Speaker A
It's a pity that we are losing a strong partner. Do you think you're losing America?
President Zelensky discusses feeling betrayed by Trump and Elon Musk amid Ukraine's ongoing war and energy crisis in a Piers Morgan interview.
Key Takeaways
- Ukraine relies heavily on US support and Starlink for defense and communication.
- Recent actions by Trump and Musk have strained Ukraine-US relations and weakened Ukraine's defense.
- Russia continues aggressive attacks on Ukraine's energy infrastructure despite ceasefire efforts.
- Zelensky views Putin as a dangerous dictator comparable to Hitler.
- Sustained international support is crucial for Ukraine's survival and peace efforts.
What the video covers
- President Zelensky expresses disappointment over perceived loss of strong US support, particularly criticizing Trump and Elon Musk's recent actions.
- He highlights the critical role of Starlink satellite service for Ukraine's defense and energy infrastructure amid Russian attacks.
- Zelensky condemns Russia's intensified missile strikes targeting Ukraine's energy facilities following Trump's announced energy ceasefire.
- He accuses Elon Musk and SpaceX of deliberately throttling Starlink service, weakening Ukraine's defense capabilities.
- Zelensky calls Putin 'the Hitler of our time' and stresses the importance of US backing to counter Russian aggression.
- He reflects on the diesel deal between Trump and Putin, calling it a betrayal and contradictory to US sanctions.
- Zelensky emphasizes Ukraine's commitment to peace but warns that Russia's actions show bad faith.
- The interview covers the human cost of the war, with casualties on both sides and the ongoing struggle for Ukraine's sovereignty.
- Zelensky appeals directly to Trump, urging him to understand Russia's intentions and support Ukraine strategically.
- The discussion touches on broader geopolitical implications and the necessity of international solidarity against Russian aggression.
Chapters
- 00:00Losing a Strong Partner: US-Ukraine Relations
- 04:14Energy Ceasefire and Russian Attacks
- 08:54Putin Compared to Hitler and US Support
- 12:56Trump's Diesel Deal and Sanctions Controversy
- 16:40Casualties and War Impact
- 20:19Ukraine's Resolve and Need for US Backing
- 29:06Geopolitical Challenges and Security Guarantees
- 32:37Betrayal by Trump and Musk: Starlink Issues
- 38:41Putin's Aggression and Ukraine's Defense
- 46:13Final Messages to Trump and International Community
Full Transcript — Download SRT & Markdown
Speaker A
Yeah, but not because of us. We can't be weak; otherwise, we can't survive. Putin, he's losing on the battlefield.
Speaker A
Are you angry with Elon Musk for doing this? No, it's a big mistake. People will die.
Speaker A
Of course, if attacks continue. So my message is absolutely clear. We are asking to switch on, and I think it will be honest. It will be fair between partners. It has to be.
Speaker A
More than half a million Ukrainians are without power after an overnight barrage of Russian missiles and drones hit the country's energy facilities. The capital city Kyiv is once again under attack. In the three days since President Trump announced a so-called energy ceasefire,
Speaker A
Russia has systematically bombed Ukrainian power plants. Now its defenses have been weakened by apparent speed limits applied overnight to Elon Musk's Starlink. Ukraine is critically dependent on the satellite service because Russia has destroyed its telecoms. Both Musk and Trump have this
Speaker A
week called for the Ukrainian president to be replaced. And the current crisis began with Trump's announcement of a diesel supply deal with Vladimir Putin, reversing years of US policy and new sanctions that he personally signed into law just 21 days earlier. Ukraine's
Speaker A
President Volodymyr Zelensky is in London for talks with Prime Minister Andy Burnham and for a meeting with King Charles. But first, he joins me for the first time in the uncensored studio. Mr.
Speaker A
President, welcome to London and welcome to Uncensored. Thank you very much. First, this is the first fourth time that I've interviewed you. The first time was four months into the war in the summer of 2022, and I went to Kyiv and we had a very
Speaker A
powerful conversation with you and the first lady. And it's hard to think that here we are nearly five years on and this war is still raging.
Speaker A
What is happening? What is happening? So I think for us it was very clear from the very beginning that Putin personally wants to occupy our country and break us totally, and it's his goal. It was
Speaker A
from the very beginning of full-scale war, but it's clear now, then it began to be clear for EU members, not all of them, I think, I hope now to all of them. Then it was clear to the United
Speaker A
States, and I think that the pressure was very strong on Russia, not enough, yes, and now what's going on, not enough pressure. Russia launched, of course, how to circumvent sanctions, how to destroy energy, and they pushed us through these
Speaker A
absolutely terrible winters. And what is understandable is that it's the war for us, but for somebody it's economy, for somebody's business, and it's not fair.
Speaker A
The events of the last few days must have been very disturbing for you and for the people of Ukraine. It appears that President Trump, to quote a phrase that we would use over here, has thrown you under the bus. He's done this diesel
Speaker A
deal with Vladimir Putin, having just announced renewed sanctions, which people find inexplicable. And now you have a situation where President Trump announced an energy ceasefire and within hours Vladimir Putin launches an absolute bombardment of Ukraine aimed directly at your energy,
Speaker A
and Elon Musk, who controls Starlink, owns the company which you rely on. It appears it's been powered down. Do you feel betrayed by what has been happening?
Speaker A
Really? Yes. Really between us. But I mean, it's a little bit more complicated than just my emotions or my feelings. Yes. It depends not on me. I mean, our country has to survive and we count on our real
Speaker A
partners, strategic partners, United States, and President Trump. They wanted us not to attack. In my opinion, it was not fair. Energy ceasefire is okay, it's understandable. I mean, it's the worst version of peace, but anyway, it's some steps to peace. So
Speaker A
the escalation energy ceasefire when President Trump said, "I didn't know about it, but of course we support it because we need our people to live, to go through this winter and to stop the war. This
Speaker A
is what we want." But he said about energy ceasefire and we didn't attack during three days any kind of energy objects, and we didn't just attack, we didn't respond. You absolutely correctly said that after energy ceasefire Russia answered, especially, by
Speaker A
the way, directly to Trump, but we had these feelings that they attacked us, our gas stations, infrastructure, etc. Then I said that okay, we will hold our emotions and we will not respond on diesel, but believe me what I
Speaker A
said to American partners: they will attack energy, they will do it, about ours or about this, and it was this night. But what was really strange and what was not like between partners is that they switched off Starlink. So something absolutely
Speaker A
crazy steps between us. So we hold energy ceasefire from our side. Russia attacked us with hundreds of different missiles, including 40 ballistic missiles, and all these ballistic, by the way, all 100% they used them against our energy infrastructure.
Speaker A
Of the 40 ballistic missiles, only four were able to be brought down. So 36 presumably got through, and of the 128 drones, the majority were taken down, but presumably had Starlink been working at the normal speed, you might have taken
Speaker A
them all down. So this is having real consequences on the damage that Russia can inflict and on the casualties involved.
Speaker A
You know that the problem is that at night the Starlink was switched off. So this is the problem.
Speaker A
And do you believe deliberately? Do you think it's been done deliberately? Has Elon Musk, because he posted on X, his own platform, he posted that he thinks there should be a new president in Ukraine, not you. He did that in the
Speaker A
last few days. Do you think he has deliberately turned the speed down on Starlink to damage you?
