tv Cross Talk RT January 13, 2020 3:30pm-4:01pm EST
stream corporate media refuse to discuss. processing some real news i'm joined by my guests going deeson is a professor at the higher school of economics as well as author of the case of western civilization and resurgence of russia we also have dimitri bobbitt she's a political analyst and editor in a semi internet media project and he and the london macross alexander macarius is a writer on legal affairs as well as editor in chief of the duran dot com our german cross-talk rules in effect that means you can jump in anytime you want and i always appreciated let me go to alexander in london you know over the past 10 days or so we've heard the term escalation deescalation proportional and one of the things i think that is mr very much is the how the behave the behavior on the side of the leadership and to iran and in washington we term asymmetrical was used all of the time and i think indeed it was asymmetrical but for very very
different reasons taran was being strategic and political while trump was relying upon sanctions and the 3rd and and the demand that the united states be remain inside of iraq against the will of the people in government and parliament there that is what makes this all asymmetrical and i think you can draw different conclusions about as the media likes to do who won and who lost go ahead alex and well what is what i mean i think the fundamental difference is that the range to the strategic range of their asses to get that foreign policy that diplomats they bring to get their political ain't is they be able to bring in their intelligence operatives manage to me people also their economic assets such as they are and they set themselves very clear objectives which they don't let themselves be done from. and then objective is not clearly defined easy is to try to get the
united states out of the middle east out of iraq specifically out of areas where they can threaten new iraq iran the united states while i contrast what we see there is a dysfunctional government which doesn't have any kind of clear long 6 long established plan so you have different people pushing for different objectives you have people look wanting to escalate as you put it which means essentially having a war you see the u.s. government forced into frantic diplomacy through the swiss embassy in tehran which it now turns out it was the united states which initiated it was lee u.s. and having started the escalation became panicked and saw the way out to deescalate in other words they don't have clear objectives and they're not working
towards those objectives instead you get the impression of a very powerful country stretching around throwing bombs in some directions killing people in other directions threatening people with sanctions but it isn't coherent and you know. you wouldn't get that impression from mainstream media go ahead glenn go ahead and i was just going to say this theme of a. dominance has been the very central strategic objective i do not of states or. in the simplicity that america would be able to increase escalate when it wants and to bring it down so for example if the u.s. drops bombs in pakistan to syria or in any other dozen countries understanding would be that country would not be allowed to respond because of the unpredictable and there are devastating consequences from your so they can bring tensions up and down as they want for for pressure now what's interesting with their. they must
deny that this is america cos what they did was they launched their missiles directly at american military bases in america essentially have to suck it up and accept all this is the price we have to pay for for killing. general in the iran so this is so that they rob americans of this escalation run their business very interesting because even if you look at the raney in response by firing those missiles they were just hitting buildings and store where houses and things like that it's sent but that is the message there is that they can do it they can't be stopped and they're not limited to iraq and i think that is the strategic message that they were sending nobody in the mainstream media the corporate media picked up on that well and that is the city i asked in my introduction what has changed that has changed and policymakers in washington that they have any kind of horse sense at all have to take that on board go ahead well i slightly disagree with you on
corporate media because this is what i read in the new york times. sports was well was a well calibrated measure for the 1st time is that just being anti trump exactly ok fine so this is the 1st time in 10 years that they agree with and maybe the wrong reason for going for their own reasons because actually what we saw was you know the no calls have shown their obvious site you know during the obama years and during this russian gate in ukraine gate investigations we have seen that ugly side of the liberal interventionists the started the war in libya they started the war in syria they started basically started the war in ukraine now we see that only side of the neocons i mean there haven't been cancelled i hope by the new broom and interventionist we saw it and what i think was more stable was basically of the moral side of it all i mean drama given into it to faux news they're asking why did you do it why did you. general sorting mind you what are your facts you know and
trump responds i believe it could have been a good embassy as it would have i believe. in foreign business i believe if we could have been military bases it could have been a lot of other things but suddenly he was gone well this is the thinking and i'm sure you all of oscar pistorius you know that soul surfer can this lead who killed his daughter and shooting her from a bottle because he thought it could have been included see it could have been roberts but pistorius was on trial for that and mr crump instead of based on trial gets released from the wall street journal though you know we have the article there which says. are we seeing a regen survival of trumps 40 poorly see if that's the headline and you can imagine it would end if you could alex alex it seems to me and i'll just be kind of more blunt here i think the assassination of the money was an act of desperation because
there's a lack of imagination in how to move forward because essentially the u.s. is going to be find itself isolated in its fred friendly country iraq instead of fighting isis or point making sure it doesn't come back it's going to have to worry about the shia militias firing upon them in their bases i mean i think this doesn't make any sense to me as something was started and i have no idea how it's going to end go ahead alex. this is correct because of course the united states as i think has become very clear now seriously underestimate as you dram when they pulled out of the j.c. way when they imposed all these sanctions on the thing that iran would on the very quickly come to the negotiating table all of that the government there would rapidly collapse because of massive protests nothing like that has happened the european allies have shown that they're not very keen on this whole crisis.
