Ex-CIA: UKRAINE HAS BEEN LYING ALL ALONG!

Introduction and Discussion on NATO and Ukraine

In this section, the host introduces the guest, Larry Johnson, a former CIA agent, to discuss the Russia-Ukraine situation and the role of NATO. They specifically focus on whether Ukraine should be allowed to join NATO and the potential consequences.

Should Ukraine Join NATO?

• The host mentions that it was a rocky week for NATO due to Zelinski's reaction to not being allowed to enter NATO at this time.

• The host asks if there is any reason why NATO would allow Ukraine to join the alliance.

• Larry Johnson explains that if Ukraine joins NATO while fighting Russia, according to Article 5 of the NATO Charter, other NATO nations would be obligated to enter the war against Russia. This could potentially lead to a nuclear exchange with Russia coming out on top.

• The West continues provoking and openly assaulting Russia by publicly declaring weapons they will send and how much aid they will provide. This overt behavior may escalate tensions further.

Overt Military Aid and Potential Escalation

In this section, Larry Johnson discusses how superpowers historically provided military aid covertly without disrupting diplomatic exchanges. He highlights how the current overt behavior of Western countries may lead to further escalation in the conflict.

Overt Military Aid

• During past conflicts like Vietnam War or Soviet-Afghan War, superpowers provided military assistance covertly without rubbing it in each other's faces.

• However, currently, Western countries are openly declaring their weapon systems that can kill Russian citizens.

• France and United Kingdom announced supplying long-range cruise missiles capable of striking inside Russia. If this happens, Russia may feel compelled to strike back against these countries' military bases or weapon factories.

Desperation of NATO

• Larry Johnson mentions that NATO is desperate as it has provided intelligence, military equipment, and ammunition to Ukraine, but the Ukrainian military is degrading and losing badly.

• Some NATO countries like Bulgaria and Hungary are reluctant to provide more weapons or support to Ukraine.

• Joe Biden admitted that they have run out of conventional artillery shells and are now sending cluster munitions, which can pose risks to civilians.

Turkey's Behavior and Potential Retaliation

In this section, Larry Johnson discusses Turkey's behavior in the conflict and the potential retaliation from Russia if they were suddenly hit with long-range missiles.

Turkey's Betrayal

• Larry Johnson mentions that Turkey has betrayed Russia through its behavior. This could make Erdogan's position less secure.

Potential Russian Retaliation

• The host brings up the scenario of hitting Moscow with long-range missiles and asks how Russia would retaliate.

• Larry Johnson believes that such a scenario is unlikely because of Russia's capabilities and deterrents. He does not provide specific details on how Russia would retaliate.

The transcript ends abruptly after this section without further discussion on potential retaliation or other aspects of the conflict.

Russian Mobilization and Increased Attacks

The speaker discusses how Russia has not fully mobilized its society or thrown everything into the conflict with Ukraine. However, there is evidence of increased attacks by Russia while the Ukrainian ability to sustain operations is being weakened.

Russian Attacks and Potential Response

• Russia has been stepping up their attacks on Ukraine while the Ukrainian ability to sustain operations is weakening.

• If Russia were to launch a large cruise missile attack on Moscow, it would require a robust response from the Russians.

• The speaker anticipates that in the coming weeks, Russia may begin shooting down US predator drones and other intelligence surveillance reconnaissance drones.

• Before attacking drones and aircraft, Russia might disrupt or destroy Elon Musk's Starlink system.

• While Russia has taken some blows so far, they have not been fatal. However, this may change as Russia recognizes that the West wants to destroy them and they need to protect themselves.

Escalation of Attacks on Drones and Infrastructure

The discussion focuses on potential Russian actions against US drones and infrastructure in response to strikes inside Russia. There is also mention of potential attacks on joint operations centers where NATO advisors are present.

Targeting US Drones and Infrastructure

• The United States has been careful to keep its drones in international airspace, but there may come a point where Russia takes them out due to strikes originating from the West hitting inside Russia.

• It is speculated that Russia may shoot down US predator drones used for intelligence surveillance reconnaissance activities.

• There could be an attempt by Russia to disrupt or destroy Elon Musk's Starlink system before targeting other aircraft collecting intelligence.