Speaker A
I'm sure that they knew what they did. Absolutely. Because it was 1 a.m., so 1 at night. He was asked about this. So, and the Starlink was blocked, of course, by SpaceX and of course by the United States. They are
Speaker A
right, of course, but I mean this Starlink is not for attacks, part of this it strikes, and of course they blocked our army strikes. What they did, they made whole pressure on us, ballistic missiles then not walking
Speaker A
information about ballistic before attack and then switched off Starlink. And when you destroy Shahed, and often when we destroy jet Shahed, we use drones with Starlink. So it's not about just attack as I said that we didn't attack their energy. It's not about attack. It's also about defending lives. So people were killed because not enough destroying, not enough interceptors, including interceptors with Starlink which didn't work. Of course, you've had people who were very supportive of President Trump,
Speaker A
like Laura Loomer, who've posted, "How come Russia isn't being held accountable?" She went to see you recently for an interview, for violating the energy ceasefire. President Trump said he wanted Russia and Ukraine to abide by.
Speaker A
Russia fired 39, now 40, you said, ballistic missiles into Ukraine last night, most of which targeted Ukraine's energy facilities. Putin is the Hitler of our time.
Speaker A
Do you agree with her when she says Putin is the Hitler of our time?
Speaker A
Absolutely. Absolutely. It's true. You think he's that evil? No, he is. He's not, I mean, he's not so strong as evil. I think so. But people are afraid of him, and he's not, I mean, United States
Speaker A
stronger between us. We understand it stronger, and they have to be on our side. And when you speak or compare Putin and Hitler like Laura said. So what can I say? United States have to be on our side if it's
Speaker A
situation. If President Trump is watching this interview and he might well be, if he is, what's your message to him? President, we have always been very thankful for his support, for the support of the American people, and he has to
Speaker A
understand that Russia wants him to be weak. This is this act after his words about energy. This is this act against him.
Speaker A
understand that Russia wants him to be weak this is this act after his words about energy is this act against him personally.
Speaker A
They're mocking him. They're mocking him, aren't they? Absolutely. They're literally, huh? They're laughing. They're laughing.
Speaker A
They're laughing making him look stupid. I don't know. I mean, there it's so I think they are.
Speaker A
I think I think they're just saying, "Look, we don't care what President Trump says.
Speaker A
He can have an energy ceasefire. We're going to we're going to rain missiles and and drones all over Ukraine." They don't care what America thinks.
Speaker A
They don't care about elections in the United States. They really care what will be with Ukraine because again this is their goal. They hate Americans. It's absolutely clear. And they I mean this when they speak for today they speak
Speaker A
even publicly about it not on the level of Putin. Putin speaks about it not loudly. As I said he's not very strong as he wants to show to the world. He's strong till till the world will stop him.
Speaker A
Do do you believe that the diesel deal? No, of course it doesn't have any influence on the price. I don't know.
Speaker A
It's a negligible amount. Absolutely. And America doesn't really need that amount from Russia. So what is going on here? There is a theory.
Speaker A
Yeah. Uh a wellsourced theory that what is going on is that Trump is under huge pressure with the midterm elections coming. The Iran war has not been going well. energy prices have spiked as a result. Americans are playing paying
Speaker A
more money at the pump for their for their gas and so on. And that actually he's done this as a distraction to kind of blame you for the energy prices in America that Americans are having to pay for what's happening in the Iran war. Do
Speaker A
do you subscribe to that theory? Do you agree with that? I think that uh there are a lot of different re reasons and uh and uh your reason is also uh absolutely correct and uh for me what's going on
Speaker A
now yes elections and possibility to push us to capitulation between us if not to choose the wars it's about capitulation they want us to find any instrument any instrument Russia wants to push us hours from Danbas not by our
Speaker A
by by them by ourselves. Yes. And of course they use the United States and of course they sell them some I don't know business John Wenture econom project projects economical projects and etc. I don't know that's why I said there are a
Speaker A
lot of different reason but yes middle east of course straight off or this is real uh reason why the prices increased in the world and all the world understands it absolutely clear 100% not even 90 when you found when you found out that
Speaker A
President Trump had done this deal with Putin 21 days after new sanctions what was your im immediate response to that?
Speaker A
It's a pity that we are losing uh we are losing strong partner. So this is my opinion and you think you're losing America.
Speaker A
Yeah. But but not because of us. We I mean this we can't be weak otherwise we can't survive otherwise we will we will just we are not selling our country.
Speaker A
Look guys it's not about business for us. just our life and this is our country. It's our body. So our home, our children and and this is very important for us. That's why it's painful when President Trump chooses one side not not
Speaker A
our side but we are okay that he's in the middle but if you're in the middle you have to stay in the middle not on the wrong side. I think his advisers are wrong. I don't know who who is pushing
Speaker A
him not to the right side. This is not right side of history. You see, I feel that many Americans I've spent a lot of time in America and I speak to a lot of Americans about this.
Speaker A
Many Americans are with you. Yes, I know. I'm thankful to them. I believe the majority of Americans support you and Ukraine. So you have just people around President Trump, I think, who do not represent the majority thinking of Americans who are pushing
Speaker A
for this to me crazy deal with Putin, which looks like he's taken a side against you. And it makes no sense to me. And the whole energy ceasefire was obviously honestly because within hours Putin's just doing what he
Speaker A
likes. No, no. Now Putin is laughing because I mean this is for him simple victory.
Speaker A
Yes. This diesel deal. Yeah. It's I mean then block Starlink. It's simple victory tactical. What's going on? For example, Starlink we use civilians use that's what I said very important to def for defending. But also our soldiers use
Speaker A
Starlinks on the battlefield. When Putin why he's laughing? Why it's small victory for him? Why? because he's losing at the battlefield. He lost so many people in 2026 now huge amount the biggest during all this all this how many casualties
Speaker A
43,000 each month now really can you can you on the Russian side alone on the Russian side alone and how many how many are you losing on the Ukrainian side I can't share but I but it's I mean
Speaker A
between us for today it's from 7 to 10 1 to 7 1 to 10 the ratio yeah from Ukrainian to Russian.
Speaker A
Yes. So for every every Ukrainian being killed, seven to 10 Russians have been killed.
Speaker A
Absolutely. Every every Ukrainian now kills from 7 to 10, which is an astonishing statistic.
Speaker A
But when we said 40, when I said 43, we have to be clear 43,000. What is the difference? When you when they lost 43,000, it mean hard wounded, tough wounded and killed, right? And among these 43, it's about 20 20 25 killed
Speaker A
every month. Every month. And that's why I said 1 to 7, 1 to 10. Yeah. And and the difference between killed and wounded also is interesting. I mean it's for for them it's nothing. For us it's important.
Speaker A
We have one killed, five, six wounded. Right. It's our statistics. Their statistic is 50/50 for today, right?
Speaker A
So killed and wounded 50/50. So So they're having a much higher majority of casualties are dying on their side.
Speaker A
Of course. Yes. And with with all these losses, we we stabilize the front and of course they switch off startling for what? So it will helpful for Putin.
Speaker A
Of course. Of course. So why has Elon Musk done this? You know Elon Musk? He's previously been surprised.
Speaker A
No, I I had communication with him. We've been very thankful for Starlings and uh you know that it was not the present. Yeah. Uh I mean this it was well we don't we don't we don't know if Elon Musk and the president spoke to
Speaker A
each other. I mean it's Europeans Yeah. Europeans paid for Star Link including our big friends and neighbors in Poland. They paid for the for for these star links.
