The Duran Podcast - Stalemate over, Russia advances, EU war economy

Episode Date: November 4, 2024

Stalemate over, Russia advances, EU war economy

All right, Alexander, let's talk about the New York Times article, which has declared that there is no stalemate in the conflict in Ukraine. So it's official. It's official no stalemate. There was a stalemate for a while, but not anymore. And the interesting part about the New York Times article is that the first part of the article talks about how there's an opportunity for Ukraine to, to win the conflict in about a year's time, once Russia's weapons, economy, vulnerabilities have been exploited, everything has deteriorated, give it one year, and Ukraine has an opportunity to win the war. And then in the same article, it talks about how the Ukraine forces are

heading towards a defeat. It's really strange how, in the first part, which is what I would guess is the part that most people read, the top part of the article that talks about how how terrible the Russia military is, how poorly trained it is, and how there's an opportunity for Ukraine. But then as you go further down the article, they get to the truth, which is that the Ukraine military is losing and is going to lose in about a year's time. But the stalemate is over. Russia is advancing. What are your thoughts? Well, it's actually very interesting because you said it's official. It is absolutely official because what the article says is that U.S. intelligence analysts and analysts assessed back in June that there was a stalemate and that the Russians

would not be able to make any breakthroughs. And then it goes on to say straightforwardly that they were wrong. That's a very interesting admission. It then also says elsewhere in the article, and you correctly say, all this is buried deep inside the article, that the Pentagon gives Ukraine in six to 12 months before the cumulative effect of the manpower losses become so acute that things begin to get vertigiously worse. So six to 12 months, that's, of course, the same timeframe that we're supposed to be led to believe that, you know, if we hold out that long, the Russians will collapse. It's clear that it's not the Russians are going to collapse in six to 12 months, it's the Ukrainians. That's actually what the Pentagon believes. But as you absolutely

rightly say, the boilerplate is all there still. All the old narratives going all the way back to the start of the special military operation are being trotted out that the Russians have suffered appalling losses, that they're running out of armour, that their economy is, you know, on the brink of, you know, running out of steam, that there's all these fragilities and vulnerabilities. I think we've done so many videos at so many points of this conflict, exposing the narrative about the Russian vulnerabilities. But, you know, they continue to trot them out at every opportunity. to be absolutely clear, we did a program recently about the Russian economy itself and its actual problems and what is really going on with it, which is completely different from what you read in the media.

This narrative about Russian vulnerabilities, about Russian weaknesses, is no more true now than it has been at any previous time in the conflict up to this time. what this article does is that it's the first signal not to the general readership of the New York Times, most of whom will do exactly what you said. They'll read the boilerplate pieces in the early part of the article, but to the ones who really understand what is going on and who follow the war much more closely, the military people, the people in the economics world, people in Congress, their staffers, people of that kind. It is telling them the war is not in stalemate. That story that we spread after the failure of Ukraine's 2023 offensive is wrong. It's unsustainable. We can't go on

pretending any longer that the war is in stalemate. To be absolutely clear, the war has never been in stalemate at any time, but it is absolutely not been in stalemate. Um, over the last year and a half. Ukraine launched an offensive last year. The Russians defeated the offensive. The offensive didn't just fail. The Russians defeated it. The Russians then went on the attack. They started their own offensive, very different from the Ukrainian, steady, incremental and methodical. They began it in October last year. In December, sorry, in January of this year, Marinka, first town fell to the Russians, then in February, then in February, André Avdeyevka fell. Then in March, Ocheretino fell. It would be a small place, but, you know, nonetheless, a place that

is of strategic importance. Then the Russians began what is increasingly looking like in a successful advance in Torez, and Chasafyar. They cleared all the villages around those places. Then they burst into the area

of southwest Donbass. A few weeks ago, they captured Uglada. They're now advancing faster and the rate of the Russian advance. Over the course of this year since the fall of Avdeyevka has been accelerating steadily.

And that's the truth. That's the reality. There was never a stalemate at any time. That was a completely false narrative that was spread previously and it was untrue. And what's now happened is that the situation on the ground has become so bad that it has become impossible. continue to indulge in the fantasy that there is a stalemate any longer. But there was never a stalemate and now because there was never a stalemate, that particular narrative meme has had to be dropped. And that's what the New York Times article is doing.

