd say all of this marks a giant leap toward Armageddon. | ||
| The speech itself has a lot of fascinating components, but it didn't occur out of a vacuum. | ||
| It occurred in the aftermath of what might be one of the most significant attacks on European infrastructure in several decades, and that was the sabotage of major pipeline from Russia to Germany, the Nord Stream Pipeline. | ||
| And that, in my view, marked a dramatic escalation. | ||
| The Europeans all kind of quietly understand that this is likely at the hands of NATO allies itself, that's why they're being good little vassal states and not making a lot of noise about it. | ||
|
unidentified
|
But Putin in his speech... Ho, ho, ho, ho, ho, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, slow down, whoa, whoa, whoa. | |
| You're saying that Germany and others have acquiesced to the fact that NATO, other NATO allies actually blew up Nord Stream? | ||
| Can you please cite a reference, sir? | ||
| Well, I think the fact that, you know, in any ordinary circumstance, an attack of that magnitude on such a significant piece of infrastructure... I didn't say that. | ||
| I didn't, I didn't, I didn't ask that. | ||
| I didn't ask that. | ||
| I didn't ask that. | ||
| You just asserted that NATO allies understood that this attack was another by another NATO ally. | ||
| That's a pretty explosive assertion. | ||
| Can you back that up? | ||
| Or is that just your opinion? | ||
| Well, it's an informed opinion based on reasonable inferences from the behavior of the affected countries themselves. | ||
| My point is that, I think we can all agree, this is a major and significant attack on a piece of infrastructure. | ||
| That is the pipeline, especially... It's an act of, let's be blunt, it's an act of war against the German people. | ||
| My point is, in any other circumstance, the Germans would be making a very big deal about it. | ||
| You're saying the passivity of German elites and the German military of not being saying, hey, Russia, you did this. | ||
| You've blown this thing up. | ||
| We're 24 hours away. | ||
| This is guns of August moment for us. | ||
| You're saying the basic crickets coming from that means or implies to you that a NATO ally would do this. | ||
| And I take it you would say that NATO ally was the United States or somebody in concert with the United States? | ||
| Yes, I would say the United States or NATO aligned proxies. | ||
| I'm not saying necessarily it was, you know, the Navy directly that did it, but I think it's a very reasonable inference given the motivation, given who benefits, and given the reaction to the sabotage by European countries themselves, including, by the way, by a Polish A political official who apparently was so excited and didn't get the memo that he took to Twitter immediately to thank the United States. | ||
| I might want to add to our audience, hang on, I want to add to our audience, not just any, anybody knows Matthew Tierman that comes on here, not just any Polish official, the husband of Anne Applebaum, who obviously the editor of the Atlantic, that may be the biggest cheerleader for the war in Ukraine and the U.S. | ||
| support of the war in Ukraine. | ||
| Am I overstating that? | ||
| Am I overstating that? | ||
| Her husband tweeted out a congressional Right. | ||
| And, you know, we can get to the speech, but just to break down the sort of whodunit aspect of things that, you know, for anyone who's been following the buildup to this war, this proxy war between the United States and Russia, Nord Stream 2 energy is an indispensable component to understanding what it's all about. | ||
| It's all about who runs Europe, who controls Europe. | ||
| Europe, we've since learned, is even more of a vassal state of the United States than we could have imagined. | ||
| And one possible countervailing factor to that was the extreme complementarity between Germany and Russia. | ||
| Germany has a great economy, it needs energy, and Russia has cheap energy and they need to sell it. | ||
| And it was a natural thing for Russians to provide energy to Germany in the form of Nord Stream But what that does is it undercuts United States leverage, both geopolitically and economically, because we want to sell our far more expensive LNG gas to Europe and have total leverage over Europe. | ||
| And so Nord Stream 2 was always a major thorn in the side of the United States military establishment, in particular that Atlanticist faction of the establishment that's obsessed with destroying Russia and obsessed with maintaining complete hegemony over Europe. | ||
