The Duran Podcast - Zelensky wants Tomahawk missiles

Episode Date: November 2, 2024

Zelensky wants Tomahawk missiles

All right, Alexander, let's talk about this New York Times article, which claims that the secret annex in Zelensky's victory plan was Zelensky asking, demanding from the U.S., from the Biden White House, for long range, 2,400-kilometer long-range tomahawk missiles. I believe the New York Times reporting. I also feel as if this was probably leaked to the New York Times by the Biden White House or the Pentagon, most likely the Pentagon, because it highlights how outrageous and crazy this ask from Zelensky was, how desperate actually, this ask from Zelensky was, which would effectively mean if this was done, this would effectively mean nuclear war in World War III, in my opinion. I understand the thinking that maybe Zelensky was, was, uh, was going through with this ask of tomahawk missiles, he probably thought that with the tomahawk missiles, as do the neocans with the tomahawk missiles,

this would scare Putin, and this would bring forth his capitulation because now all of a sudden there are tomahawk missiles in Ukraine, so Putin would surrender next day. That's probably what they were thinking, and they couldn't be more wrong. But we did have a press conference, conference from Zelensky the other day and he he's very upset at as he was talking to the media at the fact

that this was revealed this secret annex of Tomahawk missiles he also revealed Alexander maybe you may want to discuss this before you get into the into the big story which is the tomahawk missile story he also revealed that the incursion into Kersk could have he said because russia's military is very weak he said it's not strong. And it could have resulted in Ukraine capturing the Kersk power plant because they could have done it, he said, very easily. But because he's Zelensky, he's the Chilean figure of Zelensky and Ukraine doesn't do these things. They opted not to capture the Kersk power plant, even though they could have, they decided not to because that's not the things that the Ukraine military and the Zelensky administration does, which to me is a clear admission that that was

exactly what the Kursk incursion was all about. Anyway, your thoughts on the New York Times, Tomahawks, missiles, and this Kersk revelation from Zelensky. Well, let's let's first of all turn to the Kursk revelation from Zelensky because I absolutely 100% fully agree with you. That is exactly what the Kusk invasion was all about. When Zelensky says that the Russian military is weak and that the Ukrainians could have got all the way to the Kusk nuclear power plant and it would be an incredibly easy thing for them to do. If you follow the events in the fighting in Kuzk,

you know on the contrary that that was exactly the direction in which they were trying to move, and they weren't able to. It wasn't for lack of trying. It was because it wasn't possible. So the fact that Zelensky is talking in this way is essentially, as far as I'm concerned, an admission that that was the objective all along, which is what I have always believed, what the Russians clearly believe, and what some people in the West also indicated that they believed was the case also. Can I quickly add that, of course, Zelensky says that Ukraine would never do such a thing.

It would never do what the Russians did when they advanced and captured the Zaporosia nuclear power plant. Ukraine would never, ever attempt to capture a nuclear power plant in that way, except, of course, it has. It's made repeated attempts to capture or recapture the Zaporosia nuclear power plant. It sent armed men across the Kourachovar Reservoir in boats in all kinds of attempts to try and capture it. It's through wild commander raids. When I say wild, when I first heard about the first one, when the Russians were talking about it, it seemed to me so zany that I thought the Russians were making it up. And if I did a whole program about it, it said that the Russians had made it up,

because it seemed to be so completely absurd. except then afterwards, first the US media and then no less a person than Budanov admitted that the Ukrainians had indeed done, attempted the thing in exactly the way that the Russian said. So when Zelensky says they don't launch attacks on nuclear power plants, they don't attempt to capture them in that kind of way. Well, he's simply not telling the truth. That's all I can say about it. So, you know, it's absolutely clear.