Maybe, maybe it's impossible for them to indulge in this fantasy any longer. I'll tell you why I think that. Yeah, we're the only channel that has, or at least we were the first channel, that said that the counteroffensive of 2023 to summer spring, great counteroffensive. It was the Russians that defeated Ukraine. The media never says that in their spin. But you made that statement, and we've been talking about it ever since that it was a defeat. And the Russians did win in that spring summer counteroffensive. There was never a capture of Kiev in three days. days. Mark Milley made that up. There was never an unprovoked act of aggression. They made that up as well. Well, they've been spinning lies since the beginning of the conflict. Before the conflict, the mainstream media has been spinning lies to the detriment of Ukraine, to the horrific results that we see in Ukraine and to the hundreds of thousands, if not millions of lives that have been lost or damaged because of the lies that the collective West media has been spinning about this conflict in Ukraine.

But the reason I say maybe they can't indulge in the fantasies is because any longer, and they have to admit that it's not a stalemate, which was another lie that they were pushing out there. There was some stalemate is because I'm going through the media right now. You're reading a lot of articles. I'm reading a lot of articles. And I see a pattern in all of the mainstream media, whether it's U.S., whether it's U.S., whether it's U.K. or especially German. German media is probably the worst of all of them. But maybe the U.K. is kind of up there as well. But they admit that Russia's advancing.

They admit that Russia's winning in a roundabout way. They admit that Russia's gaining territory. But they also talk about how Russia's weak, how Russia's military is weak, how Russia has lost 300,000 soldiers, a million soldiers, 10 million. The numbers are all over the place. Russia's low on weapons. The Russian economy is about to collapse. So sometimes you find it even in the same article. Sometimes it's in different articles from the same publication.

So, I mean, my question to you is, in my thinking on this, is that they're still, they're still hedging their bets because of the election. I think that's the big event that's going to decide how the media spins is for Ukraine. They're waiting to see the outcome of the election and maybe waiting to see, you know, a month into the new administration, or at least the administration that's going to take over in January. They're waiting to see what's going to happen. And then they'll probably pick a path as to how they want to report the conflict of Ukraine. Do they want to continue to lie and create false narratives, depending on who wins?

Or will they finally start to say the truth, depending on who wins? What do you think of that? I think that's why they're placing both narratives, sometimes in the same article, sometimes in the same publication. Russia's winning, Ukraine's losing, but Russia is going to lose and Ukraine is going to win. That's pretty much what you read at a daily basis from all the Western race. I think that the reason for this is the elections. Absolutely. No, no. I mean, the thing to say, the point I made is not that they aren't now busy constructing a new narrative arc, which will eventually lead to Ukrainian victory. it's that they've now had to, they've been forced to admit,

that the previous narrative arc, the one that said that the war was in stalemate, has failed. I mean, it's unsustainable anymore. But now they're busy constructing a new one, and you can see the process of construction in the article in the New York Times, which is, yes, that Russia is winning,

but it's only winning for the moment, actually is winning for the moment, but it's driving on empty. There's nothing in the tank, supposedly. So they're running out of ammunition, they're running out of radars, they're short of tanks. They can't sustain levels of production.

The central bank, of course, has put up interest rates. So as we said in that program that we just did, they latch on to that as proof that everything there is about to come unstuck and fall apart. They've suffered horrific losses, as you said, it's, you know, 100,000, 300,000, half a million, whatever it is. They can't keep it up. That's the new narrative. So all we have to do, all we have to do is hold out for a couple more months, maybe a year, maybe a little longer,

and then, then finally, the wheels will fall off the Russian bus, or to be more precise, the Russian tank, we can go back on the attack and Ukraine will win. That's not a narrative of stalemate. That is a narrative of Russia becoming exhausted. Now, it has no basis in reality. It is no more real than the narrative of stalemate that we've just had and which has just been jettison.

But it is the new one. And you're absolutely right. It's purpose. It's got, in my opinion, a two-fold purpose. One is to get through the election, which is, of course, going to be over very soon. The second is that to keep things going, hold things together until the new president takes over. And then, as I said, when you have to change the narrative, again, when it becomes clear that victory is not going to be achieved, that in fact Ukraine is looking at defeat,

well, then you change the narrative again, and it's all the fault of the new president and of his team, especially if the new president's initials are DJT. But even if it's the other person, you can still say, well, you know, she didn't act with the same fortitude and the same courage that, you know, the current president and his team did,

and that, you know, they gave up too soon. They, and of course, partly the reason they gave up was because of all of those bad people in Congress, in alternative media, and elsewhere, who undermined the war efforts and so doubts where none existed. But we should be absolutely clear about this, this new narrative that's been constructive, that the Russians are running on empty, that their economy is coming apart at the seams, that their losses are impossibly high. that their allies are turning on them because there's some elements of that too. That narrative is every bit as false as all of the other narratives