| We've gone through a lot of activity, a lot of operations to try to sanction the pipeline, to try to support the Green Party in Germany, to be against the pipeline, and all of those things didn't really work. In the days leading up to the sabotage of the pipeline, there are major demonstrations in Germany anticipating the energy problems this winter and saying, look, we have this enormously expensive | ||
| piece of infrastructure, this pipeline from Russia that has the capacity to deliver cheap energy to us. | ||
| We are facing a very difficult winter and energy situation. | ||
| The only thing stopping the activation of this pipeline is political hesitation on the part of the Chancellor of Germany, who again, as a head of a vassal state, is totally beholden to US interests. | ||
| And the fact that the Nord Stream Pipeline was sabotaged and destroyed takes that option off the table. | ||
| Now that piece of leverage that the Russians had, and frankly also the Europeans had, is gone and they're totally beholden to the United States. | ||
| And again, if you look at the reactions of these countries, Notwithstanding the Polish official who just jumped the gun and thanked the United States, not understanding that they're supposed to pretend that it's not us and that it's Russia for whatever reason. | ||
| Notwithstanding that, you don't see the types of reactions that any reasonable sovereign state would have To an attack on the infrastructure of that magnitude, because they're in this awkward position of knowing that it comes from the US or NATO proxies themselves. | ||
| And their only option is really to put their tail between the legs, keep their heads down and shut up about it, which is more or less what they've been doing. | ||
| Hang on for one second. | ||
| I want to get Jack Bassovia. | ||
| He's going to join Rebecca Koffler and Darren Beatty. | ||
| Jack, this very dramatic speech. | ||
| They had the plebiscite. | ||
| They've officially announced the annexation off of the plebiscite. | ||
| And now they had this amazing event in Moscow today, including a total throwdown against the elites of the West. | ||
| Can you give us your perspective about the speech and really NATO's reaction and the White House reaction to it, sir? | ||
| Well, Steve, I think the speech itself was pretty much what a lot of people were expecting. | ||
| Of course, it was a speech where he was saying that he was welcoming these regions of Ukraine back home into Russia. | ||
| There's been some phrases going around, of course, on Russian social media, on Telegram, talking about how this is the little cubs coming back home to the mother, you know, back to the mother bear. | ||
| So this is, you know, from their perspective, a huge win. | ||
| They're viewing this as a win and a victory. | ||
| There was a massive rally outside in Red Square immediately following this ceremony. | ||
| And it was a huge ceremony right there in Moscow. | ||
| But one of the key phrases that I think that he made from the West, and which everyone should take to heart very directly, is that he said that the United States set a precedent when it used nuclear weapons on Japan. | ||
| And remember, what did we use those weapons for? | ||
| The surrender, the surrender of Imperial Japan, the surrender of Hirohito. | ||
| His point was, he's not bluffing, he's willing to use nuclear weapons should it come to that. | ||
| Zelensky now, the president of Ukraine, responds to all of this by making a fast track approval into NATO. | ||
| Signs the document, goes out there, and of course was giving a big speech, interestingly enough wearing a hoodie, because as we all know, Winter is coming, and certainly with everything that we've seen from these pipelines. | ||
| At one point, Putin was, of course, blaming the West. | ||
| He specifically named Anglo-Saxons. | ||
| That's really his term for the Germany, US, Washington, DC, and London axis. | ||
| So he's blaming them for the destruction of Nord Stream 2 and Nord Stream 1. | ||
| Zelensky putting up this approval for NATO, but then NATO comes out and essentially says, well, we welcome your interest, but we're going to put this to a vote. | ||
| And there's a long process. | ||
| We're not part of this. | ||
| We're not a party to it. | ||
| Because this is what they've been trying to do from the start. | ||
| NATO is trying to be involved without being involved. | ||
| But the New York Times just yesterday said that the Pentagon is going to be installing a new facility in Europe, possibly within either Poland, Romania, maybe Germany, for the actual direct training of Ukrainian soldiers. | ||
| So of course that narrative has been out there about the West is willing to fight to the last Ukrainian. | ||
| But the question then becomes, how much will they go before it's considered in by Lavrov, by the Kremlin, as tipping the scales into becoming an active participant in this fight? | ||
| Let me get Koffler back here in a second. | ||