Speaker A
It's not just Are you angry with Elon Musk for doing this? Yes. I think he is not right. It's a big mistake. I don't know him or somebody pushed him to I don't know really. But um our soldiers when we got this
Speaker A
information at night they tried to make connection with SpaceX and not only SpaceX with with American partners with generals. Yes. I said them of course connect and ask what's going on maybe technical problems and etc. They said no no no we we don't
Speaker A
think that this is technical problem it was deliberately restricted it's two big problems the first one is intelligence when American partners shared with us intelligence about ballistic another thing it's startling it's uh mid strikes which helped our soldiers and also civilians to defend
Speaker A
shahitz it helps because we use some interceptors with ster links to defend jet shahit because They're very quick.
Speaker A
So it's two different issues. When you speak about intelligence, yes, they said that we had some technical problems. Now they it will work. But half of the night it again it again didn't work. It's a pity. But they said it's technical
Speaker A
problem. But about Starlink. So I mean this we are professionals. We we understand what's going on. If you're losing the speed so of Starling, so we understand what's going on. So they switch off. It's their decision.
Speaker A
What is your message to Elon Musk? No, it's a big mistake. A a lot of losses. This decision will bring a lot of human losses.
Speaker A
Yes, people are dying because of his decision. Of course, people will die. Of course, if attacks will continue and if sterling will not work, of course, I mean this it's not helpful. So my message is absolutely I hope that is mistake maybe
Speaker A
huge technical problem. I don't know. But we are asking to to do it to switch on and I think it's it will be I mean honest it will be fair and it like between partners have to be Donald Trump when he was asked about the
Speaker A
situation he he said this listen to what he said. You know what I suggest?
Speaker A
I suggest they get a new leader who can make a deal because he could have made many deals that for some reason he'd never does. And let me go a step further. If I were president, you wouldn't have ever had that war. That
Speaker A
war would have never started. There was no reason that that war with Ukraine and Russia started. It started due to incompetence.
Speaker A
Should have never started. You wouldn't have lost 30% of your country already. You've lost 30% of your country and you've had over a million people killed.
Speaker A
Between the two of them, over two million people killed. That's a war that should have never started. And I think it's time for Ukraine to get a new president.
Speaker A
I mean, he's he's throwing you under a massive bus there, isn't he? He wants you out.
Speaker A
He wants you out. Yeah. When I by the way when I became the president uh Crimea and Danbas partially was already occupied of course.
Speaker A
Yes. It was a new by the way president. President Trump has to know another president was in my then uh it was how to say.
Speaker A
Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So long periods quite long period till the full scale mission began.
Speaker A
Yeah. And uh it's mean that moving me and but but it decision of course of our people. Yes. No Trump, no musk, no anybody in the world can can choose the president or elect in other countries.
Speaker A
But this is not the problem of the president. I mean this moving me and uh I'm sure the new man or woman will defend our country because we are I mean this where it's our as I said it's our home how you
Speaker A
can do another way it's it's the question how to do it somebody will do it better somebody not but in any way we speak about Ukrainian president and what what is extraordinary I think when I went to Ukraine
Speaker A
Four months into the war, many people were predicting it would be over quickly. Russia would win because they'd throw everything at it. And here we are nearly 5 years later and they haven't.
Speaker A
They've taken a section of the Donbass. But the question I guess for you, can you imagine a scenario where you don't have to give any territory to Russia? or is the only way this war ends with you agreeing to give some territory to the
Speaker A
Russians? It depends on several things and not not too much. By the way, the first thing the first thing how our partners will be ready to stay closely with us. better to be closer than now because when we speak as I said
Speaker A
that's I mean there's no shadow games nothing everything will have to be between partners very open clear and very understandable weapon sanctions fundings and it's very understandable what to do to stay strong to be strong and Putin will not win will not prevail
Speaker A
100% without partners is uh more difficult ult [clears throat] and it's I mean it's unbelievable how how to how to survive without huge losses.
Speaker A
This is the key not to have too much losses. This is and is America key to this America and Europe EU and Europe I mean this because Georgia Maloney today um from Italy obviously she has come out very strongly against the diesel deal.
Speaker A
She's furious with President Trump, who she was very friendly with. Yeah, she's a conservative politician, but she's enraged by this deal. Thinks it flies in the face of everything uh that had been agreed with the sanctions. It encourages Putin and so
Speaker A
on. Are you encouraged that leaders like Georgia Maloney Yeah. are now coming out. Obviously, the British Prime Minister Burnham as well, Andy, Georgia, strong leaders. Kir who was always on our side. Yes, he was. and uh Emmanuel is on our side mostly people
Speaker A
Donald Tusk. Yeah. So and I mean I mean this and countries even with the changing you know changing with the leaders the policy was continuing so they supported us matter in Denmark Swiss Sweden uh Ulf Sweden prime minister Finland Alex a lot
Speaker A
of so they stay now with us and they are very clear and direct doesn't matter Georgia is friend of Trump of Donald Trump or not doesn't matter Uh, it's it's not right. But can you can you win, President Zalinski?
Speaker A
Can you win? Of course. No. Without the Americans on your side. So we we can we we will not in any way lose our independent country. Yes. Uh we we will have huge problems with uh huge problems with how to push Putin to um
Speaker A
diplomatic way of ending this war to negotiations. This is the problem. Yeah. So that's why with the United States it's more simple. It's difficult but it's more simple to push Putin to the right position to negotiations and only
Speaker A
during negotiations you can find a way out of this war real. Is is your position, just to push you on this, is your position as the president of Ukraine that in those negotiations you would never agree to any territory
Speaker A
being given to the Russians or is your position that it's negotiable? In other words, obviously you don't want to give the whole Donbass, but is there a deal to be done that would involve potentially some Ukrainian land being
Speaker A
given to Russia? I think in your in your question yes there is an answer why uh some big guys want to change me because I will never accept Ukrainian land as Russian land. Yes I am a realist and I understand that people more
Speaker A
important than uh 1 kilometer or 2 km is not about kilometers. I mean this it's it's about land and homes. This is important. Yes, it's occupied but it's this territory is occupied. It's temporary.
Speaker A
Yes, I am finding the way of dialogue. I'm on this side to have dialect and try to manage it because in the future in any way these all the thing all these people who want to be Ukrainians they
Speaker A
will be Ukrainians because they are and these territories are Ukrainian that in any way it will come back but without weapon because of losses it to my mind because a lot of things will change leader in Russia will change yes of
Speaker A
course not next if the next will be the same you know in 10 years.
Speaker A
But in with your position, yeah, to be clear, you have no intention of resigning.
Speaker A
You're not going to quit. Not of course. It's my responsibility. And then people will say, "Okay, when will you have an election?" Now, obviously, you were supposed to have one in 2024, but because of the war, you weren't able
Speaker A
to have one. Many millions of people, Ukrainians, have left the country. Many more are fighting on the front line. Is it is it possible to have an election of the kind that President Trump has been talking about?
Speaker A
Not of course. No 10%. It's because of each hour we have attacks. This massive attack what we discussed it was about night but during the day the same drone shah hundreds and thousands each hour attack. So that's why from the
Speaker A
point of security you can't do elections then soldiers are on the front. We can't choose the president without soldiers because they give and gave their lives.
Speaker A
They first who has to vote and I think it's fair. Do you believe the Ukrainian people are on your side?
Speaker A
Yes, of course. I'm sure we all Ukrainian people and we all on one side.
Speaker A
We have only one enemy. It's Russia and it's in also in their interests to end this war because Putin will end and Russia is a country. They want to have a his not only history. Yeah. They want to
Speaker A
have future but how to live with such leader. How how how to manage it. They killed a lot of people. Thousands and thousands of Ukrainians came to our houses, occupied it our homes and now this their solution is go out again. But
Speaker A
who who can give guarantees even if somebody want to make steps back? You've been achieving who will give you security.
