"Brian Berletic" Kalibrated Live #138

ruticker 02.03.2025 12:34:35

Recognized text from YouScriptor channel Kalibrated

Recognized from a YouTube video by YouScriptor.com, For more details, follow the link "Brian Berletic" Kalibrated Live #138

**All right, we are live!** Welcome back, everybody. This is **episode 138** of the Calibrated Live Show with your host, of course, **Scott**. I am Scott. Welcome in, everybody! We have some distracting events going on today, and here to talk about it from the New Atlas YouTube channel, the one, the only, **Brian Berletic**. Brian, how are you doing today, my good man? I'm doing well, and you know, you already scheduled me to come on ahead of time, and it was just perfect timing that this theater is unfolding—well, semi-theater is unfolding. I think it's good timing because we really have to talk about this, and I see so many otherwise intelligent people reacting emotionally to this when there needs to be some deeper thinking going on. Yes, this is something that I've often referred to when talking about any analysis. The very first thing you should do is remove any and all emotion and as much bias as you possibly can immediately. Maybe let it seep in a little bit later because there are beneficial things to a bias or some emotion to an analysis, but when something is unfolding, reacting emotionally immediately to that information is usually the least beneficial route forward to actually achieve good analysis. And yes, I have also seen throughout today a number of people who should otherwise probably think twice about what they're saying—not thinking twice because it's right in front of them; it's there, you know, the clicks are available, whatever it is. People are going after this tooth and nail. For those who don't know, for those who are just tuning in from underneath their rock, **Zelensky** and **Trump** had a meeting today in Washington. That meeting did not go particularly well. It kind of goes in line with what I have been talking about; I know it goes directly in line with what Brian Berletic has been talking about. Brian, I want a full rundown of the conversation that took place today in Washington in the White House between **JD Vance**, **Donald Trump**, and **Vladimir Zelensky**. I want to hear your take on it; I want to hear what you think is going to come out of this conversation, and yeah, just all your thoughts. Go ahead, take it away. The first thing to keep in mind is two out of the three people in the conversation are accomplished actors. I'm just going to put that out there. I don't know if it's connected or not, but just keep in mind Zelensky was a comedian and actor in TV shows and movies back in Ukraine, and they deliberately picked him to groom him as a candidate for president to play on his popularity as an entertainer. President Trump had a reality TV show, which, despite the word "reality" being in there, is highly scripted and edited to make compelling TV for 14 seasons. He was the host of his reality TV show, **The Apprentice**, and he also participated regularly in professional wrestling, which is not actual competition; the matches are predetermined. It's entertainment, and alongside the competitions, there's always this in-and-out-of-ring drama, and President Trump participated in that quite often. So keep all of that in mind; they're not strangers to staging confrontations and disagreements to advance narratives. But anyway, it didn't even make sense to me that President Zelensky was traveling to Washington in the first place. There was nothing to talk about or discuss or even sign off on. I was listening to **Alexander Mercouris** of **The Duran** talking about this so-called minerals deal, and there is nothing—there's nothing in the deal to even agree on. It's not even really fair to call it a deal; it is so vague and ambiguous the terms don't make any sense at all. The very premise of it—the U.S. and, and this is just what we hear, the U.S. president saying the U.S. wants its money back from investing in Ukraine in this conflict that is ultimately a U.S. proxy war against Russia. So they want Ukraine to pay for America's own proxy war against Russia. Does that even add up at face value? I don't think that it does. So why were they meeting in the first place? It makes no sense, except to put on this performance and convince the Russians that there is this deep fallout between Ukraine and the U.S. and to try to convince Russia, against their better judgment, to trust the U.S. ever again and just step into the breach and be betrayed and undermined and have the rug pulled out from under them again—Minsk One, Minsk Two, Istanbul—all the arms control treaties, one of which President Trump actually unilaterally withdrew from during his first administration. And the most amazing thing to me was that as they were arguing with each other, because Zelensky basically was demanding the U.S. support him to continue fighting on in this proxy war, and President Trump was demanding Zelensky thank him. Then he brought up the **Javelins** again, which is so ironic because under the Trump administration, the first administration, his sending weapons to Ukraine was almost certainly the last red line crossed that convinced Russia that this was irreversible—that Ukraine was being transformed into a battering ram aimed straight at Russia. If they did not act sooner rather than later, this would become a military threat, a national security threat, an existential threat to Russia in the future, and that is why they launched a special military operation. So many people are blaming this, including President Trump, are blaming this on the Biden administration. He played an equal role in preparing and precipitating this conflict. So I think that's a pretty good explanation. By leaving it, anything else, Scott? No, I don't think so. You know, to your point, I actually went and read through the MO—at least parts of, like, the majority of the deal that I could get my hands on—and yeah, it's so weird for both sides, really. For the U.S., it's only new investment, basically. So, you