| This annexation is a massive deal. | ||
| Because no matter if you like it or you don't like it, it's legal or not legal. | ||
| I mean, now they consider this part of Russian territory. | ||
| And I don't notice them giving up a lot of Russian territory historically. | ||
| It's not what they do. | ||
| This could not have happened without the sign-off of President Xi of China. | ||
| He's got to have an underwriting of this. | ||
| The underwriting has got to be Xi, because Xi would love to do the same thing with Taiwan. | ||
| So now the Ukrainians have been walked down the primrose path by the West. | ||
| And that tweet today, I don't know if we've got it. | ||
| I'll put it up on my getter. | ||
| The tweet from Stoltenberg in the middle of all this with the guys signing the documents as they speak to try to have a dramatic counterpart to what Putin's doing because Putin's calling the elites of the West Satan and evil and he's throwing transgenderism in there and everything. | ||
| He's putting the kitchen sink into this speech. | ||
| NATO comes out and says, Oh, by the way, uh, you know, we're 30 guys has got to be unanimous. | ||
| We'll, we'll, we'll certainly consider your, your filing when we get to it. | ||
| I mean, it wasn't exactly, we're there, we're building a facility to train your troops. | ||
| It was about as big a, Hey, you're not really in NATO. | ||
| And then Biden, the very leading Biden, Biden came out and said, we will defend every inch of NATO territory. | ||
| So have the Ukrainians been walked down the Primrose path as they were warned? | ||
| What? | ||
| By Mersheimer at the University of Chicago? | ||
| The elites are going to walk you down the primrose path into the charnel house of the killing fields of Eastern Ukraine and when it gets to it they're not going to back you up. | ||
| So Zelensky's now got two-thirds of a country Right. | ||
| Not the whole thing, at least how he defines it. | ||
| The Russians have annexed it. | ||
| They have a history of not giving up what they get. | ||
| And now you get Xi in the background. | ||
| How is this not, all the analysts saying big loss for Putin. | ||
| He's got to get troops up there. | ||
| He's got these draftees, people running around trying to leave the country. | ||
| How is this anything but a huge win? | ||
| for Putin and given the fact that Nord Stream, whoever did Nord Stream 2, is not going to happen so the Germans are going to freeze this winner and probably overthrow their government. How is this, what am I missing here about why this is not a huge win for Putin? I'll start with Posovic, then Kofler, then Darren Beatty. Well Steve, you're exactly right in terms of the sense that they are the ones who are taking territory here. It's not the right... | ||
| It's not the Russians who are losing territory. | ||
| This isn't the 1990s anymore. | ||
| And if you look at some of the things that she and Putin have said outside of this speech, Where he's talked about the sense that the unipolar world is over and now begins the rise of the multipolar world. | ||
| India plays a huge role in that as well, because India, of course, standing with Russia, Russia using India to balance against China. | ||
| Of course, India and China, that adversarial nature has been going on prior even to World War II. | ||
| But really what Putin is getting at here is this idea that World War II ended. | ||
| And when World War II ended, it was the United States that came out on top because we were the country that didn't become completely destroyed in that. | ||
| Yes, we had to submit to the war itself, and we submitted many men and much blood and treasure to it, but the war was not fought on our territory, with the exception of Pearl Harbor and a few of the islands in the Aleutians. | ||
| Because of that, the rest of the world had to essentially recover. | ||
| What he's getting at here is that the world has recovered, and we're throwing off the shackles of this idea of a one-world order that's run out of Brussels, D.C., Davos, etc. | ||
| That's where he was getting at with talking about what he called the experimentation on children He called it satanic. | ||
| He said, we're throwing out these ideas. | ||
| He didn't quite get into directly transhumanism, but you could kind of see some shades of that in the speech as well. | ||
| And so he's making this appeal, obviously, to conservatives in all of those countries as well, because he said, there are people within your own countries who believe with what I'm saying right now. | ||
| You don't want this for your children. | ||
| You don't want to be flying the flag of that regime as you go forward. | ||
| And when it comes down to it, look, The United States government, are we really willing to go to World War III over the Donbass, Zaporizhia, Kyrgyzstan, and Crimea? | ||
