and you’re great, captain, i’m really proud of you, so you die.

holy, quietly, quietly, sit down, quietly, sit down, everything is fine, grigory ivanovich, you’re safe and alive. and this lucas, he’s still just a child. what

will happen to him now? as usual, according to the laws of war. when will we finally begin to live according to the laws of peacetime? there's a big game on the air. observing the events of recent days, two conclusions involuntarily come to mind. first: the russian armed forces continue to advance, continue to advance in many directions with very tangible results. on the other side.

there is a clear escalation at this stage, at least only in statements from western leaders that they will do even more for ukraine and may not even stop before sending their own troops to ukraine. the situation is really very serious, and what was done about this, it seems to me,

was an official doctrine called the schlesinger doctrine, the doctrine of the selective use of non-strategic nuclear forces. however, when the soviet union stopped exist when nato began to have superiority, from their point of view, at least in conventional armed forces, russia was told that any talk about the use of nuclear weapons.

and now we are moving away from the fact that the soviet union for many years regularly made a statement that it would never, under any circumstances, use weapons, nuclear weapons first, to which the americans and their allies always defamed us and said: and you are so are strong that if something happens, without nuclear weapons you are there with us

deal with it, the situation has changed, i don’t remember that there was any hysteria in the west then, because the yeltsin government took an absolutely pro-western position, it was an absolutely... small element, it left the pages of newspapers literally after 2-3 days, that’s all they remembered it when, in fact, in vladimir putin’s third term, it was voiced again, then this dog wedding already arose, therefore , paradoxically, this approach turns out that what is allowed, so to speak, to jupiter, is not allowed to the bull, then there's us for some reason considered a second-class country that has no right to even think about... certain scenarios, hypothetical uses of this or that weapon, this is at least strange to me, maybe that’s why our leadership decided to remind everyone around us that in one case or another we we can apply it, does not mean that we will

do it, that’s why i interpret it this way, this understanding, it seems to me, contributes to strategic deterrence.

in recent years, twice i was invited to speak at annual meetings meetings, you probably know this, the defense policy board, the military-political council is the highest advisory body of the ministry of defense, i still, since i signed, naturally do not have the right to discuss what was said there in detail, but i can just to say that i... i myself mentioned that while nato is increasing its potential and its, if you like, offensive fervor in europe, it is very likely that russia will at some stage again have to seriously

focus on its non-strategic nuclear forces, and i want to tell you that this idea did not cause indignation at that time. among those in this room was the head of the ministry of defense, it seemed that russia had not yet begun, but it seemed that this was the approach. could russia be, if from their point of view not necessarily expedient, then at least quite natural. you know, nuclear weapons are often viewed as some kind of taboo that cannot be used. yes, of course, at the moral and ethical level, yes, the use of such powerful weapons, it is certainly extremely undesirable, but... let's say, a number of experts agree that the germans

were, by and large, lucky in 1945, that they capitulated in may, in principle, for a number of reasons, they could last until september, maybe even until october, but then, with a high degree of probability , the americans would have tested nuclear weapons not on kheroshima and gossack, in berlin or in some other large industrial city, and in fact,

not even counting that, that generally speaking, we are talking about the fact that a clash is brewing

not with ukraine, but with the armed forces of the west and nato. why then are the west surprised that we, facing such a threat, which can be considered as a threat to the existence of the russian federation, are starting to conduct exercises, in this case not of strategic nuclear forces. i am categorically opposed to our launching nuclear strikes. i'm always for this. entered, i continue to insist on this, but the other side must also understand that this is a constant movement of its so-called red lines, it leads to the fact that we simply find ourselves hostage to their behavior in this matter, because today there was another statement, i want to draw attention to it, but it seems to me even more serious is the statement that in connection with the position of great britain, this one uh...

but me too, but i’m also against the fact that - despite the very peaceful mood of russia throughout the nineties and 2000s, that despite this, a crusade was declared against russia, which ukraine joined in support about 50

states, i don’t see such a situation in history, but maybe it’s what napoleon did when organizing europe against russia, and of course, we must remember adolf hitler. this situation is, frankly, very unusual, and unusual situations require unusual solutions. secondly, you know better than me, i am sure you know better than me, that modern technology makes it possible to have non-nuclear weapons with a destruction potential that exceeds. what so-called nuclear charges can do on the battlefield, so let's still come to understanding that in war it is not so important what you use, but what is central is who you use it against, under what circumstances, with what results? no, both are important,