that we have been peddled, that we've seen peddled basically since the war began. In fact, as I said, many elements of the new narrative have been there before us. I said, if you believe the stories about tank losses, I can remember the British defencemen,

in the early summer of 2022, saying that in the first few weeks of the war, Russia had lost more tanks, so many tanks, that it would take them at least a decade to replace them. That didn't last very long. And you remember the business about, you know, the shovels and all of those things. So, I mean, you know, the story about Russia, you know, driving on empty is actually not new. But it is going to be given now a much great prominence than we have seen at any point previously. And I think that's where this North Korea narrative also fits in, or a lot of it fits into this. Russia is running on empty, which is the statements from people like Austin and Kirby and

these guys saying that the fact that North Korean soldiers are being recruited to fight and Kursk is proof of Russia's desperation and the fact that Russia is running out of soldiers. So the North Korea narrative actually fits in there very nicely with this latest spin on the conflict in Ukraine. And also what you said about some of Russia's allies and friends are now turning against Russia. The North Korea narrative actually fits into that as well. I've been reading a couple of articles which claims that China is very upset with Russia because Russia is courting North Korea. And North Korea has been going steady with China. It's very high schoolish, childish.

North Korea has been going steady with China, but now Russia is courting North Korea, and this is upset China big time. And so now they're upset with Russia. Oh, boy, yeah. It's ridiculous. It is ridiculous. I mean, one can waste a huge amount of time trying to debunk all of these things. I mean, just briefly, with Russia and China and North Korea, the Chinese will have been briefed by the Russians well in advance. about whatever it is that the Russians and the North Koreans are doing with each other.

It would not have happened unless the Chinese had approved it. That's the first thing. The second thing is 10,000 North Korea troops in a war where the Russian army is now said to to number around 600,000 men and could be as big as 800,000 men by the end of the year, is not going to make a huge difference in the war. And the third thing is, and here I'm beginning to get, I think you're getting the same information. I'm beginning to get information, which basically appears to confirm that this is a training program.

It's not about, you know, enlisting North Korean troops. It's about educating them and how real war is full. And apparently they're proving to be disturbingly, the Russians find them disturbingly enthusiastic pupils, just to say. But, you know, as you correctly say, when you are constructing narratives, any little bit that supports the narrative becomes useful. I mean, you know, other narratives have fallen by the wayside as well. Remember the Blacks? F-16s? I mean, F-16s.

I'm not saying, F-16s. What happened to them? F-16 is exactly what happened to them. Now Zelensky is scrounging for MiG-29s again. and he's begging the polls to supply him with their remaining mig 29s. What does he need then if he's going to get F-16s or functional F-16s in a few weeks? But anyway, that narrative was shifted. There was the great naval victory that had been achieved against the Russian fleet in the Blacks.

See, you don't hear anything about that. That story has been switched off for several months now. I mean, there's been no evidence of any further progress. on that side. But, you know, don't worry, provided you can keep the headline and the story going, you know, never let the facts get in the way of a good story. I mean, that was supposedly said by William Randolph Hearst, and we can see that it still applies.

Yeah. So what's happening on the front lines? Do you have any updates as fast approaches? The thought is that the fighting is going to. slow down with the mud season and winter. Because of the Rasputitsa, and I think that is probably true. I mean, you know, the Rasputtica, just for people to know, is the famous period that comes at the beginning of the autumn, rather in the middle of the autumn, and at the beginning of spring, when, in the case of the autumn, there's the autumn rains, which happened just before winter. and they make the ground very soft and marshy and boggy.

It's a very, very famous aspect of the topography in this part of Europe, Eastern Europe and Western Russia. And in the spring it also happens when the ice and the frosts melts and again the ground becomes marshy and boggy. And of course that does restrict movement. It means that infantry certainly and most armored vehicles and wheeled vehicles can't move across ground. I mean, they're basically obliged to stick to the roads. Now, to be clear, that is going to affect the Ukrainians in some respects more than the Russians.

because the Russians, their armoured vehicles, are to some extent designed to cope with the Rasputtica. They're lighter. They have less ground pressure. So ground pressure means, you know, the weight of the vehicle on any particular point is dispersed so that it's also able to float across softer ground. Russian tanks and armored vehicles are designed to be able to do that.