| I don't think so. | ||
| Jack, are we going to lose you or do we have you for a few more minutes? | ||
| I know you're under pressure to get to your show. | ||
| Do we have you for a few minutes? | ||
| No, no, no. | ||
| I'm good. | ||
| We're good. | ||
| We're good. | ||
| I'm going to go to Rebecca Koffler. | ||
| Rebecca, you've studied Putin for years. | ||
| You know the mindset of the Kremlin. | ||
| Is this a major strategic win for Putin and his colleagues in the Kremlin? | ||
| Or do you take the Western analysis? | ||
| We did the cold open where there's all this pressure. | ||
| People don't want to get drafted into the army. | ||
| There's all this unrest. | ||
| They had to bust the crowd in for the big speech tonight. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Who's right, Rebecca Koffler? | |
| So this is a huge strategic win for Putin, but it's even a bigger win for China's Xi Jinping. | ||
| First, I'd like to say that I completely agree with Jack and what he said about China and Russia forming this very strategic alliance. | ||
| Not only that, They are establishing an economic and military architecture to support this alliance. | ||
| Remember the Shanghai Cooperation Organization that not only includes Russia and China, but now Iran is joining in. | ||
| India They have established an alternative, both countries, to SWIFT and the mechanism to conduct business transactions in yuan and ruble, bypassing the dollar. | ||
| This is a huge implication, long-term implication, because Biden's incompetent policies of sanctions have eroded the many countries' confidence in U.S. | ||
| dollar as the premier currency of international reserves and medium of exchange. | ||
| So now to China's Xi. | ||
| So once China's Mao Zedong told this story about a monkey. | ||
| A monkey in the Chinese culture is a symbol of wisdom, cleverness, and power, right? | ||
| So Mao Zedong said a monkey So, what Xi Jinping is right now witnessing, Steve, is the United States and Russia are basically going at each other in a proxy war. | ||
| What Xi Jinping is right now witnessing, Steve, is the United States and Russia are basically going at each other in a proxy war. | ||
| The Pentagon has decided to erode and deplete our own weapons supplies in order to degrade Russia's military, as Secretary Lloyd Austin stated. | ||
| And Biden confirmed that we're supposed to keep helping them, and I already lost count of the billions of dollars of U.S. | ||
| taxpayers' hard-earned money that we are pumping into Ukraine. | ||
| Biden has opened a spigot basically indefinitely. | ||
| And so the two tigers, right, the two most aggressive adversaries of the United States, Of China, right? | ||
| Russia and the United States are going at each other, destroying each other's capabilities. | ||
| And how in the world are we going to protect Taiwan from China? | ||
| So this is a complete strategic incompetence of massive proportion that the Biden administration is committing right here, in addition to putting us on the brink of nuclear war, as Jack stated. | ||
| You saw the preamble was the extraction from Afghanistan. | ||
| Now we're seeing the whole thing. | ||
| thing. Okay, Darren Beatty from Revolver, Jack Pasobic from Human Events Daily, the author of Putin's playbook, or Becker Koffler, all going to rejoin with us after a short commercial break. | ||
|
unidentified
|
you Okay, welcome back. | |
| We have Posobiec, we have Beattie, we have Rebecca Koffler. | ||
| I'm going to go back to Darren Beattie. | ||
| Darren, you said we are leaping into Armageddon. | ||
| That's a pretty bold statement coming from you, Darren Beattie. | ||
| I'm going to bring you on, give your response, let's hear your thoughts, and then we're going to bring up both Posobiec and Koffler. | ||
| We want to have a little more of an open conversation. | ||
| So what do you mean, leaping into Armageddon, sir, with what's happened over the last 72 hours? | ||
| Well, there's been major escalatory events. | ||
| And I encourage everyone to go to revolver.news. | ||
| We have a white hot piece on this very issue that looks into historical precedents, including a war between the not yet empire of Russia and Sweden that has a lot of interesting parallels to our situation today. | ||
| But to get back to the question of whether this is a strategic victory for Putin, I have to say, I don't really entirely agree with your other guest on that matter. | ||
| I think this whole situation has been strategically calamitous for Putin and Russia. | ||
| Putin's playing the hand that he has now, but if you look at Whoa, whoa, whoa. | ||
| How can you say that? | ||
| He just annexed a third of the country that he was going in to do. | ||