Speaker A
You've been achieving a lot of success attacking Russia in Russia including in Moscow. You've been hitting these data centers, uh, the Yandex data centers, which many people think they will respond, by the way. Yes. They attacked our data center and destroyed
Speaker A
course. But you're being more successful than perhaps the Russians anticipated. Do you believe in your heart, President Zilinski, that you can beat the Russians, that you can actually achieve victory in this war?
Speaker A
I think that Putin's goal is total occupation of Ukraine. We already beat that. What is your what is your goal?
Speaker A
To stop this war. Make it peace. Stay where we stay. Everything will come back because we real country. We really Ukrainians and all this part which is occupied it is temporarily occupied it.
Speaker A
I'm sure. Mr. President, um I'm being told by your team that we have to wrap up because you have two important meetings. One with my prime minister and one with my king. I can only thank you for coming all the
Speaker A
way to the studio. Thank you. Uh, it's great to see you again. You know how I feel about this.
Speaker A
I want Ukraine to win this. And I want America and I want President Trump, I've known him a long time. And if you're watching, President Trump, do the right thing here. Siding with Vladimir Putin against this guy and his country is the
Speaker A
wrong thing. It's what we called in World War II appeasement to Hitler. Don't be that guy. Give this guy the support he needs to defeat the modernday Hitler. That's how I'd like to end this interview. I wish you all the very best
Speaker A
and please send my best to the Ukrainian people. We in England I know in the UK we're right behind you be under no doubt about that whatsoever.
Speaker A
Thankful to you and to your nation absolutely great nation great people great Britain which is from the very beginning on right side of history by the way on our side and we we are thankful to your support and it's we I
Speaker A
mean it's clear we are friends. Thank you. Great to see you. Thank you very much. Thank you.
Speaker A
Thank you. Thank you. Well, joining us now for their reaction to that extraordinary interview with President Zilinski is the former NATO Supreme Allied Commander, General Wesley Clark. Also here with me in my studio, the author of Provoked, Scott Horton,
Speaker A
and the US Special Forces veteran and chief strategist at the Middle East forum, Jim Hansen. Well, welcome to all of you. General Clark, first of all, welcome for your first time in my studio here. Great to have you here as well.
Speaker A
Um, you watched the interview, you've all watched the interview. What was your reaction? Well, I my reaction was I thought he uh he he gave you some really straight answers. He uh he couldn't tell you what the casualties were exactly. Didn't want
Speaker A
to give away certain things. He was very clear about the need for Starlink. He's very concerned about US support. Uh he certainly didn't appreciate the uh the oil diesel deal. Um he would have gone along uh with the energy uh ceasefire
Speaker A
[clears throat] and so forth and it's going to be very difficult to hold elections. I think those are all solid positions. And he said basically his objective is to get the war stopped. He didn't say he had to
Speaker A
retake Crimea. He didn't say he had to. But he did say it's going to be very difficult for anyone to provide security and really keep Ukraine safe even when this is over. Uh and the implication is if Vladimir Putin's still there.
Speaker A
What he said about President Trump was very interesting. I mean he he clearly believes he's been betrayed by President Trump in the last few days. first with this diesel deal with Putin flying in the face of the sanctions which Trump
Speaker A
had had renewed only 21 days before uh but also of course with this issue of potentially Elon Musk's Starlink being turned off uh by SpaceX and the damage that's caused to their intelligence capabilities and their ability to thwart
Speaker A
incoming missiles. And of course, this fact that Trump announced there's going to be an energy ceasefire and within hours Putin totally ignored it and attacked a load of Ukrainian energy uh areas. What do you think? I mean, I
Speaker A
asked him a straight question. Can you win this without America? From a military perspective solely, General Clark, can the Ukrainians win without [clears throat] fullscale American support? Well, they don't have full-scale American support right now because uh we've got $400
Speaker A
million tied up in uh in the US Congress that the president hasn't released. And uh you know uh we could have uh we could have diverted more air defense missiles there. We've given a few. And there's other things, but they do need American
Speaker A
intelligence support. the ability to warn of missiles, the ability to monitor communications, the ability to target uh key uh Russian targets, command and control, especially in Donbos and and in the nearer part of the of Russia. Yeah, they do need that because there's no
Speaker A
substitute for that. But uh they're getting a lot of support from Europe and especially strong moral and emotional support that uh is uh has been much more let's say nuanced coming from Washington.
Speaker A
Right. Jim Hansen, welcome back to Uncensored. I got to say I was absolutely shocked and appalled frankly about the news of the deal the the diesel deal with Putin. Uh can you defend what President Trump has done there? Because obviously it's tokenism.
Speaker A
the amount is negligible really. Um it's it's appears to be him wanting to say, "Hey, you know, I'm ready to do business with Russia again." But if you're Ukraine, you just feel like you've been thrown under a massive bus.
Speaker A
I think President Trump is making a point as well that he has no confidence that Zalinski will lead Ukraine to peace. And he showed that in your interview. He said he's not going to seed a single kilometer of Ukrainian
Speaker A
territory. Why should he? Because it's already taken. Russia's had it for almost five years. He can't take it back.
Speaker A
Would you see Would you seed if America was invaded in a similar way? You know, let me let me sort look at that. No, Canada can't take territory from us because we'd kick their butt in an afternoon. [laughter]
Speaker A
Let's put Russia's not our neighbor. Let's put Russia is if Russia is our neighbor. Hang on, Jim. Hang on one sec.
Speaker A
Let's put the the the sort of, you know, the chest beating to one side for a moment. From a purely comparative point of view, if somebody decided to invade a chunk of the United States, are you telling me that a single
Speaker A
American, well, obviously some would, but if you're telling me the vast majority of Americans would tolerate seeding any inch of American land, even if it took years in the way you're categorizing, they wouldn't. And nor would I in the UK. We had this with
Speaker A
Hitler in World War II, right? Why on earth should the Ukrainians, even if they've currently lost land, why should they agree to give it up permanently to a bunch of Russian invaders?
Speaker A
So, we should continue to fund this meat grinder that's been going on for 5 years now.
Speaker A
World War II was a meat grinder and that went on for longer than this.
Speaker A
Let me make my point, Pierce. They can't defeat Putin. They can't defeat Russia. Even with Europe's help, they can't push them out of the territory that Russia holds now because they haven't been able to and they they now have less chance than
Speaker A
before. They're not going to get additional American support. So, they're going to have to make do with whatever Europe can. So, they cannot push them out. Now, we can continue to to let people die in this or they can face
Speaker A
reality. I wouldn't like it, but we're not losing a war to Mexico. We're not losing a war to Canada. They are tied in a war with with Russia and that territory is already gone. And Putin's not going to take a loss. He wants to go
Speaker A
down in history as one of the great Russian men. Losing a war to Ukraine doesn't do that. He'd rather be with Ivan the terrible, Catherine the Great, as Vlad the Vicious in whatever it takes to do that than lose to Ukraine, which
Speaker A
if he does not keep the parts of the Donbass he has and the rest of that land bridge to Crimea, it's a loss. He's not going to do that. He can't be moved. So, it's Zullinsky and the Ukrainians who
Speaker A
are going to have to face reality. They can't win and that war can't go on forever. If they want to fight it, they're going to do it without American support. And that was President Trump's point.
Speaker A
Scott Horton, welcome back to you to Uncensored. Um, what was your view of what Zalinski said in that interview?