know, in terms of, like, the 50% that they're going to get until the debt or whatever you want to call it is paid back, that only comes from new claims, basically, on the rare earth minerals and stuff like that. So already you're talking about a very small amount of money that I believe the U.S. would be able to get out of this. I mean, I would be surprised if they got 50 billion out of Ukraine over, you know, a two-year period, let alone the 500 billion that they're talking about. But not only that, it is basically nothing for Zelensky. So the entire reason he's there—which is one of the reasons that you brought up that they're fighting—is these security guarantees. One thing that nobody's talking about is Ukraine already has, like, 30-plus security guarantees from multiple European nations—Estonia, you know, all of these countries have bought into this security guarantee idea, along with England, which has a 100-year security guarantee with Zelensky. But what nobody talks about is these security guarantees don't really matter either. So, I mean, for a security guarantee to work, the other side, the guarantor, has to show up, and I don't know if Europe is going to do that. You know, if the clauses of the security guarantee are probed, with no security guarantees, no military funding, nothing like this, it just appeared as though Zelensky was going to bend the knee to Trump and sell out Ukraine. I made a tweet about it; I basically said, you know, Zelensky is getting, you know, he's going to kiss the ring, and he's gonna get nothing out of it. That didn't end up happening because of the complete farce—I don't know what you would even call it—that transpired in the Oval Office in front of the press corps. But are you buying it? Are you buying this argument that they had? Well, something else for people to consider—people who are skeptical and then who really think some real fallout is just—just think about the last time the U.S. created a puppet and then ever cared what they actually really had to say and would genuinely react to what a powerless puppet said to them. And the answer is never. It's never happened. If someone becomes an obstacle to U.S. interests regarding the manipulation and self-destruction of a targeted country, they will simply remove that person and replace them with somebody else. So if this was a real fallout, Zelensky will be gone, and they will continue doing what they have planned to do. U.S. Secretary of Defense **Lloyd Austin** has publicly said this; he has laid out the entire plan. There's not going to be peace with Russia. They're trying to lure Russia in and trick them again—the Minsk Three—even though he literally said this is not Minsk 3.0, but he described what is literally Minsk 3.0, where European forces go into Ukraine, freeze the conflict along the current line of contact, and they just hold on to it while the U.S. and Europe expand military industrial production, the manufacturing of arms and ammunition, and also while the U.S. rushes to try to contain China. I don't think people quite understand how far China has accelerated out of the orbit of the U.S.-led so-called international order. Now, the whole mineral deal, which doesn't make any sense if you look at it, is really just a ploy. There are no minerals to be had; Ukraine doesn't even have energy. So how are they extracting all of these rare minerals for the U.S.? It doesn't make any sense at face value. What it is, is a trick to convince Trump supporters that if the U.S. continues supporting Ukraine—even indirectly, sending weapons to Europe, who then send it to Ukraine—which is literally what they're talking about doing—they will feel better because they think they're going to be getting their tax dollars back as part of this deal. You're not getting your tax dollars back; actually, taxes will be increasing because the tariffs are a form of tax on the American people, the American consumer. So people have to understand that part of it. And then President Trump just the other day was talking about what does Ukraine get out of the mineral deal? They get the right to fight on, and they will get continued support if Russia doesn't make a foolish, ridiculous deal with the U.S. They will continue fighting on; the U.S. will continue backing them, which was always the plan. You know, they're just seeing if Russia is foolish enough to agree to something that puts them at a disadvantage. And if they don't, they will continue the proxy war through Europe while they double down on China. Secretary Austin even literally said Europe needs to double down on Ukraine. Does that sound like an administration interested in ending this war or perpetuating it under the cover of pursuing peace? And look, I see people in the comment section; there's, you know, they're skeptical. But ask yourself, why are you skeptical? Because the evidence really adds up in favor of what you want to believe, or just because you really, really want to believe it rather than what the facts are adding up to? You know, I should honestly ask yourself that question, as if myself or Scott don't want to see this conflict, and we've been covering it closer than most people. We've watched with our own eyes the horrors taking place on the battlefield. This is one of the most highly documented, close-up wars in human history. I would love to see this whole conflict come to an end. We have to be realistic, and we have to make sure we're not promoting a course of action that's actually going to expand the conflict either vis-à-vis Russia or vis-à-vis China because the exact same conflict is being teed up by this administration, handed off to them from the previous administration—the exact same type of conflict vis-à-vis China. Yeah, the part that I want to just try to get into people's brains—and I and I—I, me and Brian had a quick conversation before this whole live stream started. I said, "Brian, people are not going to be very happy with the direction we're going to go with this," because me and Brian agree very similarly on what we see happening, and Brian has been a little