Ukraine is increasingly relying on Western tanks and Western armoured vehicles, which aren't designed in the same way, because the ground in Western Europe and North America is harder in the autumn and spring, and they don't have the equivalent, the exact equivalent to the Rasputtisa. And of course, the Ukrainians have relied more on the fields, more on infantry than the Russians do. The Russian infantry is motorized or mechanized. They move into battle on armored vehicles. Whereas the Ukrainians have to walk across the fields on many occasions.

And it is more difficult for them because as a walker, I can tell you that it's not fun or easy to walk across swampy and boggy fields. But against that, I mean, if you're advancing, if you're trying to advance, which is what the Russians are. doing and you're advancing across wet ground, then that obviously does slow you down, even if your vehicles are adapted for it. So it is going to slow down the momentum of the battle. But it doesn't change the fact that the battle is still swinging very decisively in the

Russian's favour. I think October was the fastest period of Russia. advance since the early weeks of the war. They captured, I think, something like 600 square kilometers of territory over the course of October. They also captured important fortified positions like Uglida, which we spoke about before. They also captured the town of Selidavu and Ukransk and Gorniak. And they see. seem to be moving very rapidly towards creating a situation in southwestern Dombas, south of Bakrowski, where the entire Ukrainian defense system is basically on the brink of

complete collapse. And by the way, there was even an article in The Guardian, which effectively confirmed that. And the Russians are also moving in other places, in Charsifiyar, in Tare, in Taretsk. They're also very close, apparently. again according to that same article in the Guardian to achieving a breakthrough in the north in Kharkov region near Kupiansk and also by the way in Volchansk which is that town on the border with Russia where there's been intense fighting since the Russians crossed the border into Kharkov region in May and last but not least the Rasputits of the period of the the wet grounds, the soft ground is a disaster for the Ukrainian troops in Kuzk region.

They can't use the roads because the roads in Kusk region are controlled by the Russian drones. So, you know, using the roads is a guarantee of attack by Russian drones, which are now apparently everywhere. and the Russians of course can use the roads and there are rumours and there are reports that the Russians within the next few weeks are going to start what could very well be the final offensive in Kusk region

intended to cut off the Ukrainian troops there. So the story is one of disaster and failure. Things will slow down for about two or three weeks but probably not by as much as some people think and one way or the other when we get out of the period of the, you know, the wet ground,

the mud period, the Rasputitsa, the Russian offensive will resume and probably accelerate. It looks like Russia's planning something for Kiev as well. Is that right? I think so. Because they're sending a lot of drones

into Kiev, it seems almost on a daily basis, a lot of drones, to deplete the air defenses, possibly for a big strike in the next couple of weeks or next couple of months. Is that what's going on? Are they looking to deplete the air defenses in and around Kiev to do something come December, January? I don't know the time frame, but that's what it looks like. Now, this is enormous speculation, but I think you, I think, think you're absolutely right. I mean, most people believe that when the big Russian strike comes, it will come in the south. The Russians will capture Pachrovsk. They'll advance to the deeper river. The armies in the south, which have barely been fighting for the last few weeks, but are very big.

The Russian armies in the south will then be activated and they will also advance towards Zaporosia at NEPRO, you know, on the river, two big cities on the river. And that's where the big Russian winter offensive will come. And that may very well be true. But I also think that we're now working steadily towards a big Russian offensive in the north. And Kiev is the obvious ultimate objective here. And you're right, Russian drones are operating over Kiev every day. The Ukrainian air defence appears to have essentially collapsed. The Ukrainians now, Now, are obviously so short of air defense interceptors, Patriot missiles, in other words, that they have to limit their use,

which means that the drones are able to operate over the skies, the night skies of Kiev, basically, you know, without meeting any resistance. And we see them constantly and all the time. Now, these are the famous geranium drones. which the Russians took the design from Iran and started to produce in massive quantities in this factory that they built in Kazan, and they're now being produced and operated in their thousands.

So, you know, we had a situation where back in 2023, early 2023, when we started to see the Genandrons for the first time, you'd see about a dozen at a time, then it became scores at a time. Now it's hundreds. at a time and you know the sky's always full on them and it was the Russians have adapted them and of course these drones now carry imagery they're able to they carry cameras so they're able to conduct imagery they're able to conduct reconnaissance in other words over Kiev and one gets

the sense that the Russians are not only depleting the Ukrainian air defences but are actually monitoring what is going on in Kiev. They're getting a complete picture of the layout of the city and where the Ukrainian defences are and that kind of thing. And just to get a sense of how bad the situation with air defense in Ukraine is, Mariana Bezuglia, who is this dissident Ukrainian MP. She said that the Ukrainian military has reassigned many of the personnel who operated the air defense systems to fill out the ranks in the army, which has become very depleted. In other words, to fight as infantry. Now, many people say that this is further evidence of how many how short the Ukrainian army is of good infantry, and that is absolutely right.