you can’t say that, it doesn’t matter what you use, even from a military point of view, i said it’s not so important, of course everything is important. important, but everything is important, but the supreme commander must have flexibility in choosing the arsenal of means, and with who russia is facing, given their actions against russia, i believe that russia should consider using all of its arsenal, as the circumstances require, well then, of course, you need what you have. for something right does not mean that you should run and do it, i absolutely agree with this, i’m just saying that we can actually present our version to the west, that we believe that by your actions today you have begun now for the implementation of this second, you give a second reason that you are actually threatening the existence of the russian federation, and we in

this case, of course, territorial integrity, they openly say that they they give... i don’t agree with this, i mean with the seizure of territory, you will agree, i hope, that we are talking about an attack on the sovereignty of russia, the territorial integrity, who can argue, absolutely, and it has nothing to do with crimea is not limited, judging by the attacks on all other regions, novgorod, kursk, or whatever, the krasnodar region, well, let's look for a second, before i ask you to explain everything, everything that this is,

everything that means, this is karana shakhnazarov, an outstanding film director, let's see what have western leaders been saying, literally over the past few days, about what they are going to do in relation to russia? they openly say that restrictions in confrontation with russia are a manifestation of weakness. this was stated by french president emmanuel macron. and he didn't stop there. he said that this sign of weakness should be discarded. further. there were no reservations here, he didn’t say what shouldn’t be done, he didn’t say that there should be some rules, we are constantly told that there are some rules that

russia must comply, there are no rules in striking russia, nor... in order to avoid american losses, because if troops are not sent now, then russia will go further to the west, then , apparently, it will have to fight with large losses, that is...

on the other hand, when we are talking about the truly colossal threat that the russian federation is exposed to today as a whole, then

there seems to be no other option, however, when we evaluate the messages there from macron, cameron, well you see, after all, by and large, we need to understand how much they bluff in general, because bluffing is present in politics, it’s usually, it’s ordinary... part, just like playing poker, without bluffing, as is clear, does not exist, so big politics does not exist without bluffing, in this sense we must understand how internally they are generally ready for such an escalation, i would suggest that in general they have no reason for such an escalation, why, because in principle today they, well, in general, i think their task is to drag russia into a difficult, difficult war. where russia spends its resources, energy, people, and thus, of course, russia finds itself isolated, russia is cut off from europe, that is , many of the tasks that they set, they

received, what is the point of risking your existence when you already have quite a lot, i reason like this, then you must explain to me, and this is not a rhetorical question, please explain to me why they went through this whole... crisis around ukraine, why they refused to negotiate, why they allowed it, for the conflict between russia and ukraine to become decisive in the foreign policy of the entire west, it seems to me that this is absolutely irrational, do you have an explanation why they are doing this? it is very rational from the point of view, if we look at the struggle, as civilization says, of empires, well, this is absolutely rationally, an opportunity presented itself for them.

this does not mean that there is no other option, they are really ready to go far enough, but the whole question is whether they are still ready to go to self-destruction, this is the question, it still remains open, a war of nerves, it has entered a very acute phase, in what relates to our teachings and their statements - this is essentially a opposition of one to the other, each side is trying to prove that if the other acts in some way, then...

to show readiness to the negotiations, they decided that they would do more of what they were doing before, and do it faster, and listen even less to russian concerns, and i think we all understand that in response to their threats, no one will hit them , if there are any blows, they will will respond not to rhetoric, not to vomiting,

but only to concrete actions. russia is still not fighting at full strength, i have this feeling, i have the feeling that this is not yet the war that it is waging, this is not due to the fact that it has not used it, because it has not mobilized as it should have been mobilized for such a war, which is acquiring such, we are now entering, that is, there are resources, and not nuclear, as it should have been, how it should have been mobilized, this is a verbal question.

because common sense says that of course it's better mobilize quickly and effectively, do it in such a way that the enemy doesn’t think it’s enough, on the other hand, you must understand that if you carry out such mobilization, it will undermine your capabilities, including the capabilities of your defense industry, if you do it this way in the way that you create.

when you look at the course of military operations, then with hindsight we are all strong, and you can find a lot that you, again, looking back, would have done a little differently, but i can tell you something else, i can tell you that in general very rarely, when wars start, the victorious country starts with that plan and with those...