bit of an influence, obviously talking to me, so we're on the same track. But time and time again, the things that Brian says and the things that I echo sometimes from Brian tend to come true. What I've been saying specifically since about New Year's and even a little bit before that—and Brian's been saying for longer—is that the U.S. is going to pivot; Europe is going to have to take over, and the war is going to continue. I said that the second Trump came out and said "one day, one negotiations." I told all of you listening, "No." I said, first off, there's no way he gets it done in one day—not feasible, just communication-wise. But outside of that, the U.S. has geostrategic interests that it cannot back down from if it wants to maintain its hegemony. Does anybody here think that Donald Trump is going to be the president that is going to willfully retreat from U.S. hegemony? Absolutely not. He would probably be killed if he went through that process. I mean, that is going against the entire U.S. establishment right now. We want to be number one; we're going to continue to fight to be number one, and we will not give it up—hegemony or nothing. So when we're saying just wait, and just wait until you see this conflict not come to an end because Trump is not going to end it, and just wait because the U.S. is not going to back off of support for Ukraine in a wider picture—the way, you know, they might not be announcing billions of dollars of aid going directly to Ukraine—but Europe can still buy U.S. weapon systems, U.S. artillery shells, you know, U.S.-produced equipment, and send that to Ukraine under the guise of it being European funding and security, right? So the U.S. removes itself; it pivots; it can focus on Iran and China, and meanwhile, the Russians are continuously distracted by the European control over the Ukraine project. Do I have that right, Brian? Because that makes perfect logical sense to me, and I don't think that I have seen anything that goes against that that hasn't turned out to be complete and total theater. Very good point. Yes, absolutely. Look at this tiff between America and Europe for about a week or so. Secretary Austin laid out the plan, and he said, "This is what you're gonna do: you're gonna double down on Ukraine, and we're gonna go after China." It's a division of labor. He literally said a division of labor between Europe and America. He didn't say a split; he didn't say peace in Ukraine; he said division of labor. You guys hold on to Ukraine while we take care of China; we'll be back. That's what he said publicly to everybody. And Europe and America, they were calling each other names; they were fighting publicly for about a week, and then **Ursula von der Leyen**, whatever her position is—I don't even know, head president of the EU or something—she was announcing how the EU is going to double down on producing arms and ammunition and supporting Ukraine. So she is complying with Secretary Austin's directive after pretending there was this huge divide, this split between the U.S. and Europe. And that's all meant to draw Russia in, and I don't know if Russia's really falling for it or not. I follow Russian media, and Russian media is very enthusiastic about all of this, and they're, you know, feeding into it. But is that—what is that? I don't know. I'm just—I'm hoping, and you should never hope because you're almost always going to be disappointed—but I'm hoping that they're just going along with this. There's no—I hope there's nobody in Moscow who's going to believe this again. Now, some people are saying they don't think this conversation between Zelensky, Trump, and Vance was staged, and maybe it wasn't. I mean, I have met people high up who actually believe everything the U.S. says, no matter how many times the U.S. betrays them. And maybe in Zelensky's mind, he honestly believed he was special and that the West had his back for as long as it takes. But as we know, the plan before any of this even began was always to burn Ukraine to the ground to extend Russia. And I hate to do this; I do it almost every single time I do a video, but read the 2019 Rand Corporation paper titled **Extending Russia**, and the plan was to light fires all along Russia's periphery—in Ukraine, in Georgia, in Armenia, in Kazakhstan, in Syria—light as many fires as possible, force Russia to expend resources trying to put them all out, hopefully overextending themselves and collapsing. The goal has always been to overthrow the political order in Moscow, subordinate Russia to the U.S. Still is. And if you read under the first geopolitical measure, provide lethal aid to Ukraine, which is followed by arming the Syrian rebels, and we see how that all ended, they talk about the benefits, but they also talk about the risk. The risk was such a move might also come at a significant cost to Ukraine and to U.S. prestige and credibility. This could produce disproportionately large Ukrainian casualties, which it has, territorial losses—absolutely irreversible—and refugee flows. It might even lead Ukraine into a disadvantageous peace. So this is where we're at. This was always part of the plan: create a disposable battering ram. They've used this battering ram; it has run its course. Now is the part where they dispose of it. That's what we're watching right now. are not aware, the American public is becoming increasingly fatigued with the ongoing support for Ukraine. So, the U.S. is going to pivot and allow Europe to take the lead while still providing indirect support. This way, they can maintain the narrative that they are still backing Ukraine without directly being involved in the conflict. **As for Ukraine**, they will continue to struggle, but they will not be completely alone. Europe will step in, but the level of support may not be as robust as what the U.S. has provided. The reality is that Europe is also facing its own economic challenges, and while they may increase military spending, it will come at the cost of social programs, which could lead to unrest among their populations. **In terms of the conflict**, I