Speaker A
Okay. Well, so there's a lot here, but first of all, I agree with what it's Jim I believe correct just said. This is the same thing, Pierce is, it's not a direct analogy in the situation, but morally it's the same thing as in Vietnam and
Speaker A
Afghanistan where the enemy was the communists and the Taliban. And if you want to, you know, talk for an hour in purely moral terms, how sinful is it to turn over the poor people of South Vietnam or the people of North
Speaker A
Afghanistan to the tender mercies of these terrible enemies? But the reality is they're going to win the war anyway.
Speaker A
It's actually immoral to keep the war going for 10 years or 20 years and have all these hundreds of thousands or even in the case of Vietnam, millions of people die and then they lose anyway.
Speaker A
And that's the same thing here. Jim is right that this is a fool's errand. It can't be done. The only thing that could truly turn the tide in this war, as General Clark knows, would be direct intervention by the United States Army,
Speaker A
Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force. And we're not going to do that because that means thermonuclear war.
Speaker A
But does it not part of you though, Scott? You know, this it's all very well us sitting here. You know, I'm I remember vividly getting the long 12-hour train into key four months into that war. You know, being told to turn
Speaker A
off all my devices and the lights in the cabin because if the Russians saw any lights or power, they might attack it and so on. Pretty, you know, pretty for me as civvy, it was a pretty uncomfortable uh 24 hours on a train, I
Speaker A
can tell you. Um but I was struck then by Zalinski in particular by the extraordinary resolve he had. This is a guy who on the night it started everyone expected him to leave and instead he went on uh FaceTime video whatever it
Speaker A
was on his phone and told the world I'm not going. And he has stood there as leader of that country for nearly 5 years when everyone has been predicting the the fact that Russia would win and they haven't won and we've pretty well
Speaker A
reached a kind of military stalemate. And what we're really talking about in any settlement would be the Donbass and what happens to it. And he, you know, I I I agree with him. Why the why the hell should they give up any territory, even
Speaker A
if it's currently occupied by a bunch of invaders from Russia? Why should they give that up in any deal?
Speaker A
Okay. Well, first of all, I'm sympathetic with him. He's in a difficult position there. I don't completely disdain the guy. He's no more corrupt than any national leader in the East or West, I don't guess. Um, and he's in a very difficult spot here. But
Speaker A
of course, there's this huge moral hazard here where the Western Alliance, including the United States, still are backing his effort here in a hot war on Russia's border. That I hasten to remind you that all this moral talk about Adolf
Speaker A
Hitler and all of this stuff completely obscures the fact that in fact Putin is not a, you know, enraged, you know, uh, insane ideologue like that. This is much more like wear Russia than Nazi Russia.
Speaker A
And the fact that they have hydrogen bombs, Pierce, which means that the NATO alliance and the Russian Federation must not can not ever go to war. And that is a risk here. And you're talking about losing London permanently. Talking about
Speaker A
losing Austin, Texas permanently over who controls Denipro Petro Provosque. And I'm sorry. No, I don't care about that. I'm not willing to get the United States into a war. Even Joe Biden.
Speaker A
So, what if he Okay, so going to do that. Okay. So, what what else would you give Putin? Would you give him Poland if he decided to march in there? Would you?
Speaker A
No. But look, see, come on. You think it's very unlikely? You think it's very unlikely? I say it's highly likely if we roll over to this guy, it's highly likely Putin, who never ever wanted the Soviet Union to break up. He
Speaker A
wants this vast rambling empire and I reckon he'd go after he'd go after new places to take in a heartbeat if he sense we don't have the stomach for the fight.
Speaker A
Now take I know you've read provoked Pierce and I debunk all that. All those quotes of Putin waxing on about the Soviet Union are all taken completely out of context.
Speaker A
That's not what's going on here. This is really Donald Trump is right in that clip that you played to blame Joe Biden and for that matter to blame Barack Obama for the intervention in 2014 that overthrew the government and then
Speaker A
sending John Brennan there immediately to start the war in the east. They did not do a full diplomatic push to compromise as the Washington Post recommended to compromise with the people of the east to prevent conflict.
Speaker A
John Brennan the CIA guy went and started the war and then what did he do when Donald Trump won the election?
Speaker A
Obama and Brennan framed Trump for treason with Russia which completely, you know, hampered him and as they put it, as the FBI put it, reigned him in and prevented him from adopting a more consiliatory policy when he could have
Speaker A
ended the ongoing so-called civil war then. And instead, his entire first term, he was prevented from reconciling with Russia. And then the country and the world was turned over to the tender mercies of Joe Biden who absolutely ham-handedly stumbled the West into this
Speaker A
war. And I do and I've told you before, Pierce, I do blame Vladimir Putin for this. He did not have to invade on the 24th if he didn't on the 23rd or the 20th. Okay. However, Joe Biden in 21
Speaker A
continued to reiterate that, oh, we're bringing them into NATO. All right. You're damn right we are. and we're going to continue to standardize their military and make it essentially a de facto member of the NATO alliance. And there's nothing that the Russians can do
Speaker A
about it. And no, we are not willing to negotiate their treaty in good faith because, as they said repeatedly, he we're going to do like Rambo 3 and we're going to lure them in and we're going to inflict upon them a strategic defeat. As
Speaker A
Lindsey Graham said, Russians are dying and we our soldiers aren't dying. It's the great It's the best money we ever spent because we are overextending Russia. We're giving them an expensive problem where the Ukrainians and your morality play. The Ukrainians are just
Speaker A
the club in America's hand that we're using against Russia here in a way to weaken them in an attempt to weaken China, which is completely ham-handed and also backfired. Right. We just push Russia even further into China's arms.
Speaker A
Let me bring about any of this. Okay, General Clark, what's your response to what Scott has laid out there?
Speaker A
Well, he's laid out a lot and it's a little hard to unpack it all to be honest, peers, but let's start with this. Uh, peace, general peace since the end of the Second World War has been built on principles. And one of those
Speaker A
principles is you don't change borders by force. Uh what we learned from World War II is that if you don't stand up to potential aggression, uh appeasement doesn't work and so you've got to actually stop it. So uh what you're
Speaker A
saying basically, Scott, is uh is uh you want after 5 years to continue appeasement and uh that's not a policy that's going to bring stability to Europe or the world. Everybody's watching this.
Speaker A
[clears throat] they're saying is the principle of of not invading and crossing borders that kept major peace. There were fights, sure, but but that was the principle.
Speaker A
We're going to just throw it out because that's the consequence of the argument that you're making.
Speaker A
That's why Europe and the United States are standing strong behind Ukraine. Aggression should not be rewarded. It should be punished. And if you can't punish it, you got to at least stop it and and block it and block the
Speaker A
objectives. And so the likely consequence of following the the thought train that that you're projecting there is a let's just give up on it. Okay. But then what happens is we know that's not the end of Vladimir Putin's ambition. We
Speaker A
know he wants to restore control, Russian control over the nations of Eastern Europe and especially the completely wrong, General. I'm sorry, General Millie in November.
Speaker A
I'm just answering so you're you're interrupting me, Scott. So I I did not interrupt 2022, General Millie told the Ukrainians, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said, "You boys should quit while you're only this far behind." They had a great success in
Speaker A
Harkke and Luhansk, and he said, "You should deal now because it's only going to get worse from here." So you can wax on about all this moralizing stuff, but all that's happened is hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of thousands of
Speaker A
people have lost more strategy and they're probably going to now lose the military tactics and technology and a lot of things and throwing a lot of of word salad out there at the audience right now. Actually, what's happened is
Speaker A
this is a war in which Ukraine has mobilized its population. The population's fully behind it. the United States has uh held back. We're not even explaining to the Russian people what's going on. Now, that was a decision that
Speaker A
I disagree with that the Biden administration made, but they did make the decision that we won't take the so-called information war in to Russia.