you still need to look, but if you want, not just with respect for what was managed to be done, but it seems to me with the understanding that we have there is a basis, well, if you like, for optimism and pride, there is a big game on the air when we discuss what to do and what not to do in relation to this crisis circle of ukraine, in fact a crisis to change the world order, the first thing that comes to mind, even turning pay attention to our previous discussion, we did not talk about diplomacy. we they spoke as if it did not exist at all, at least to the extent that concerns relations with our opponents, so let’s listen to what foreign minister sergei lavrov said about this, there is no one to talk to yet,

because i’m here for you gave examples, statements of the ukrainian leadership, the american and european political class, none of them... are ready for a serious conversation, they are playing a parody of negotiations in the form of a meeting in geneva, copenhagen, in the sense in switzerland, the copenhagen format is absolutely dead-end, by hook or by crook, blackmail, lies, they are trying to drag the maximum number of developing countries, countries of the global south into these gatherings, the minister spoke of course about that event...

capitulates, well, i still wouldn’t rate it as absolutely a meaningless move, it has a certain logic in it, they are in this way, but the point is that it’s not about russia, russia’s position is clear, it is voiced and

it is unchanged, but the point is that it is clear that they are not will be able to achieve anything there is no single solution, but even for those details that have leaked out there.

i’m studying, i’m learning in one respect, i said that there is no readiness to negotiate with russia about the real world, what?

yes, you think that peace is unattainable in this way, right? no, of course, but do you think that they seriously believe that russia will agree to such conditions, they will, they, it seems to me, this conference in bergenstock, by the way, i was once in bergenstock, it was in 1992, such a nice spa resort in switzerland, near lucerne, lake lucerne, so, i just want to say that they are trying to put russia in an uncomfortable position. it’s inconvenient, you, the whole world is calling you for peace, and you continue

military operations, they will then distort the results of all this, they will not achieve absolutely unanimity there, but they will continue to say after the conference, well, you see, you see, that’s what happened there are so many countries, they are all for peace, and you are against it, well , there it is, i read there, there are such positions, for example, the exchange of prisoners of all for all, well, strictly speaking, for many this is it seems, well, this is a humanist.

one gets the impression that where

diplomacy is stalled, the only reality is to find a way out, that russian tanks will not stall, and that russian combat aircraft will be able to pave the way for themselves, i’m wrong, the bitter irony is that at one time joseph vesseryonovich stalin said the famous the phrase where, well, i meant another, where the boot stepped. there is no return to capitalism for the soviet soldier, so here is what russia will be able to secure for itself as a result of military operations, with a high degree most likely will remain under our control, what, for one reason or another, will not be under our control, it most likely will not be under our control, and, probably, a comprehensive peace will be extremely difficult to achieve, at least in the form of some then international agreements. however, we know from the example

of the same relations between north and south korea that since 1953 a fairly stable truce has been achieved, yes, despite the fact that the countries are formally in a state of war, yes, yes, some aggravations periodically occur, ethereal aircraft, yes, shelling, explosions, yes, however, blood is not shed in huge quantities and the blood of civilians is not shed, so certain agreements can be reached, quite possibly, not within the framework of megaphone diplomacy of attempts to publicly put pressure on russia, but let’s say , through the intelligence services, but you should know this better, you are a much more experienced international specialist. than me, i didn’t know that ruslan was such a lover of stalin, but i want to give him another earlier quote, nicholas i said, the russian flag is once understood, should not be lowered, he wrote this on the report of muravyov, who complained about admiral nevelsky that he

had decided to annex sakhalin, no matter how the british were worried about this, on this report, for the sake of justice, the flag was lowered, as we know, nevertheless, this no less than this , we never had a flag in alaska, alaska was not born, by the way, but in any case , he lives by this principle, and we proceed from it in any case, and what happens, this happens in spite of this, is a disaster , for example, the collapse of the russian empire, for example, the collapse of the soviet union, you know, it seems to me that this is important to emphasize, and here in this story...

communication, allegedly, in any case, the pope , who received the invitation, said that he would not go there without russia , i don’t know if this is really so, and whether he will withstand this position if it remains under pressure from his western friends, but in any case there are reasonable people, including in the western camp, who understand that in this way russia do not force anyone to do anything, because that russia, it has already demonstrated that it is ready to fight, after that...