actually all they weren't consulted is the united states in this situation which is looking increasingly isolated even the saudis even the israelis were not particularly it's interesting alex i was i was one of the questions i sent out to you guys is that there was it was really relatively quiet in the region as the song was going on ok because again the demonstration effect of the the the attack on the saudi. energy installations sent a message and everyone else has been taking that on board except for some neo cons in washington d.c. you want to get in a just a small you know it all started with the united states born being a base or sharing militias in iraq and then mr trump got very angry about demonstrations near the american embassy in the united states about it but we hear from c.b.s. from c.b.s. from david martin their correspondent that i called these shared militias are part
of the iraqi security force and there were 25 people killed there imagine some foreign country. you know a base of u.s. national guard kills $25.00 people and then they're dismayed that they're going to have to states citizens are staging a demonstration in their embassy you know and this demonstration it was von percent all 'd war the ukrainian nazis did during their mind on protests they set on fire 10 buildings there and people and killed 38 policemen this is how the war started put in didn't started it started in kiev but now there were just a few storms thrown their gate of their embassy the current of their gas to green zone you know and the iraqi security force did not react why because 25 of their colleagues were killed you know it's interesting you know when i was watching how my pompei of the secretary of state was reacting to all of this and they did. i
want any kind of questioning of their i was going to say strategy but there is no strategy the way i can see it i mean it looks quite empty and vacuous and they don't really have a reason it seems that this is the goal and it seems to me they did the assassination is merely because they could do it nothing was made any strategic sense no i agree and i think they kind of walked him selfe into this difficult position because the the mainland. legitimacy behind this would be they called him a terrorist and then this is the killed terrorists and it's probably the most fundamental individual in the region that actually pushed isis back but this going to show us the problem of demonizing iran because you know already 3 months ago they recognize that the revolutionary guard a military branch in iran is a terrorist organization and then by definition the leader of this of the money they define him as a terrorist now once you start throwing this words around terrorist calling foreign
leaders foreign terrorists now you're opening for you having this legitimate so-called legitimate. issue when leaders in u.s. is legitimizing that why can't a rand do it is well it's been legitimized by the i don't want exactly and all ones and the kind of language that trump you'll just you know it could have been for emphasis and then suddenly he's gone you know it was ascribed to study and then he said there is a man there is a problem there is no man there is no problem no one can start in saying that publicly but truong is basically saying it both all of that but we're going to go to a short break and after that short break we'll continue our discussion on some real news stay with argue. the world is driven by a draw. shaped by one person. who
. thinks. we dare to ask. if we ponder the future and look into 2020 what fascinating stories will come our way there are often said on this show that you can't have capitalism without capital capital without positive registration kerching people to say and this next story this next whole show this next entire segment is going to be dedicated to this very notion.