believe it will drag on. The U.S. and Europe will continue to push for a resolution that favors their interests, while Russia will not back down easily. The situation is complex, and any potential ceasefire will likely be temporary, as the underlying issues remain unresolved. **Ultimately**, the dynamics of this conflict are driven by geopolitical interests rather than the well-being of the Ukrainian people. The longer this continues, the more entrenched the positions will become, making a peaceful resolution increasingly difficult. So, to answer your question, yes, Europe will step in, but Ukraine will continue to face significant challenges, and the conflict is unlikely to see a resolution anytime soon. the first few months of the war, and then he just kept doubling down on these outrageous claims without any credible evidence to back them up. It’s like, how can people still take him seriously after that? **The reality is** that the conflict has been tragic enough without inflating numbers or making wild claims. It undermines the real suffering that people are going through. And when you have someone like Scott Ritter, who has a platform, spreading misinformation, it can be incredibly damaging. **As for the emotional aspect**, I completely understand why someone from Ukraine would feel deeply about this situation. It’s their home, their people, and their lives at stake. But that doesn’t mean we should ignore the facts or let emotions cloud our judgment. **In the end**, it’s about finding a balance between understanding the human cost of this conflict and maintaining a clear-eyed view of the geopolitical realities at play. We need to focus on the truth, no matter how uncomfortable it may be, and hold those in power accountable for their actions. **So, to wrap it up**, while I appreciate the emotional connection people have to this war, we must also be vigilant about the narratives being pushed and the individuals promoting them. It’s crucial to sift through the noise and focus on what’s actually happening on the ground, rather than getting swept up in sensationalism or emotional rhetoric. Like 2023, it was just ridiculous stuff. So, yeah, I never had the same communication with him or anything, but thank you for understanding. That was the Ukrainian 1 million men dead or gone. I’ll be honest with you; when I watch these videos from the battlefield, I’m just upset when I see Russians dying. I’m genuinely upset when I see Ukrainians dying, unless they’re Nazis. But even then, those people were manipulated a lot of them since they were teenagers, so can you really blame them? I have kids, and I can just imagine how horrible it would be to see your son blown in half by a drone drop to heavy metal music and people clicking the smiley face on it. It would destroy you for eternity. Yeah, you know, till the end of time, it would destroy you. I don’t see anything good about any of this. I want it to stop, but just like Scott said, we want it to really stop. We don’t want smoke and mirrors and for the U.S. to kick the can down the road and kill even more people in the next round of aggression they’re already setting up. Look at what the Trump Administration has promised to do; they are going to expand the military-industrial base. Why? If you want peace and you want multipolarism, what do you need this for? You already have an enormous military, enough nukes to destroy the planet ten times over. What do you need more weapons for? Because they’ve got future proxy wars they need to fight and win. All right, Brian, that takes us to an hour and 12 minutes, man. We’ve been grinding this out. I think we covered the topic today pretty well. Anything else you want to throw in? Anything you want to share with the audience before we get out of here? Well, just again, if you’re having doubts about what is being said regarding Ukraine, just look at what current U.S. policy coming out of the Trump Administration is towards China in the Asia-Pacific region. The U.S. has tens of thousands of troops closer to China than to America’s own shores. They have no right to be there; they are violating—and still under the Trump Administration—backtracking from their own One China policy that they made together with Beijing back in the 1970s. Under Secretary Rubio’s State Department, they have edited the U.S.-Taiwan relations page on their website; they have stricken the sentence that says we do not recognize Taiwan independence because they’re preparing to do to China via either Taiwan—which is an island province of China, by the way—look it up—or the Philippines. They’re planning to do the exact same thing vis-à-vis China that they’re pretending they want to end with Russia in Ukraine. So, does that sound like genuine interest in change, or do you need smoke and mirrors? You need to buy time because you lost your proxy war, and you have an even bigger war you still have no idea how you’re going to fight and win, but you’re still determined to do it anyway. Think on that. Yeah, no, and I again, as always, Brian, I have you on because I agree with what you say, and I appreciate how you deliver it to my audience. Thank you so much for coming on. Everybody, if you would like to follow Brian at the New Atlas, you can find the link in the description of this video. His page, you can find all of his social media and where to find his work. Please, I implore you, go read Brian. He is a daily source for me. I really appreciate all that he does, all of the in-depth analysis and research that I honestly don’t find myself having the time to do. I get a good chunk of that condensed and properly distributed to my Telegram page every day. So, thank you, Brian, for that, and thank you, everybody, who was in here talking, asking questions, everything. Go ahead, Brian. I was just going to say thank you for having me on. Yeah, no, I appreciate it. Be sure to check out Brian’s shows; be sure to tune in to our streams when we do them together. Until next time, everybody, thank you so much, and we will see you later. Goodbye!

Назад

Залогинтесь, что бы оставить свой комментарий