the youngest member of the english parliament. following muusolini, mosley declared great britain the heir to great rome, which sounded wild, but he did not even notice it. after the end of the second world war, the french, at least at that time, defeated their internal fascism. but whether the anglo-saxons coped with it is a big question. it was they who helped many nazis evade responsibility and with all their might. tried to avoid the monstrous eyes crimes of the german fascists. premiere, ordinary fascism 2. today on the first. to the eightieth anniversary of the liberation of crimea from the nazi invaders. spotted,

don't, please, i beg you, don't shoot, i beg you. yes, please, car, add two nodes, we should be there in an hour, quiet, quiet, quiet, quiet, if we have the code, we can start with russian radio groups, in the square 19:23, expect transport 0 hours, one mile from the coastline, answer, in progress, started, is, worked, your task is to be whoever you are, a wounded soviet soldier, don’t open fire on the line, our defenses were broken through there, also looking like a wounded red army soldier, stop this madness, i’ll give you mine maps, alexandrov, the owner of secret information that the germans can’t get to must, it is clear that they managed to convey, in this folder there are junhans documents, all the spent cartridges are hidden, someone

covered their tracks, a saboteur, crimea on may 9 on the first, what are we going to do, commander, how is it? carry out the order, liquidate alexandra, no, what do you mean no, the option that i offer you is the best, 10 km from the city, and they will provide care at the highest level, we have prepared our best apartments for you, no hint of a hospice or almshouse, you can have an autograph, i admire youth, autograph, anna evseeva actress. and her relatives are giving a double rate, the fatal lady, i would say sterova, and you are a believer, a stricken atheist, and in general there is nowhere to put samples, again for the old times? mom, you’re sick, well , somehow you come to your senses already, you decided to hit him in the face, until you decide, you take me as a helper and

take me out into the courtyard, i’ll sneak into your limousine, and we’ll go to europe, if your mother, at her age, wanted a boy, we should probably just be happy for her, i don’t want to, so that you repeat my mistakes, anna andreevna, i’m not alphonse, oh, i’m daydreaming, an animator, i would think why they behave in such an irresponsible way, i especially thought about this because when

the special operation began, i saw real signs in washington that there was interest in the peace process and some kind of agreement, and i i really saw it, i can say it first-hand, that there was such interest in the white house, and then all this...

with real results, russia did a lot to strengthen its military industry with real results, but what didn’t russia do? russia did not strike at the sponsors of the patrons of ukraine when russia was effective on the battlefield, well , in general, for the collective west, the terrible losses that ukraine suffered. but this was not a decisive consideration, and they had the feeling that they themselves would not be touched, that

they themselves, as if by a reliable account, were entrenched in the fifth article of the nato charter, and that russia would understand that they cannot be touched, so their appetites gradually grew, and i’m not afraid to say, their impudence grew, your opinion, yes, you answered, i’m with you... absolutely agree, is it even possible to force the collective west to show flexibility if they themselves are not touched. let's listen to what dmitry peskov said about this today. obviously, we are talking, naturally, about the statements of mr. macron, about the statements of british representatives. you know to them representatives of the us senate were also added, if i'm not mistaken, who actually talked about...

in ukraine a russian special military operation, which, firstly, is associated with military successes that are much larger

than those that we have achieved today , this is...

effective, but on the other hand, something needs to be done so that the west understands that it is not in their interests to constantly pump ukraine with weapons and provide ukraine with assistance that gives them these opportunities, resistance to the illusion that they can achieve results, and here we return to that old soviet joke that if you think, you need

to shake, which means you need to continue to put pressure on russia, we just didn’t put much pressure. it is necessary to give more weapons, and if the ukrainians do not have a sufficient number of personnel, it is necessary , under one pretext or another, to push some people there, starting from colombian mercenaries, ending with some others who want to fight within the framework of nato, outside the framework of nato, and as if they were frantically trying to push us through, that is, we just need to continue, carry out our strategy, yes, that is, do everything the same, yes, only after and nothing else, then...

we must refrain from provoking a more serious war, they should also think about this, and we are doing the right thing by conducting exercises everything else, we warn them, if they don’t draw a conclusion from this, we need to discuss other measures, but still this is not mainstream, this is not the most important thing, the main thing is that they must be convinced that they are doing this in vain - this is a failure of their entire strategy, failure, collapse ukraine, the collapse of the front of ukraine, the armed forces of ukraine,

a war involving the future of russia and here we need to stand to the end, i don’t know a single western country where there would be an understanding that... the collective west, that this situation concerns them, that this is about their own safety and, moreover, that we are talking about their own survival, when this is

demonstrated to them, i think, a combination of successes on the battlefield of greater realism in the capitals of the collective west, this can create real opportunities for diplomacy. and in this case , the matter will not be up to russia. it was a great game, we'll see you on the air tomorrow. ceremony, inauguration of the president of the russian federation, vladimir putin. live stream. tomorrow at 11:40 moscow time.

when it comes to european fascism, germany, italy and spain immediately come to mind, and in that order, one gets the impression that the rest of the europeans were affected by fascism only in the sense that they... in fact, after the first world war ii, fascist movements were strong throughout europe, including in the victorious countries, that is.