Joint Operations Centers

• So far, Russia has been cautious about attacking joint operations centers where NATO advisors work alongside Ukrainian officers and enlisted personnel.

• This caution may be because of possible human sources within these centers providing valuable intelligence.

• However, if Ukraine launches long-distance strikes that cause significant damage, Russia may feel politically compelled to target these joint operations centers.

Infrastructure Destruction and Conceding Territory

The speaker discusses the destruction of infrastructure in Ukraine and the potential need for Ukraine to concede territory to end the war. There is also mention of President Zelensky openly mocking former President Trump.

Infrastructure Destruction

• Russia has been focused on wiping out the infrastructure of Ukraine.

• It is speculated that Russia may further target communication with NATO nations, including joint operations centers.

Conceding Territory

• President Zelensky openly mocked former President Trump, suggesting that if ending the war in 24 hours was possible, Joe Biden would do it in five minutes.

• The speaker believes that Ukraine does not have a choice in this matter and that they will be required to give up territory to end the war.

• The Ukrainian military is facing challenges as their army has been exterminated multiple times and they are running out of ammunition.

Criticism of President Zelensky and Ukrainian Military Challenges

The discussion focuses on criticism towards President Zelensky and the challenges faced by the Ukrainian military, including manpower shortages and lack of training.

Criticism Towards President Zelensky

• The speaker criticizes President Zelensky, calling him a delusional cocaine addict who is a career comedian known for using cocaine to stay alert.

Challenges Faced by Ukrainian Military

• The Ukrainian military is currently on its third army due to previous losses. The current army is less well-trained and struggling with large maneuvers or even small ones.

• Senior officers who provided leadership have been lost, requiring rebuilding efforts each time.

• Manpower shortage is becoming critical as Ukraine lacks the ability to recruit and train soldiers effectively.

• Additionally, Ukraine is running out of ammunition.

The transcript ends abruptly after this section.

New Section

The limited mobile artillery capability and frequent tank losses in Ukraine make it unlikely for them to recapture any territory. The retreat from Crimea was a tactical withdrawal due to troop shortages, and other instances of Ukrainian capture are non-existent. There is speculation that Ukraine's statements about reclaiming territory are aimed at involving NATO in the conflict.

Ukraine's Limited Capability

• Ukraine's mobile artillery capability is quite limited.

• Tanks are being blown up regularly, indicating their vulnerability.

Unlikelihood of Recapturing Territory

• There have been no instances of Ukraine actually capturing and taking back significant territory.

• Statements about recapturing territory may be more bombast than reality.

• It is unlikely for Ukraine to recapture anything without a significant change in circumstances.

New Section

The retreat from Crimea and the giving up of certain areas were strategic decisions made to avoid risky positions and ensure troop supply. These actions were not indicative of successful Ukrainian captures.

Retreat from Crimea

• The retreat from Crimea was a tactical withdrawal due to troop shortages.

• Troops were pulled out rather than being put into a dangerous situation.

• Leaving troops on the west side of the riverbank could have resulted in flooding, isolation, and difficulty in resupplying them.

Giving Up Certain Areas

• General Siroviken recognized the risk of leaving troops on the west side of the riverbank.

• To avoid potential flooding and isolation, troops were withdrawn from those areas.

• Risky positions should be avoided unless there is assurance of supply and sustainability.

New Section

Apart from strategic withdrawals, there have been no significant instances of Ukrainian forces capturing or retaking territory. Claims made by Ukrainian officials may be exaggerated or influenced by external factors.

Lack of Ukrainian Captures

• There is no evidence of the Ukrainian military capturing and retaking significant territory.

• Claims made by Ukrainian officials may be exaggerated or influenced by external factors.

• The statements from Zelensky may have been influenced by a cocaine-induced high.

New Section

It seems like Ukraine is trying to involve NATO in the conflict through their statements about reclaiming territory. However, NATO's military capabilities are not sufficient to defeat Russia. The hope of NATO intervention is unlikely to materialize.

Setting Up NATO Intervention

• Ukraine may be trying to create a reason for NATO to intervene in the conflict.