There's no doubt at all that that was the objective. He's, in effect, by denying it, all but admitted it in exactly the way you said. And as far as I'm concerned, that is the end of this issue. I mean, I think we can now say quite... He's such an actor. Absolutely, he's an actor. Exactly. But when Zelensky, when Zelensky, denies.

something in this way. You could take it. It was true. Now, that's, that's, that's, that's, that's, that's the nuclear power. Now, let's, let's turn to the other big story. Now, um, you said that you believe the New York Times. We have every reason to believe the New York Times because no less than a person, than Zelensky himself is confirming the story. He also says that he told the Americans that he wanted Tom or Hawk nuclear weapons. And he's absolutely furious at that. this important secret piece of information was disclosed, disclosed to the American people. I mean, it's an astonishing thing.

He wants one of the most powerful strategic weapons in the American military arsenal, and he wants the Americans to agree to give it to him, and he doesn't want the American people to be informed about it, because that's essentially what do you say. So, of course, he's furious. But it tells us again, an awful lot about how desperate and how unbalanced he's becoming. Because Tomahawk nuclear cruise missiles are strategic weapons way back in the 1980s when they were first brought into service.

And they were going to be based, as I remember in Britain, and I seem to remember the Netherlands in the early 1980s. The objective was that they would be nuclear-tip, nuclear-armed, and they would be used as intermediate nuclear weapons to strike at the Soviet Union, able to hit targets well inside the Soviet Union and reach even as far as Moscow. So they have a strategic capability,

and they can also potentially be done, developed into nuclear weapons. And yes, it is true that at present time, Tomahawk cruise missiles are only launched from warships and to some extent, I believe, from aircraft. But back in the 80s, they could be ground launched. The United States has built launches in Romania and Poland, which are part of the Aegis offshore system, which could potentially also launch Tomahawk cruise missiles. So they could be ground launched from Ukraine. They could reach targets in huge areas of Russia. They would be a strategic weapon. They're potentially capable of carrying nuclear weapons. Zelensky has floated the idea of Ukraine acquiring nuclear weapons. He's then retracted it,

but he said what he said. As you absolutely rightly said, this idea would lead a straight into World War III. The Russians would not be deterred into capitulation by a move like that. They would see it as a massive and incredibly dangerous provocation. The United States establishing long-range missile bases in Ukraine, exactly the thing the Russians warned against before the war began, and the Russians would respond, and they would respond immediately and an overwhelming force, and they might conceive of leaving use tactical nuclear weapons themselves in order to prevent it.

They have indicated this. So the Pentagon knows that, the Biden White House knows that. Everybody across the entire American system knows this. That's why inevitably they were going to say no. The extraordinary thing is that Zelensky, Despite presumably having been told about this, nonetheless comes forward and demands it and demands that these weapons should be supplied to him in effect in secret. That tells you everything you need to know about how out of control Zelensky now has become. We saw it with the victory plan of a couple of ten days ago and we see it with this time.

Omaha missile thing, which has now been revealed, and with his response to the fact that the Americans are now telling us about it. I mean, he calls a press conference, Alexander, and Zelensky reveals all of this stuff. He's upset. He's upset that this story, the secret annex, the secret annex in his victory plan was revealed by the New York Times, which was a plan to take the world to World War III, to nuclear war. And he's upset that this was revealed, this was leaked. He said he basically implied that the Biden White House, they betrayed him by revealing this

information. It was a confidential conversation. It was a secret annex. And they've betrayed me and Ukraine by revealing. this information, which would have taken us to World War III, no doubt about it. But he doesn't care about that. No. He doesn't care about that at all.

What does that tell you about, not only about, I mean, you touched on Zelensky that he's losing it. It's clear that he's losing it. But what does it tell you about the collective West, the United States, and even more so the Europeans, the fact that they continue to stick with this guy, even though it is clear to everybody, everybody that's paying attention. Definitely us, definitely our community, definitely the people that watch us and comment on our videos. It's clear that this guy is dangerous.

Any normal administration, a normal administration, Republican, Democrat, conservative Tories, labor, I don't care, normal administration would be looking at all of this. would be looking at that request for Tom Hawks, and they would say, yeah, this, this guy's got to go. I mean, he's getting too dangerous. Yes, we're invested in Project Ukraine. Yes, we want to defeat Russia. Yes, we want a regime change Putin.