| He just annexed it with an overwhelming plebiscite. | ||
| And he's daring the West to do anything about it. | ||
| And at least today, unless I'm missing it, the West looks feckless. | ||
| NATO look weak. | ||
| The guy sent a message, hey, thanks for the thanks for the application. | ||
| We'll get back to you. | ||
| And Biden said, hey, you will defend to the death every inch of NATO territory. | ||
| He emphasized NATO territory. | ||
| How can Zelensky and these guys, on what level do you say it's not a major strategic win? | ||
| It's a great question. | ||
| And let me preface it by saying many, I assume you're Listeners know, I'm no fanboy for what I call the globalist American empire, and neither am I a fanboy for NATO. | ||
| I'm not a fanboy for NATO. | ||
| I don't think we need an introduction to that. | ||
| I think, I think, I think people, I think, I did say Darren Beattie of Revolver, didn't I? | ||
| I think they know that, right? | ||
| Tucker's wingman, let's say that. | ||
| But I have to be, um, I have to be forthcoming about my objective assessment of the matter And yes, Russia got to annex some territories in the eastern part of Ukraine. | ||
| We'll see ultimately how that develops. | ||
| But the question is, at what cost? | ||
| Early on in this conflict, Revolver ran a bunch of articles basically drawing parallels between the cancellation machinery visited on domestic dissidents in the United States, And the geopolitical cancellation machinery that's been marshaled against Russia, which is absolutely severe. | ||
| Russia has functionally become a global pariah on an order that's virtually unprecedented in modern history. | ||
| They are partners now with probably the most powerful. | ||
| If you line up NATO in the United States versus what they have in the Eurasian landmass, the Chinese Communist Party, North Korea, Pakistan, the mullahs in Iran, and let's throw in Erdogan in Turkey, who's really their partner. | ||
| And Russia on the Eurasian landmass. | ||
| And by the way, all the Central Asian countries are going to fall in with that. | ||
| We're around the periphery with NATO in the United States. | ||
| How can they be? | ||
| They're a pariah in the third world. | ||
| People are backing them nonstop. | ||
| The One Belt One, all the Sub-Saharan Africa, even Latin America. | ||
| Nobody's out there saying, uh, and so I don't under, yeah, they're pariahs in Davos, they're pariahs in Brussels, they're pariah in London, they're pariah in Washington, D.C. | ||
| and New York, of which they were beforehand. | ||
| I'm saying today, how can you not say this? | ||
| I'm missing something, and you're a brilliant guy. | ||
| So, and I'm not rooting for Russia at all. | ||
| I think the KGB guys are as bad as they get, but my point is, I have argued for years the Chinese Communist Party is our existential threat, and we have Force, because of our fecklessness, haplessness and incompetence and malfeasance, force these guys into a partnership that's going to have implications for a hundred years. | ||
| Right now, she just said it, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization is now, I mean, it's the mullahs in Iran, you got Persia, Russia and China, three ancient civilizations that have now partnered against the West. | ||
| How can you say that this is a major strategic defeat? | ||
| For, for Russia, it may end up being, but as we sit here on the last day of the third quarter in 20 year of our Lord, 2022, it don't look like it to me, sir. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| But you'll have to give me a couple of minutes to run through it without, without interruption to make the case. | ||
| Just give me two minutes. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Okay. | |
| We'll give it, but I got, hold it two minutes. | ||
| Then I got, I'm gonna let Pasovic and Koffler come in at two. | ||
| Cause this is good. | ||
| Go ahead, sir. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Okay. | |
| So the question is Russia before this special operation, Russia after. | ||
| You have to look at the state of its alliances, the state of its financial position, the state of its political position. | ||
| It's basically been entirely cancelled by all of the Western infrastructure. | ||
| Entirely cancelled financially, cancelled politically and otherwise, and made a global pariah with the exception of the countries that you mentioned, and I'm going to address those soon. | ||
| So, Russia and China always had an interesting sort of strategic calculus with one another. | ||
| There are always going to be dimensions in which they cooperate and places where they have competing interests. | ||