But it's also, I think, a sign of how depleted the air defense system has become. Because without air defense missiles, there is little point from a general staff, a military point of view, of keeping all of these men idle, you know, in their huts and radars when they haven't got any air defense missiles to launch. at the radars and drones that come in. So somebody has made a decision that rather than do that, let's at least put these people to some use by sending them to the front,

which is, of course, bad news for them, the soldiers involved. But it does make a kind of military logic. Yeah, she's talking a lot, by the way. Oh, Maria, Bezouclaia. Bezaglia, yeah. Bezulaya, yeah. I wonder why they're allowing her to say such things.

Well, that's a very good question. Yeah, that is a very, very good question. And I mean, she's a, but whatever, she says lots and lots of things. She maintains these critical narratives all the time. And the interesting thing about this is what she says turns out to be true. I mean, this report about the redeployment of air defense personnel to the front lines has been confirmed now by other sources. I wonder if the Pentagon or some other deep state three-letter agency,

I don't know, I mean, in the U.S. told the Zelensky regime, don't touch her, because we want one or two voices reporting the truth just in case things really go south. So I wonder if Zeletsky's gotten the order. Don't touch her, let her continue to talk. and at least it gives us a little bit of a hedge in case everything goes really bad. We can say, well, look, we had various Ukraine officials reporting on the reality of the situation and they can cite her. I don't know. It's just a thought that I have.

There must be some sort of order to Zelensky to let her talk from someone. Yes. Absolutely. I mean, can I just say, I mean, you know, we've had situations where we've seen people repressed and even killed in Ukraine for step. out of line. She is stepping out of line as far as the Zelensky government is concerned in a very, very big way. Now, to be clear, she is a Ukrainian patriot. She supports Ukraine. She supports the war. She's in no conceivable sense, disloyal. But she is very, very critical of the Zelensky government and of the military and of the way in which the war has been conducted. And as she,

she provides huge amounts of information. And as I said, what she tends to turn out to be true. So, you know, I think you're probably right that she's got very high-level protection from someone, quite plausibly, someone in the West, which is why the Ukrainian government is obliged to tolerate her, because it is remarkable that she's able to get away with all the things she's saying. Or maybe what she says is, is used to keep pressure on Zelensky. Yeah. Well, I mean, that's also a possibility. Yeah. Anyway, let's finish off the video by talking

about the Europeans, the EU. They're trying, at least this is my impression. They're trying to shift to some sort of a war economy or something like that. Donald Tusk, the prime minister of Poland the other day. He said that Europe doesn't need U.S. security any longer. At least Europe should not be dependent on U.S. security. We need to provide for our own security. German, various German officials are saying the same thing. And this is the Europeans. Yes, they're afraid of a Trump win. We'll find out tomorrow. Maybe it'll take longer to find out exactly who has won. But eventually we'll find out who's going to be president of the United States. But the European political elites, with the exception of Arban and Fidzio, they're very worried

about a Trump presidency. But they're definitely talking about shifting Europe to some sort of a war economy because of Ukraine and because of Russia, of course, the fear of Putin and Russia. What do you make of these statements? Well, the possibility that Europe can become a war economy, which to be sounds like a big time fantasy, but anyway, what are your thoughts? It is a complete, it is a complete fantasy. Bear in mind, of course, that this isn't the first time they've said it. I mean, they said it every couple of months they come around and saying it, you know, Europe must sort out its problems with its defense system. It must increase production of this,

that, and the other. And we then wait to see what happens and nothing does. I mean, all right. I mean, they produced a few more shells, but not that many more. And they produced more of pretty much nothing else. They've thrown an awful lot of money at the problem, but that money isn't fixing anything. And European arsenals continue to become ever more heavily depleted. The Starma government has thrown three billion pounds at the defence establishment.