welcome back to crossfire where all things considered i'm peter lavelle to to remind you we're discussing some real news. ok let's go back to alex in london you know alex this this 10 day. fiasco that we all went through. a lot of war jitters and whatnot and a lot of exaggeration in the media and misinformation disinformation that's why we do programs like this but there is one problem out there that is not resolved then is going to be increasingly more difficult to resolve and that is the u.s. military presence in iraq now trump is been threatening iraq with sanctions making you have to pay for these bases while the u.s. and its allies in baited in 2003 illegally i don't see why the iraqis have to pay one cent as a matter fact an apology is due also we have threats that the new york fed bank
may withhold cash reserves that are held on behalf of iraq and if i'm not mistaken in the in the tune of $3000000000.00 i mean is this how you treat an ally i mean don't you go shade in top with a now i not threaten that's how you resolve issues or maybe that is is something no one void in this administration when it comes to foreign policy go ahead alex well this is absolutely shocking behavior because those troops those american troops in iraq are supposed to be there at the invitation of iraq if iran conflicts with them to go they should go in fact it seems that the united states not only wants them to stay it is prepared to put coercive pressure and you talked about this attempt to stall iraq axis bank. in order to force them to stay that is not the action of an outlaw and that is the action of an ok paula of a country that is drawn to all people you rock. for its own purposes in order to
conduct wolves against other countries namely iran with which iraq is on good terms and which she wrote needs to be on good terms with so it is all for behavior and of course it is extremely unwise and very dangerous behavior because increasingly iraqis every level of society who are already very angered by the experiences of 1st the war and occupation of their treat but also the previous history of sanctions that the united states imposed on iraq are now increasingly going to start to see the united states and its military on that territory as not the solution to their problems but has the problem you know yeah i mean as glengall it glenn it seems to me and we have to remind our viewers that in the 1980 s. iran and iraq want an 8 year war something akin to like trench warfare in the 1st
world war it was bloody it was awful it was destructive. and now we have this illegal invasion of iraq and the net outcome of that is that iraq has moved closer to iran a country that they fought a bloody war for 8 years. doesn't the american stance actually than in push forward a better iraqi iran relationship because you know the trump administration say we're going to leave and part of the conditions is that we want everyone else to leave everyone should get out of iraq i think you could sell that idea the i think a lot of iraqis would go for it i think the majority of iraqis would like to see all foreign troops off or an opera or operatives leave but the way the trumpet ministration is playing it works to iran's advantage again. and all that in 2003 and $4.00 after the invasion and we saw that to. that. with the sudden same gone
a future shiite dominated iraq would increasingly align itself closer with iran and of course overcome their troubled history now i think. there's been a one of the unintended consequence of killing some of money as well now the iraqis are asking americans to leave iraq because of course they don't want to be battlefield for the in the middle of all of this so so yes the day they play this and then the very very bad way and of course this will be a big strategic victory for the iranians because they would like the americans to leave the middle east and iraq would of course be a highest priority in terms of where they should lead in syria. yes of all obviously so i think well i do sympathize with that goal though to get like you mentioned get them on out of iraq and i think what the middle east really needs is a proper security architecture and now i think the problem there is i think this more interested in conceptualizing security architecture like we do in europe where
we establish a military alliance team for example against russia now i think they want to recreate something similar in the middle east now security architecture should include iraq once excluded then we have the european system where it's targeting another state and then security becomes defined very much since there are some terms. you didn't use the word i'll use it nato they want to get you know the navy . need to we're even expanding nato to include arab countries which i think is going to be interesting as nobody's mentioned if israel should be part of that i think that's an interesting no wrinkle we would have to work on but you know this idea of an arab nato has been floated before but nobody in the region seems to be particularly interested in drop said he said you know i told him him we can use nato in other locations for example in the middle east lake interventionist had been on it withdrawn for all these years saying that he didn't respect he as you would be an ally as you know he thought there germany was not plain enough now drop a c. . you know these european guys they use this middle east you know we can expect there
but isn't that. terrible. has been occupied them as you can see have created a civil war in iraq that killed according to various estimates but i've heard any good men you know on television citing physicians for peace who say it could be up to london median people killed in iraq as a result of that chain reaction from the american intervention in 2003 so 1000000 people killed and now mr trump is seeing you all oss one trillion dollars all the money that we spent on the war in iraq you with iraq you government or us but also of the other interesting point is that i think in the rockaways see how liberal interventionists and now of course in the united states how the miscalculated to both democracy they had been warned that the majority in iraq is basically shaded
more slips so if if you introduce democracy there bro you raney an audience would get would win you know that it was obvious but still you know george bush jr and others the press to have you know they had elections and now they're on paper that iran has influence well of course iran has influence and there are some parts in the rock which support doing in presence because the need it against the so-called islamic state the true lies are on there so when you read the course and and also iran is a religious to be close to them we had the same story in ukraine why is ukraine a dictatorship now because if you have do more prosy the pro russian the eastern candidate wins as it was the case with kuchma win over craft 2 young actually beaten you should go in the 1st on the ground of elections so no with a zillion ski having a landslide against against portugal so these ideas. that we need democracy 0.