| What happened, though, is that by Russia getting totally slammed by the entire Western architecture, it put Russia in a very vulnerable position where it was basically forced to crawl into China's arms as a very weak junior partner. It eliminated whatever Russia had in terms of leverage to negotiate its future relationship with China on stronger terms. Now it's a very, | ||
| very junior partner and there's nothing they can do about it because China's the only lifeline. | ||
| Plus, China is not. | ||
| But you assumed they weren't a senior partner at the beginning. | ||
| The reason they had to crawl back to China, and we shouldn't have done it, is their tank column didn't take Kiev, right? | ||
| Hang on a second, Darren, because we love you. | ||
| Hang on one second. | ||
| Let me bring Pasovic in for a couple of minutes, and then Rebecca, because this is getting hot, as we wanted to hear in the warm. | ||
| Pasovic, your assessment of Darren Beatty's analysis, sir? | ||
| Well, I certainly understand what Darren's saying. | ||
| Of course, it's the financial weight of China that's given them any kind of lifeline. | ||
| And Steve, you yourself pointed out that it was Xi Jinping that underwrote this entire thing. | ||
| They would not be doing this without the underwriting of Xi Jinping. | ||
| It's the only lifeline insurance policy that they have left. | ||
| Selling their oil to Xi, selling their oil to eventually India, who they're also building Yes. | ||
| pipeline with they would not be able to do that otherwise now with this idea of and Putin mentioned in his speech as well he said I wanted a pan-european ideal that was the point of Nord Stream the idea was that Russia and possibly Europe would be able to you know come back together again because there's always been sort of these two Russia's right there's there's European Russia and there's Asian Russia and the Euro mountains split them in between yes and ever it goes all the way back to Peter the Great Peter the | ||
| Great who rebuilt you know a one-for-one almost That's my debate. | ||
| That's my debate. | ||
| That's my debate with Dugan. | ||
| That's my debate with Dugan. | ||
| They get this Eurasian landmass, you know, certain guys like Dugan, you know, and the St. | ||
| Petersburg crowd sees as a European nation combined with Europe. | ||
| Well, Stephen, this has always been the question. | ||
| Do they look East or do they look West? | ||
| That's the debate. | ||
| Do they look East or do they look West? | ||
| Well, he just said that West shut the door. | ||
| Real quickly, before I go to Rebecca, do you agree with Darren that this is a strategic, I don't say defeat, but not a strategic victory? | ||
| As we sit here on the last day of the third quarter, as Putin's seen it, with all the problems he's got, financial, all that, with Europe shivering and going to be kowtowing to him for the gas, is this a strategic defeat in the annexation of these provinces? | ||
| I think it's a mixed bag. | ||
| I think it's mixed. | ||
| I think he was not able to be shut out, obviously, of Ukraine completely, which is what Zelensky and Biden and Blinken have all been trying to say, while Biden is drooling. | ||
| I mean, he's out there threatening tactical nuclear strikes while Biden is dribbling into his creamed beets every morning, now that Jill's spoon-feeding him over there. | ||
| That being said, To Darren's point, they did also lose their leverage with Europe, a massive part of their leverage with Europe, which is going to be an issue for them. | ||
| How did they lose their leverage? | ||
| Please tell me how they lose their leverage. | ||
| Okay, stop. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Their leverage with Europe is sitting at the bottom of the Baltic Sea. | |
| It's sitting at the bottom of the Baltic. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Go take a look. | |
| Okay, I know you're a naval officer, so am I, but they'll give up the Baltic Fleet. | ||
| Listen, the West went to—the West went in the first 30 or 60 days of the war and tried to destroy the central bank of Russia. | ||
| They tried to destroy the ruble. | ||
| We did more economic warfare in the first 100 days of this war than we did against the Nazis the entire time. | ||
| We never tried to set down the central bank of Germany during World War II, and we let the Germans—the Germans, we didn't try to destroy the German currency. | ||
| And we didn't even stop them from taking their cash out and putting it in Switzerland. | ||
| They did more against Russia, and he kind of powered through it. | ||
|
unidentified
|
He kind of powered through it because he had the natural gas. | |
| Steve, Lord Hastings Isley, the first Secretary General of NATO, and they asked him, they said, what's the point of NATO? | ||
| And he was very British, remember, and he had a very distinct answer, infamous answer. | ||