Speaker A
So, Putin has free play with the Russian people. They don't know the truth. And uh I don't think uh that you or others have the right to tell the Ukrainian people, give up on your country.
Speaker A
They have the right to continue to fight. I've been there. I talked to many Ukrainians, including members of the government, soldiers, and others. They want their country.
Speaker A
Yeah. And it's an important principle for the [clears throat] rest of us because if we uphold that principle, we have a better chance of preventing further war, greater destruction in the future. you know, and let me bring Jim in here. Hang
Speaker A
on, Scott. Scott, every time I say something substantive, all I get is a bunch of moralizing and Adolf Hitler and principle and valor and all of this stuff. Why don't you talk about the fact that they're more likely to lose Odessa
Speaker A
permanently now? They're more likely to lose the entire southwestern coast of Ukraine. But I would argue, Scott, okay, but Scott, I would argue with But Scott, I would I would argue they are much more likely to lose those things if they just
Speaker A
roll over and let Putin take what he wants. That's what I think. Get a compromise on all of this.
Speaker A
Let me bring Let me bring Jim in. You know, Jim, I I'm old enough to remember 1991 when Saddam Hussein invaded Q8.
Speaker A
[snorts] That wasn't part of NATO. America had no great obligation to go and kick him out of Q8, but it did because it was the morally right thing to do and we all agreed with that and it was a very quick operation. And unlike
Speaker A
the next Iraq war, which I thought was fought on a completely false premise and frankly illegal and indefensible, that one seemed to me a very clear-cut case of somebody invading another country and being kicked out by a uh a country
Speaker A
predominantly American, but obviously helped by allies who just decided this was the wrong thing and they weren't going to let it happen. And for Donald Trump to be doing diesel deals right now with Vladimir Putin 21 days after he
Speaker A
renews sanctions against Russia and basically throw the Ukrainians and Z and say he wants Zilinski out because he won't give up the Dombas 20% of his country to this marauding barbarian Putin. I I'm staggered that anyone on the conservative right who were
Speaker A
unanimous about America doing the right thing with Q8, which wasn't even part of NATO or anywhere near anyone to do with NATO. I'm staggered that there are people on the conservative right in America cheering Trump on with this.
Speaker A
He's doing deals with Putin. I mean, you should be outraged. I can I can respect Zalinski as a hero for Ukraine and being able to stand up to Russia for as long as he has, but as I pointed out, he can't win the war
Speaker A
unless America intervenes. We've all agreed with that. So, he's not going to win the war.
Speaker A
I haven't agreed to that. General Clark, so half the panel have not agreed with that.
Speaker A
Okay, fine. I don't believe it's possible. Well, Zalinsky is delusional in that respect. But the point is as as a threat to the world, Russia and Saddam Hussein aren't even in the same league. They aren't even playing the same game. So whatever
Speaker A
we did in Kuwait has nothing to do with dealing with the fact that Russia took the parts of of Ukraine it has and is going to keep them. And now we have to decide what's the US strategic.
Speaker A
WHY DID WE OKAY, out of interest, why did why did America then attack Iraq after 9/11, which had nothing to do with Iraq? Why did they attack Iraq if the belief as we were told it was was that
Speaker A
Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction by your argument? Why would why would they have done that if they thought he had nuclear weapons? Because if that's the argument for not taking on Vladimir Putin VLADIMIR PUTIN WELLIN HOLD ON SCOTT, let
Speaker A
me finish dude. Okay, but let me finish my point. Putin has thousands of nukes. We know that.
Speaker A
But so does America. and America and the other nuclearpowered countries actually have marginally more than he does. He's not going to risk everything for a nuclear tear up with an equally well-armed opposition. But he might he might if he thinks America, which is a
Speaker A
huge factor in all this, if America is moving to Russia's way, then God help us. So you think he's going the only places he can expand are into NATO countries. All right. Ukraine he's already fighting in. He's not he's
Speaker A
friends with Bellerus. Every other country on his flank is a NATO country. So if he moves west at all, he brings the big dog off the porch because as many beefs as we have right now.
Speaker A
Does he though? What would Trump do? What would President Trump do? Okay, so say he attacks one of the Say he attacks one of the Baltic countries or Poland or whatever it may be. Say he does that.
Speaker A
Say he really is the next Hitler and he wants to invade Poland, right? Because he's got his gander up because we forced Ukraine to surrender. Say he does all that. Do you have any confidence that President Trump in that eventuality
Speaker A
would do what you're suggesting? Of course he would. Because the point is that NATO is designed to be a trip wire that brings us into something that stops Russia from turning it back into the neosviet Union. All right? We will not
Speaker A
tolerate that. And he knows that. And that's why Putin will not roll tanks going west. He hit Ukraine because it's not a NATO country and because he wanted Donbass and his land bridge and to solidify Crimea. That's a done deal. Now
Speaker A
the question is what's the US strategic interest? Our strategic interest is in stopping the war from expanding and turning into World War II because Putin won't take a loss and it's from ensuring that the rest of the world doesn't
Speaker A
suffer for a war that can't be won. Our blood and treasure, the energy implications and the rest of it. That war needs to end and that requires Zalinski and the Ukrainian people to understand there is not going to be a
Speaker A
continuous flow of material and treasure to go ahead and continue a war that we do not believe they can.
Speaker A
Okay. Uh Scott, you know what's interesting to me is that the American people remain supportive of Ukraine. So they're against what their president and current administration uh are believing.
Speaker A
So they so Trump's administration do not represent the majority in America about Ukraine and they definitely don't represent the majority with the war on Iran. So you've got a very unusual situation here where you have an American president who is involved in
Speaker A
various machinations around the world where he doesn't have the support of his people. That's unusual.
Speaker A
Well, no. I mean, American foreign policy has nothing to do with the wishes of the American public at large. It's all just a faction fight over control of the empire. And so, but America's never gone to war before
Speaker A
like it did with Iran, where from the start, the American people in all the polling were opposed to it and have got increasingly opposed to it. We've never seen that before.
Speaker A
Uh yeah. Well, um it's unfortunate. you know, there was not public support for the war when um Bill Clinton and General Clark started an aggressive war against Serbia without a UN resolution and uh in order to break off Kosovo, a precedent
Speaker A
which Vladimir Putin of course invoked in his declaration of war against Ukraine just as he invoked Bush's threat about WMD and Obama's pretention of protecting life in Libya to say that this is why he gets to cross these
Speaker A
borders is America gets to rewrite the international law whenever we want and so um it's a matter of high principle.
Speaker A
Um it's only high uh when it's the other guys who are who are violating it. Um but look the the fact of the matter is there's been a potential I'll bring you in when he's finished.