00 dollars a year has translated into policy ok this go back to our experience i think it's really quite fascinating that you know the europeans and their country should get more involved in the middle east why would they want to do that because it turned into a 3 digit backwater in a quagmire but i guess that's what trump really wants he wants other people to do his dirty work for him and not just his i mean pro previous administrations as well i mean it really shows a lack of strategic vision and we want to leave the middle east problem solved and we solve for the united states and let the people in the region figure it out because that's the only way it's ever going to be figured out go ahead well that's absolutely right and i think that in europe the hunt deer expanding nato or sending nato troops to the middle east is absolutely horrifying to most people i mean speaking here in gross that there would be massive opposition. in germany where it was proposed some time ago by the current german defense minister that they send
troops to syria to act as a peacekeeping force when the u.s. pulling out the in a war horrified at the whole notion the europeans would be appalled european public would be appalled by such a thing it seemed to me frankly that this is just try again trying to find a way saving face pulling u.s. troops out of the middle east without at the same time surrendering appearing to surrender to the the middle east and so he turns to his nato allies who are of course not interested it proves again exactly the point you made at the start of the program that there is no real strategic thinking behind all of this was a quickly say ideas of setting up arab and arab nato they go all the way back to the 1950 is those of us with memories or knowledge of the history of the region you know there was the. baghdad act yeah of the 1950s yet want to. eat
revolution in iraq because that leaves one of the region don't want it it's extraordinary how the us instead of learning mistakes always seems to repeat you know. the critics of donald trump from the left i'm actually from on the right as well i think of some writers on the website the american conservative is it 3 years in this is ministration in election looming is that trump has not drain the swamp pieces actually taken it over he's running it now that's a little bit over the last. 10 days or so really show that there are no i agree and again the key attraction for many of to vote for trump is again this idea that he would pull them out of the wars now is interesting. they did this discrepancy between the american leadership and the people because every kind of election has
had the same following bush he won after clinton because it promised america would not be a global policeman in tunisia to build a new nation with nation building then you had the obama he wanted changed in your peace candidate and here trump he promised you know we're going to pull us out of the middle east and all of this foreign conflicts it's going to be america 1st they get now he seems to be doubling down as well the whole see taking on iran is just. where to go who would who to vote for it's so i think this this might cost him lection it's interesting how it plays out of the. last 25 seconds go to you well it's amazing that probably one of the good things about it all is that for the 1st time in many years democrats are speaking out against the wars vali nasr on the pages of the new york times the person who supported the interventions in the in ukraine and you this why their son says you're a new son nationalists a new war with the united states. they would see us forced on them as
a fight with the bully well that's true but the only problem is why did he came and why did he stand before what it never would have been said if it wasn't for the individual sitting up in the white house that shows how everything is warped in politics because of one man and your perception of amounts all the time we have gentlemen here many thanks my guest here in moscow and in london and thanks to our viewers for watching us here r.t.c. you next time remember rostock rules. is your media a reflection of reality. in a world transformed. what will make you feel safe.
isolation community. are you going the right way or are you being so. direct. what is true what is faith. in the world corrupted you need to descend. to join us in the depths. or inmate in the shallows. and the united states presidential candidates debate the future of the us and the world. max kaiser and stacy her but dig into the burning questions of this election cycle oneself every week. tax student debt trade was corporate money universal basic income and more catch up with what's front running this sunday exclusively on r.t. . you know world of big partisan movies
lot and conspiracy it's time to wake up to dig deeper to hit the stories that mainstream media refuses to tell more than ever we need to be smarter we need to stop slamming the door on the bath and shouting past each other it's time for critical thinking it's time to fight for the middle for the truth the time is now for watching closely watching the hawks. description. even for the owners. to choose pet food industry is telling us what to feed our pets more based on what they want to sell us necessarily good for the pet turns out may not be the best people belief we have
animals that have you know. they have auto immune disorders allergies we are actually creating these problems it's a huge epidemic of problems. can be linked to very simple problem of diet and some dog owners so heartbreaking stories about their pets treats the larger corporations are not very interested in proving or disproving the value of their food because they're already making a $1000000000.00 on it and there's no reason to do that research. the.
headline stories. needed. saying that even if he was. theory me and general truck records. the leaders of libya's warring factions are in. talks. turkey it is hoped. nation's. on tuesday. boost infrastructure in east africa prevent mass immigration to europe is in the firing line for driving modern day slavery we speak with a human rights watch representative claims. to have.