| He said, the point of NATO is this, to keep the Americans in, to keep the Russians out, and to keep the Germans down. | ||
| And if you look at what's happened this... | ||
| Follows every single leg of the three legs of that statement. | ||
| Okay, let me go to Rebecca Koffler. | ||
| Rebecca, strategic, you study these guys inside the... When they're sitting there tonight, drinking the cold vodka, do they think it's with all the problems they got? | ||
| Do you think they're sitting there going strategic win, or do you agree with Darren Beatty that they've been shut out, they're a pariah, they got bigger problems, and this is something they never thought in six months or eight months into this war they'd be here, ma'am? | ||
| Well, I respectfully disagree with Darren. | ||
| I believe the Russians view it as a strategic win, and Putin has made a very calculated decision looking into the future, because losing leverage with the Europeans was just a matter of time. | ||
| Putin and his regime, all of the syloviki, which by the way, they support him 100%, right? | ||
| They look at it this way. | ||
| Basically, in the future, they view China and Asia as their strongest partner. | ||
| Russia has concluded that regardless of who is in charge in the White House, whether it's Democrats or Republicans, we will still continue to fight them for control over the Eurasian territory, which Russia views as a security perimeter on which it relied For centuries. | ||
| And given that right now, with the absorption of the Baltics into NATO, the distance between NATO forces and Moscow and St. | ||
| Petersburg has reduced from 1,000 miles to 1,300 miles back into the Cold War to 100 to 300 miles, right? | ||
| So that's a distance that's shorter than between Washington and New York. | ||
| And so, for Putin it's unacceptable, and that's why he kept saying it's a red line, it's a red line, it's a red line, and finally he enforced it today by annexing this territory. | ||
| So, back into the China point. | ||
| So, everything that Putin does, right, he has China in the back of his mind, because Russia considers China as its geopolitical threat number two in the long term. | ||
| Yes, they're presenting it to the world, and they are united in so-called no-limits. | ||
| But hang on, is Beattie right that he's now the junior partner and had to kind of go crawling on his knees to be the junior partner of Xi? | ||
| Not quite, not quite. | ||
| Here's why. | ||
| Yes, he's somewhat of a junior partner because Chinese economy is in an upward trajectory and demographics. | ||
| Russia's is on the down, but look at it this way. | ||
| So China and Russia share a 26 mile long border, right? | ||
|
unidentified
|
And Putin is just showing 2,600 miles. | |
| 2,600 miles. | ||
| I'm sorry if I said something different. | ||
| So Putin just stated that he will use low-yield nuclear weapons. | ||
| They developed a very specific low-yield nuclear warhead that they believe is usable that is under 1 kiloton compared to what we used in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which was 15 kiloton and even then within a year The cities went back to life, right? | ||
| So this is why Putin today as Jack pointed it out Reminded us that the United States is the one that set this precedent. Well, he's signaling to Xi he's signaling to Xi and this is exactly why he developed the capability and And that's the capability that right now we don't have, because whatever President Trump authorized, the low-yield nuclear-tipped cruise missiles, sea launch, Biden canceled it. | ||
| So he's signaling to both, to us and to China. | ||
| That's how far he's willing to escalate. | ||
| Okay, hang on. | ||
| Hang on, hang on, I gotta bring in Darren Beattie. | ||
| Darren, I need, I want you to come in hot and respond to all this. | ||
| One thing I also, if Kofler and Posobiec have taught me anything, is that Russia thinks in historical precedent, that there's a continuity of the way they think, the ruling elites, although they overthrew the czars, they still think like this, and so your Swedish and your Russian analysis may be, may be, So Darren, come in hot and respond to both Kofler and Posobiec, sir. | ||
| So I'll just sort of state my case in the simplest terms possible. | ||
| The question of whether Russia and Putin are in a better position now than before the so-called special operation can be evaluated according to three dimensions. | ||
| The internal situation within Russia The situation between Russia and Europe, the situation between Russia and China, and I'll add a fourth between Russia and the United States. | ||
| So let's take China first. | ||
| As I mentioned, just the nature of the situation is such that Russia is always going to be a junior partner. | ||