Speaker A
Kushner and them have been have been talking about this right now and this is they've been there have been leaks like this. I think we discussed this on your show before Pierce. There have been leaks about a potential for Russia to
Speaker A
settle for the current line of contact and so that would be essentially as Jim just said the land bridge to Crimea from Donbass AOV coast there. They control virtually all of Donesk. So it's almost a done deal at that point. And then but
Speaker A
they would be forsaking or foregoing trying to take Zaprosia city uh and the last like third or or or more of Zaprosia as well as forgetting about the part of Kersan, the third of Kersan that is on the western side of the Neper
Speaker A
River and essentially just calling it timeout where they have it now. That is the best case scenario for peace, stability, loss of life and whatever and for any potential to turn this thing around. It just makes no sense to say
Speaker A
that because of principle and valor and honor that this thing should go the other way, therefore it will. And by the way, I really wish that you had asked him because this is a serious thing. I wish that you had asked Zinsky, what
Speaker A
about Dmitri Yash from right sector who helped overthrow the government in 2014, who threatened to hang Zalinski from a tree on Crmaturk Street, the main drag in Kiev. I'm sure I'm pronouncing that wrong. Forgive me. uh if he would dare
Speaker A
to negotiate a peace with Russia and is he afraid of the radical right inside his military such as Andrew Bleki the leader of the third army corps who's leading the vivaldi campaign right now he's the author of the book the word of
Speaker A
the white leader and the author of the speech Ukrainian racial social nationalism and he's the guy who said he's leading the white race against the semitic le unment mention and is the third or fourth most popular political figure in Ukraine right now and has made
Speaker A
his political ambitions absolutely clear. And is Zilinsky afraid? I think he is afraid that these Hitlerian Nazis, these avowed Hitlerian supremacists would shoot him in the head to death if he would dare compromise. And how much of a disincentive is that to him to
Speaker A
compromise in this war? Okay. Um, General Clark, just the point that Scott made about Serbia and what NATO did there. What's your response first to that?
Speaker A
Bill Clinton put it best, I think. He said, "When you can make a difference, you should." So, in 1994 in the African country of Rwanda, we stood by and watched 800,000 or 900,000 people hacked to death, children thrown
Speaker A
down wells, uh heads cut off with machetes. We could have intervened. We could have made a difference. Maybe we didn't understand it fully at the time.
Speaker A
I was in the joint staff when I finally understood it, not as it was going on.
Speaker A
We didn't really have good enough intelligence. We saw some pictures. We heard some stories, but it it really took months afterwards before reporters came in on the ground and really talked to people and we saw what had been done.
Speaker A
It was horrendous. And I think all of us at that time recognized we're not going to let this happen again. So the United Nations tried to stop the slaughter that began in Bosnia in 1992 and they weren't very effective. And so
Speaker A
when it picked up momentum in 1995, uh we started a negotiation process. We backed it with NATO troops. And then again in 1998 it started again in a part of Serbia known as Kosovo. I went down talked to Mallovich three times. I asked
Speaker A
him not to do this. I talked to the Serb generals. They said, "You're not going to. These people are just fighting for their rights. They're not terrorists.
Speaker A
They just want to have a school with their own language. They want to have people from their own community in the police force." All that's been taken away from them. They're being enslaved in this uh province of of Kosovo.
Speaker A
And uh and the Russians came in and said, "Don't pay any attention to it. If you want to wipe them out, just wipe them out." And uh and so that's what started it. So we had warned Melovich not to do this. We saw the experience
Speaker A
from Rwanda. We saw it in Bosnia. And uh the global opinion and the opinion of uh NATO was you can't permit another such slaughter. Now I have a problem right now. Now just we've got a lot of time on this show.
Speaker A
Give me a chance to talk. I have a problem with the Biden administration because although they certainly warned the Europeans uh that they uh that this attack was coming uh they didn't provoke it in except by being weak. And so as it
Speaker A
started the Biden administration and NATO made perfectly clear that they wouldn't intervene to stop Putin. They set up an an equation in which Ukraine was more or less more or less left by itself. Uh I went to the White House by
Speaker A
phone. I talked to people there. I said, "Look, uh you say you believe in in in an international rules-based order." Well, if that's the case, this is Ukrainian airspace. This is airspace that if Ukraine says bring in aircraft
Speaker A
that we have the right to do it, Ukraine has the right to ask for it. Instead, NATO stood back. The Biden administration, of course, was behind this and saying, "Oh, no, no, no. We don't want to do anything with the
Speaker A
Russians." The time to have stopped it was then, but we didn't have the courage. We had a different group of people in leadership. They didn't have the same experience that those of us in the 1990s went through. And so, u the
Speaker A
argument of using Ukrainian airspace became, "Oh, uh, like a no-fly zone, and then you're going to going to have to bomb Russia or something." It was a deliberate effort not to face up to the reality of what Vladimir Putin stood
Speaker A
for. We learned in the 1990s and uh Chancellor uh NATO secretary general um uh rec recognized uh Manford Verer that if NATO wants to be safe and secure, it cannot hide behind its borders. It has to reach out of area and we failed to do
Speaker A
that effectively immediately in Ukraine. We proaricated, we delayed, we postponed, we tried to dodge the issue because of fear of Vladimir Putin and we built him up.
Speaker A
He was a mouse when he started this by going into Georgia instead of saying to Vladimir Putin, "Get out of Georgia. How dare you invade another country?" Uh we sent the French president in Sarco who uh said well okay
Speaker A
you can keep a quarter of Georgia and we won't check on you anymore and every year they move the barbwire and take a little more of Georgia.
Speaker A
Exactly. And then they learn from they taken the dumbbat and still was supposed to think he won't take anymore. Of course he will. This is what a scorpion does to a frog. Let me bring Are you really going to pretend that
Speaker A
Russia just started that war against Georgia in August 2008? Georgia attacked and killed Russian peacekeepers in South Oetia trying to retake South Oetia and then Russia responded and did recommended missile strikes on the actually happened that way Scott what
Speaker A
actually happened is it was a false flag. It was a provocation by Russia looking for trouble. Vladimir Putin. No, Vladimir Putin saw the power that he had and Vladimir Putin figured a way to draw him in so he could then make the
Speaker A
military argument and go after him. Uh, but I don't understand why, you know, a man like you who has fought for the United States and cares about the United States and obviously you believe we're very very powerful because you think
Speaker A
that uh, you know, we should be determining the fate of other people who are fighting for their own country as though we have the moral authority to do that. Why do you then take take Putin's side of everything? I I don't understand
Speaker A
it. I hear these people who are so-called realists in foreign policy and what they do is they look at the past and they say, "Well, a powerful country won." Yes. But that's not the future.
Speaker A
The future is what kind of country what kind of world do we want? Do we want a world in which the mighty step over others? Do we want a world run by a couple of dictators? No. You don't want
Speaker A
to live in that country. You fought for your country in freedom. I want to bring I want to give I want to give Jim has been very Jim has been very patient here. Jim I just [laughter] want he asked me a direct question and he
Speaker A
totally mischaracterized I never said anything about I never said anything about America should force Ukraine to do this or that.
Speaker A
He's the one saying that the government ought to tax me and all the rest of my fellow Texans and force us to participate in this war for a foreign nation which is an entirely separate question uh and is not what I was
Speaker A
saying. And also, by the way, you know, all his talk about, oh no, it was too much appeasement, too much weakness.
Speaker A
Well, Zack Dorfman from Yahoo News had CIA officers before the war in January or February of 22. CIA officers in charge of receiving and distributing the arms in Ukraine. Told Zack Dorfman, they're calibrating this wrong. They're not deterring the Russians. They're
Speaker A
provoking them. And we're trying to tell the bosses to tell the White House to stop sending arms now. Now you're just making war more likely. Maybe you could imagine a situation where pouring in arms is going to deter them up to some
Speaker A
certain ratio. I don't know. But the CIA officers on the ground at the time said this is backfiring. We're going to cause the war. I guess they're just appeasers to the CIA officers are just taking the side of Vladimir Putin instead of just
Speaker A
being wiser than people like you, General Clark, who would cause a million something people to be killed over an idiotic battle over who controls the Dawnbass. Okay. I don't think it's well I don't think it's an idiotic battle to
Speaker A
for Ukraine to want to keep Ukraine. Let me bring in Jim for the final word here.
Speaker A
Jim, you'd be very patient. Thank you. Um although it's been a fascinating debate, I have to say.