• They are counting on NATO as their only hope for assistance.

• However, NATO is not equipped to fight and beat the Russians due to insufficient troops, armor, and artillery shells.

New Section

Europe, particularly countries close to World War II, are reluctant to engage in another European land war that could result in massive casualties. The desire for peace and avoidance of prolonged conflicts is understandable.

Reluctance Towards Land Wars

• Most of Europe does not want another European land war that lasts for years and causes immense human casualties.

• Memories of World War II and even World War I contribute to this reluctance.

• The commitment towards engaging in such conflicts is low due to these historical experiences.

New Section

There is speculation about the relationship between Putin and Purgosian, as well as whether Purgosian was set up with false expectations of support from intelligence agencies. The information available is limited due to propaganda surrounding the topic.

Relationship Between Putin and Purgosian

• It is unclear if the beef between Putin and Purgosian has been settled.

• There are speculations that Purgosian believed he would have support from the CIA or MI6 if he got close to Moscow.

• The information available is limited and clouded by propaganda, making it difficult to determine the truth.

Purgosian's Role

• Purgosian has been part of Russian intelligence operations, but his activities and anger towards Russia may not be entirely staged.

• Russian intelligence has used him as a distraction and shiny object to divert attention from other activities.

• The focus on Purgosian in Western media may be deliberate manipulation by the Russians.

New Section

Purgosian's role can be compared to that of a military contractor, providing food and possibly being involved with the Internet Research Agency. His significance has been exaggerated in Western media while other Russian activities receive little coverage.

Purgosian as a Military Contractor

• Purgosian's primary job was providing food, although reports suggest that the quality was not good.

• He also had a role as the director of the Internet Research Agency.

• Western media has focused heavily on Purgosian while neglecting coverage of other Russian activities.

Exaggeration of Purgosian's Significance

• There is an obsession with Purgosian in Western media, similar to how Raytheon, Lockheed Martin, or General Dynamics are obsessed over in terms of military contractors.

• This focus on Purgosian may be a deliberate ploy by Russian intelligence to distract attention from other activities.

• It is reminiscent of Allied tactics during D-Day when they created distractions to mislead German forces.

Syrian Warlord's Attack on Conoco Oil Field

This section discusses the attack on a Conoco oil field in Kurdish territory by a Syrian warlord, and the involvement of U.S Special Operations forces and Russian mercenaries.

Syrian Warlord's Motive

• The warlord wanted access to the Conoco oil in Kurdish territory.

• The oil field was defended by U.S Special Operations forces.

• Daily communication between the U.S military commander and Qatar took place regarding this issue.

Involvement of Russian Mercenaries

• The warlord hired Russian mercenaries from Wagner to attack and take over the oil field.

• Wagner received payment under the table for this operation.

• It was not an official Russian action but an independent job carried out under Ferguson's direction.

Miscommunication with Russians

• The U.S military called up the Russians to inquire about their involvement in the attack.

• The Russian military commander denied any connection with the mercenaries, as it was not an official action.

Anger and Betrayal

• Many of the Wagner mercenaries were killed during the attack on the U.S military outpost.

• Progression became angry and felt betrayed due to this incident.

• There is speculation that Progression had contact with Ukrainian Military Intelligence and British MI6, leading Western intelligence agencies to recruit him.

Pregosian's Cooperation with Western Intelligence

This section explores Pregosian's alleged cooperation with Western intelligence agencies, his motivations, and Russia's response.

Recruitment by Western Intelligence

• Pregosian had contact with Ukrainian Military Intelligence, which led to connections with British MI6.

• Western intelligence agencies believed they had recruited Pregosian as someone who would work for them against Russia.

Threat from Russian Counterintelligence

• Pregosian was informed by Russian counterintelligence (FSB) that they knew about his contacts and activities.

• He was given an ultimatum to cooperate with Russia or face death.

• Pregosian chose to stay alive and cooperate with the Russians.

Betrayal Narrative

• Pregosian began acting out to support the narrative that he was angry at the general staff and minister of defense, intending to betray them.

• His emotional outbursts were widely reported on Telegram.