But not at the expense of planet Earth. Well, exactly. You're completely right. I mean, I agree with everything you absolutely say. It does demonstrate what an incredibly reckless, dangerous and extremely entitled person. he has become. I mean, the other thing about Zelensky, and it's important to say this, is that not only have, is he dangerous and is he, is he reckless and entitled, which he is, but he is also somebody who has been consistently and continuously appeased. He's demanded one advanced

weapon system after another, and the West have shoveled them at him. They've given him tanks, they've given him aircraft, they've given him. They've given him. him missiles, including attack him's missiles. They've crossed repeatedly their red lines. They've given him everything he's always wanted. And what does he do? He just comes back and demands war, more and more all the way up to, as you correctly say, World War III. Now, I'm afraid what it tells us is the total collapse of decision-making in the West, because clearly, as you absolutely rightly say, any rational government, any government values its own survival and that of planet Earth would by this point have understood that this is the single most dangerous individual

that the West has ever got itself involved in since the end of the Second World War, because that's how it looks to me. I mean, I have to say that. But instead of doing that, they all, you know, look the other way. They whisper to each other. They say, well, you know, maybe he should consider talking to the Russians about freezing the conflict or about grain deals or about that kind of thing. But, you know, in the meantime, we've got to give him all the support he wants

and we've got to go on giving him all the weapons he needs and we've got to go on writing his checks and we've got to go indulge on indulging him and pretending to each other and to the world that he really is, you know, Winston Churchill and Napoleon and Caesar and all of these things that he is the man who's defending our freedoms

and protecting us from the Russian horde and all of those things. And it's irrational to the point of, well, I mean, I didn't have a good word. I mean, it's not absurd because absurd implies an element of comedy. There's nothing comic about this.

It is incredibly dangerous. actually. But anyway, they go on indulging him. And we see that when he doesn't get what he wants, he doesn't get, you know, the toy that he thinks will winning the war, and which could lead us to World War III. What does he do? He throws a tantrum. Where do we go from here? I mean, you know, we've taken it to the limits now, haven't we? Yeah, we have. Zelensky's ask of Tomahawks is about as, this is as far as you can go. I want a missile with a 2,400 range, kilometer range, which can be armed with, which can be nuclear.

I want that missile in Ukraine. Which, which wouldn't mean, by the way, Alexander, that this missile would be launched by America. It would have to be. We know that. Yeah. So where do we go from here? Well, I think there are still some level-headed people, principally in the Pentagon, and they've been leaking now to the greatest possible degree that they can,

that this has reached its limits and that they're not prepared to go further. There's an article in The Economist, in which they said as much, that the United States has given all that it can, it cannot give more, that doing so would be dangerous, that arsonauts have become depleted, that the United States would be massively exposed if things were to go wrong in other places. They're still not saying the obvious truth that giving more to Zelensky of all people would be to bring on a whole new set of dangers. But the Pentagon is still saying no, is now saying no.

And I think that will stick. But having said that, it is still very, very, very, worrying how many people there still are there, are out there, who still want to give Zelensky whatever it is he wants. Starrma. Starrner, absolutely. I read an article in the British media about 10 days ago, in which he said, you know, if Zelensky wants nuclear weapons, you should have them.

I mean, he has seen it as simply as that. Okay, so just to end the video, the argument from someone like Stammer or Makron or the Baltics or Poland, which are for giving Zelensky everything, including going nuclear, I guess you could say, that that is what we're talking about here when we're talking about tomahawks. The argument that they're making, which they have made, I mean, I've read interviews of Sikorsky and Stom or all these guys, Lammy. The argument that they make is that by giving Ukraine these weapons, let's just use the example of Tomahawks, by giving Ukraine tomahawks, Russia will finally back down. They'll finally say, okay, you've got now the weapons, which can strike anywhere in Russia.