| But the question is how junior? | ||
| There's a spectrum there. | ||
| And the fact that Russia became a global pariah from the standpoint of basically the entire Western economic structure really severely crippled Russia's leverage with which it can make any kinds of arrangements with China. | ||
| They're literally their only lifeline in the lifeboat. | ||
| And given how much they need China, China has not actually been that solicitous in terms of what it's provided Russia both publicly and privately. | ||
| And so I think Russia's position with respect to China is weaker than it was before the special operation. | ||
| Let's look at Russia's position with respect to Europe. | ||
| Jack put it beautifully. | ||
| Where's their leverage over Europe? | ||
| It's sitting at the bottom of the Baltic. | ||
| Literally, the biggest piece of leverage that Russia has over Europe was energy. | ||
| And by the fact that the United States and its NATO proxies destroyed this piece of infrastructure, makes it just tremendously worse in terms of its position over Europe. | ||
| Its leverage is gone. | ||
| Zero. | ||
| It doesn't exist. | ||
| And for all the talk about how Putin's being bold and doing this and that, Putin's not being bold at all. | ||
| Let me remind you what I just said. | ||
| The US and its NATO proxies basically declared war on Russia By destroying Nord Stream and Putin's done nothing about it. | ||
| And furthermore, let's look at the situation between the United States and Russia. | ||
| The United States got away with what it wanted all along was the destruction of Nord Stream 2. | ||
| Russia's not doing anything about it and Europe's not doing anything about it. | ||
| If it was sort of an unspoken, tacit understanding before, it's now plain for everyone to see that there are no genuinely sovereign countries in Europe. | ||
| Europe is a vassal state. | ||
| Europe is a slave state of the United States. | ||
| And Putin in his speech basically tried to shame them for doing that. | ||
| The only problem is the Germans have no shame. | ||
| They have no pride. | ||
| They have no underlying sense that they deserve to be a sovereign nation. | ||
| And that's why they're gonna keep the tail between the legs. | ||
| Rebecca, only a minute to wrap up. | ||
| We're going to put up a link to Putin's A Secret Plan, Putin's playbook. | ||
| Russia's in a worse good. I think it's common sense. Okay, good. And it gives me pleasure to hang it. I won't I've only got a minute for each Rebecca only a minute to wrap up. You're the we're gonna put up a link to Putin's a secret plan Putin's playbook real quickly your assessment of where Russia stands tonight as we close the show man Okay, I just want to point out It is my professional intelligence assessment that is | ||
| Russia. They destroyed its own Nord Stream I have an editorial coming out tomorrow at 7am on Fox News, giving five top reasons, but I'm just going to mention one real quick. | ||
| The Nord Stream pipelines were not revenue producing at this point. | ||
| The revenue is being replaced with a $55 billion joint Russia-China pipeline called the Power of Siberia and by other export earnings. | ||
| So right now, I tell you what, I tell you what, hang on, hang on, I'm gonna leave everybody, hang on, hang on, I'm gonna leave everybody hanging because I'm running out of time. | ||
| We're gonna have you on about your piece on Fox tomorrow morning with our morning show. | ||
| We're gonna be live. | ||
| So you just hang on. | ||
| Rebecca Koffler, Putin's playbook. | ||
| Everybody can get it. | ||
| Posobiec, you got 60 seconds, sir. | ||
| Give me your assessment. | ||
| Well, I just go back to what I said before. | ||
| I think Russia's leverage over Europe is completely lying at the bottom of the Black Sea right now. | ||
| I was at the Helsinki summit with President Trump and Vladimir Putin, and this was the single biggest point of contention at that summit. | ||
| Of course, Jim Acosta and others couldn't understand what was going on around them because they don't understand geopolitics. | ||
| But the idea was, it's always been about who's going to sell fuel to Europe. | ||
| By the way, it's the Baltic, not the Black. | ||
| I know you know that. | ||
| There's a slip of tongue. | ||
| We're going to be back tomorrow. | ||
| I'm going to pick this up. | ||
| I'm going to reach out to Basoba. | ||
| I'm going to reach out to Beattie. | ||
| We're going to try and get them on. | ||
| We'll definitely have Rebecca Koffler on. | ||
| I'll be at American Freedom Alliance talking about geopolitics and the World Economic Forum in Davos where they try to arrest Darren Beattie, thank you very much. | ||
| Rebecca Koffler, thank you. | ||
| Hopefully see you guys tomorrow. | ||
| Where? |
Export Selection