If you look at what the defence establishment in Britain needs, three billion pounds isn't going to buy. very much. So, you know, it's, it is the narrative that they're coming up with. I think at some level, you know, they still want to believe it. They still think that Europe will become this great military superpower at some point. No, everyone else can see that that is a fantasy. But the narrative serves another purpose. Firstly, to maintain block discipline, to keep everybody united in Europe, to say, look, whatever happens in the US, whether it's Trump, whether it's Harris, whether the Americans are sticking with Project Ukraine, whether they're walking away, it really doesn't matter because we can come in and step up to the plate and we can do this all by ourselves. So we must remain 100% united on this issue, continue to support Zelensky and the government in Kiev and refurb.

to talk to Putin or appease him in any way. I mean, talk with Putin is appeasement. It's, you know, making all that very, very clear. So, you know, they want to stick with that narrative. And bear in mind, Annalina Berbork, who is, you know, one of the major promoters of that narrative. She's now in Kiev, as even as we speak, giving her full-throated support to Zelensky and all of that. So keep everybody united. because ultimately, if the Americans walk away, it really doesn't matter because we're going to convert

to this great, shiny, new, modern war economy and all will be well. And, of course, there is another aspect to this. There's a very interesting article by Mario Draghi in the Financial Times, which perhaps we ought to do a dedicated video to. Maybe we should. Very clever, very, very,

very sneaky article if I can say so. But in theory, he was supposed to be commenting about the British government's budget. But actually, what he was doing was calling for Eurobonds and for the unification, as he put it, the completion of European monetary and fiscal union. So basically he was arguing for the development of a single European super state with a single financial system and a single industrial policy. And of course, he didn't actually talk about Putin or Russia very much in that article. But one can very easily see how the people who know Draghi, the, you know, the EU, you know, the EU sense. they're now going to come out and they say, we need Europe bonds. We need more concentration. We need

more Europe, as they always say, because that's the only way we can withstand this Russian colossus that is now moving towards us. So we're going to see that narrative as well. Again, it doesn't bear much connection to the actual reality of building shells and tanks. banks and radar systems and missiles and any of that sort of thing. But it does serve its purpose of actually moving forward with the real project that these people most care about, which is Project EU. More Europe. That's their answer to everything. We should definitely do a dedicated video on this because I think at the end of the day, this is exactly where they're going to take the results of project Ukraine. Mark my words, they are going to

to say we lost to Russia, we lost to the evil Putin, now Europe must unite. Europe must consolidate. Europe needs euro bonds. With euro bonds, I imagine taxation of European citizens, direct taxation of European citizens, because how can you have euro bonds without nothing to backstop them to support them? Who's going to buy a euro bond if you're not, you know, taxing the hell out of European citizens? direct taxation. They're going to talk about building the EU army, whether it's separate from NATO or another branch of NATO, who knows how they'll do it. And they've been talking about creating a European intel agency as well. Absolutely. And there's a lot of articles talking about

that. So yeah, I mean, comment quickly on that and we'll end the video, but we should definitely do a dedicated video probably tomorrow on Draghi and where Europe is going to take the, where the EU is going to take the EU when Russia finally defeats the collective West in project of Korea. Absolutely. I mean, the key thing to understand is that regardless of everything else that has happened, the geopolitical debacle, the West is about to suffer, the strains that are now starting to appear between Europe and America, which are becoming louder, by the way, the bricks, all of this one very big winner from the ukraine crisis has been the EU center they've been able to force a foreign policy on all of the member states they've been able to exert block discipline

they now have control of things like civil air you know civil the civil airline industry they're able to ban travel from russia they can do all of these things media they're Absolutely. They have been, this is, this whole crisis has hugely energy policy. It is hugely concentrated power in the EU centre. And they're now looking to do an awful lot more. I mean, they're now talking, they've had, they had Mario Draghi publishes his Arctic, his whole, you know, clan, which is for more Europe. And now they're going to push further and they're going to create or try to create all the trappings of the state. You know, the taxation, absolutely.

Debt pooling, absolutely. Industrial policy, absolutely. And of course, a military and an intelligence system. All of that going together. So, I mean, that is the absolute obvious plan. That is the objective that they're now seeking to follow. even of course as opposition across Europe to all of this growth. But the opposition in a sense, from their point of view, also acts as a catalyst.

Because the more opposition they encounter, the more determined they become to press forward. And the more resources they use to suppress the opposition, the more centralised the project becomes. So you can see how it works. Yeah, the EU is heading towards a vary. It's already in a dark place, Europe. It's a darker place. Absolutely. All right.

We'll end the video there. The duran. dot locals.com. We are on Rumpelodicy, Bitchie, Telegram, Rockfin, and X, and go to the Duran shop, pick up some merch, 20% off. Use the code October 20, that is October 20, that is October 20. That discount code is still good. It's still valid for the next couple of weeks and get 20% off everything in our store. the Duran shop link is in the description box down below. Take care, everybody.