We're backing down. We're going to finally negotiate and we'll negotiate on Zelensky's peace formula. What do you say to that? Because that is the argument that they make. Absolutely. It is a complete and total fantasy. That's the first thing to say. I mean, the Russians will see this as existentially dangerous themselves.

I mean, they made it all along clear all along that Ukraine's NATO is an existential danger. Missiles in NATO is an existential danger. It is something that they cannot live with and that they won't live with and that they will act to ensure. never takes place. I mean, the Russians started an entire war on that basis. There's no reason to think, none, that they would back off now. It is facile and ridiculous to think so. Bismarck once put this type of thinking very well. He once said, you know, to take a step like this, and he was talking about, starting a preventative war against Russia,

which some people in Germany back in the 1890s were talking about. He said starting a war, a preventative war against Russia, is to commit suicide to avoid death. I mean, this is what this amounts to. I mean, you go out of your way to plant weapons, to escalate the war, to bring about World War III, in order to do what exactly? to try and prevent World War III.

I mean, it's so stupid. It is so illogical. It is crazy. And again, the fundamental problem is that no one in authority in Washington, and it has to be in Washington, is prepared to come out and say so plainly in those sort of words. What the Baltic states, the polls, some people in London need to be told is, look, this is the decision.

What you are asking for is crazy. We are not going to do it. We are not risking World War III. We are not going to put in jeopardy the entire survival of the planet because of your fantasies and illusions. And put up and shut up because there is not going to be any change in the policy. There is what the Americans need to do. This administration is never going to do it, which is why we are in the mess we're in now.

Hopefully the next administration will. Yeah, I have a final question for you. The next administration, whichever administration it will be, my thinking is that the best policy that they could have for Project Ukraine is to just walk away from it. I completely agree. It sounds crazy. cruel, I don't know, whatever you think about it. Just walk away from it. We failed. It didn't work out. You know what, Zelensky? You need to talk to the Russians. No more money, no more weapons. You need to talk to the Russians. It's not our problem anymore. And the Europeans, the same thing.

Tell them the same thing. It's not our problem. We need to focus on America now. You can say that we stabbed you in the back. You can say that we're walking away and that's not cool. Whatever you want to say we're not a good partner. Who cares? We're done. I am 100%. I am completely in agreement with this. Not even negotiations, not even mediating negotiations. We're done. We don't want to hear it anymore. The future administration can say, look, this is the Biden administration's mess. They own it. We are not touching it. Any new administration that comes along and starts to get drawn into discussions about Ukraine, negotiations with the Russians about Ukraine, negotiations with the Ukrainians about Ukraine, discussions with the Europeans. What they're going to find is

that they get drawn into. They are going to find that the point will come when they will own it as well. What they should do is say, we don't own this problem. It wasn't us. We had nothing to do with this mess. Ukraine can sort itself out. The Europeans can sort itself out. It does not impinge on the essential security interests of the United States, which it doesn't. And we don't want to be any further involved. We don't need to come up with proposals or ideas because ultimately this is not our problem. And the NATO pushback? How would you address that? Final, final question. NATO coming back and saying, you're abandoning us America. What would you, what would you say to that?

I'll take fine. Go away. Start it all out by yourselves. If you really think, if you really believe that you can go ahead and, you know, sort out your problems without us, you're welcome. We are there. We will abide by our commitment. to you, but if you don't want us anymore, if you want to talk about betrayal and that kind of thing, well, that's your business. If you don't, if you feel that way about us, well, we'll just wave goodbye and we'll go away. And believe me, if they were to say that, that would bring the Europeans back into line most immediately.

Call their bluff, yeah. Call their bluff. Yeah, there's no risk of NATO or anything. Call their bluff. Yeah. I agree. All right. We will add the video there at the durand.orgals.com. We are on Rumble, odyssey, bitchy, telegram, Rockfin, and X, and go to the Duran shop. Pick up some merch like what we are wearing in this video. You will find a link to the shop in the description box down below

20% off. Use the code October 20. That is October 20. That is October 20 for 20% off. Take care.