Speaker A
If I could take you back, Jim, to just before President Trump won his second term in office, and I was speaking to him before, during, and after I spoke to him the morning that he won. Um and he
Speaker A
was full of like, you know, we're going to do this, this, and this. Very positive. He hit the ground running with an amazing array of executive orders, many of which were very popular. He shut the border pretty much to all illegal
Speaker A
immigrants pouring in there. A lot of things were going well. But if I if I said to you as we as we come up to the midterm elections that he would end up waging a pretty disastrous war with Iran
Speaker A
uh which had an enormously negative impact on American cost of living for ordinary Americans particularly at the gas pump and so on. uh and that he'd end up siding with Vladimir Putin on a little dirty diesel deal which made no
Speaker A
sense other than basically putting his hand up saying I'm with Vlad now against Ukraine which is how most people have perceived it to be. What would you have said to me if I'd said to you this this is what he's actually going to do
Speaker A
because I've known Trump a long time and I'm slightly flabbergasted about what I've watched. I didn't understand why he got talked into going to war in Iran by Netanyah is what I think happened. I don't understand why he hasn't tried to
Speaker A
get out of it. Now he can see the catastrophic effect on American cost of living. And I just was apoplelectic when I heard about this diesel deal. So what are you doing, Donald Trump? Why would you want to be perceived as a guy
Speaker A
getting into bed with Putin right now? Well, look, you're looking at the actual acts, not the plan behind them.
Speaker A
President Trump's entire foreign policy is based around the idea that America is not the world's policemen anymore. We are not going to intervene in every single place where there are bad. We can't.
Speaker A
Why? Because Iran was building nuclear weapons. They had a plan. And we were told this time, we were told last year that that had all been put back decades, 12 years and they started trying to bring it back. The second they do that,
Speaker A
we went from they hadn't given up to 8 months. They hadn't given up. So what what he did, he took the political risk, which is less than the strategic risk of allowing a nuclear armed Iran.
Speaker A
So America is being a world policeman then. Exactly what you said it should be.
Speaker A
If the case is stopping nation, stopping rogue nations run by tyrannical It's called being a world policeman.
Speaker A
Armageddon like it is. Okay. Okay. We'll be a world policeman if someone's going to join the nuclear club. Who wants I can't think of a more classic example of America being a global policeman.
Speaker A
We're not going to do it in places. Donald Trump didn't want to do it.
Speaker A
You're right. But he ends up becoming the global policeman on the biggest possible war in the Middle East. And it's caused a lot.
Speaker A
It's caused mayhem. Can I can I finish the point about what his plan is? We don't want to be the world's policeman. When forced, we will act in US interests. It's in US interests to not have a nuclear armed
Speaker A
Iraq. Now, let's go back to the Ukraine. It is not. The Ukrainian borders are not a US strategic interest. Not being in a war with Russia is a US strategic interest. Making sure that NATO remains a deterrent to war and tries to
Speaker A
sucking up to Vladimir Putin in America's national interest. Maybe if you if you can't get Zalinski to make peace, somebody has to. So the this was not about sucking up to Putin. It was sending a message to Zalinsky, which he
Speaker A
made perfectly clear when he said that Ukraine needs a new president if he's not going to make peace.
Speaker A
But what he means by what he means by making peace and we got to wrap things unfortunately, but what he means by making peace with the situation with Ukraine is he expects Zilinski to roll over and give Vladimir Putin what he's
Speaker A
taken. And I'm afraid I am absolutely with Zalinski and Ukraine on this and totally against what Donald Trump wants him to do. Why the hell should they give up a fifth of their country to an invading?
Speaker A
It's already gone. They're not giving it up. It's been taken. [laughter] They can't take it back.
Speaker A
History is littered with territory that was taken and then reclaimed, right? Well, then good luck. I wish Ukraine could do it.
Speaker A
I do wish them good luck. You know what they need? They needed a bit of back and resolve from um from from America who is the global policeman when it suits it.
Speaker A
And thank God they are when it's the right thing to do. Anyway, look, we got to leave it there of war with the Russian Federation and hydrogen bombs.
Speaker A
You know, the Nagasaki bomb, the very familiar with it. Why would Russia get involved? Why would Russia get involved in a nuclear shooting match when it would lose immediately?
Speaker A
Well, we would all lose immediately. Exactly. So why would they do it? Why would they do it?
Speaker A
Why would they do it? They're not they're not nihilistic fundamentalists who want to kill themselves.
Speaker A
Show me the Russians who wanted to kill themselves for the cause. They don't. Right. Reason they won't invade agree that the Russians lose the war, that could lead to a general war between NATO and the Russian Federation. And you know
Speaker A
it. Well, you know what? The day we stop standing up to dictators, because you know what? If if if we because they got 7,000 H bombs in a border dispute over the D.
Speaker A
What would you have done? What would you have done with Adolf Hitler 39? Lenon laid this out. Lenon laid this out in the 1920s. He said push until you meet resistance and then back off.
Speaker A
Yeah. Until there's resistance, Putin is going to continue to push. And if you want your that's what's going on.
Speaker A
And I I actually do I do think he's the nearest thing to a modern day Hitler and I think Zilinski was right to say that.
Speaker A
Listen, that's another thing. You know what? Nora is Hitler and Saddam is Hitler and Mallovich is Hitler and Putin is Hitler. It sounds to me like Adolf was just another Hitler. And apparently any country that America doesn't like,
Speaker A
we can just start an aggressive war against them because they're all the same as that one guy that one time. What a bunch of crap. And I know you know better than that, Pierce. Vladimir Putin is a center-right conservative. He is
Speaker A
not a national socialist like Andre Bitki, the leader of the Third Army Corps in Ukraine.
Speaker A
I think he's an absolutely despicable evil dictator. And I wish more people in America agreed with me and General Clark about saying he's not all the way to the right.
Speaker A
I think the majority of people in America do agree. I think they do. That's the weird position we're now in. You only have to look at the consequences of of what happened in the immediate aftermath of the first invasion in 2022 in BHA where
Speaker A
innocent civilian was captured, tortured, murdered for no reason. And and but it wasn't an accident. Actually, there was a reason because the instructions given to the Russian soldiers were to do everything you can to destroy the civilian population, breaks, frighten
Speaker A
them, and break their will. Break their psyche. And to Ukrainians great credit, they've refused to have their will broken. And when I interview Zalinski, which I do I do quite regularly. When I interview him, I see a man whose resolve has not been broken by
Speaker A
f nearly five years of war. And I admire that in him. He's their Churchill in many ways. And I I think we owe him collectively a debt of gratitude for standing up to Putin. Otherwise, I dread to think what Putin would do if we just
Speaker A
rolled over. Anyway, we're going to leave it there. Scott, you and I agree about most things. We haven't today, but that's the beauty of Uncensored. We We are a freespirited debate platform and we can agree to disagree and I always
Speaker A
love having you guys on. Thank you all very much indeed. Thank you so much, Pearson. Thank you.
Speaker A
Piers Morgan Uncensored is proudly independent. The only boss around here is me. If you enjoy our show, we ask for only one simple thing. Hit subscribe on YouTube and follow Piers Morgan Uncensored on Spotify and Apple Podcast.
Speaker A
And in return, we will continue our mission to inform, irritate, and entertain. And we'll do it all for free.
Speaker A
Independent, uncensored media has never been more critical, and we couldn't do it without you.
Topics:Volodymyr ZelenskyPiers MorganUkraine warDonald TrumpElon MuskStarlinkRussian missile attacksenergy ceasefireUS-Ukraine relationsPutin