Tolerance of Pregosian's Outbursts

This section discusses the tolerance shown by Vladimir Putin towards Pregosian's outbursts and the potential reasons behind it.

Putin's Tolerance

• Despite being portrayed as an authoritarian leader, Putin tolerated Pregosian's outbursts and actions.

• This contrasts with the perception of Putin silencing dissidents.

Passing Intelligence to Establish Bonafides

• Leaked documents revealed that Pregosian delivered intelligence about Russian troop locations to Western intelligence agencies.

• This act helped establish his credibility and trustworthiness in their eyes.

The Survival of Pregosian

This section explores why it is believed that Pregosian is still alive and walking around despite his cooperation with Russian counterintelligence.

Survival Theory

• It is believed that Pregosian is still alive because his commanders were not rounded up or punished.

• He played a role in a larger plan, which explains why he was spared.

Unintended Consequences

• During the operation, some Russian Airmen were killed, which may have been an unintended consequence.

Timing and NATO Exercise

This section discusses the timing of Pregosian's actions and its relation to a large-scale NATO military exercise.

Timing of Pregosian's Actions

• Pregosian initiated his action on the same day a large-scale NATO military exercise was concluding.

• The timing may have been strategic to potentially involve NATO aircraft in supporting his forces.

Russian Preparedness

• The Russians had already pre-positioned troops, indicating they were prepared for such an eventuality.

• They did not scramble or panic but responded swiftly with pre-planned measures.

Challenges of Transportation

This section highlights the challenges faced by Pregosian's forces in transporting their troops from Rostov-on-Don to Moscow.

Lack of Viable Plan

• Pregosian's forces did not have a viable plan for transporting their 3,000 troops from Rostov-on-Don to Moscow.

• They lacked aircraft for transportation, which would require a long convoy journey by trucks.

Logistics Challenges

• Transporting 3,000 troops would require approximately 250 trucks, resulting in a lengthy convoy.

• The logistics involved in stopping at gas stations and managing the needs of such a large group posed significant challenges.

New Section

The discussion revolves around the current state of relations between Russia and the United States, with a focus on the potential for escalating tensions and the need for peace.

Seeking Peace with Russia

• Former Russian president Medvedev and former U.S president Donald Trump have both expressed concerns about the increasing likelihood of World War III.

• The question is raised as to why there seems to be a lack of effort in seeking peace with Russia, and why Joe Biden's administration appears to be pushing for war instead.

• It is questioned whether these statements from former presidents are genuine concerns or merely political talking points.

New Section

The speaker agrees with both former presidents' statements, emphasizing that this is an extremely alarming time. They draw a comparison to their experience during the Cuban Missile Crisis.

Scariest Time in History

• The speaker shares that they consider this period to be the scariest time in their life.

• Even during the Cuban Missile Crisis, when nuclear conflict was imminent, there were still diplomatic efforts and communication channels open between the United States and Soviet Union.

• However, today's situation is different as there seems to be a lack of respectful dialogue and attempts at deescalation.

New Section

The discussion focuses on how current actions by the Biden administration may aggravate tensions rather than promote peace.

Aggravating Tensions

• The Biden administration's approach appears to be focused on isolating and destroying Russia, which has led to further aggravation of tensions.

• This aggressive stance has resulted in negative consequences for Western countries' control over international world order.

• Russia and China are working together politically, economically, and militarily to transform the international order while diminishing U.S. influence.

New Section

The speaker discusses the potential consequences of the deteriorating relationship between Russia and the United States.

Dismantling of International Order

• The West's efforts to isolate and destroy Russia have backfired, leading to a loss of control over international rules and order.

• Both Russia and China are actively working to transform the international order, both militarily and politically.

• The United States' ability to control events is rapidly diminishing, which may have significant implications for global dynamics.

New Section

The discussion focuses on the perception that Russia may be pushed into a corner, potentially leading to drastic actions.

Potential Nuclear Conflict

• It is suggested that Russia is unlikely to initiate a nuclear war due to their understanding of its catastrophic consequences.

• However, if pushed into a corner, they may feel compelled to respond with retaliation.

• Russia has taken measures such as refurbishing bomb shelters and developing an anti-ballistic missile defense system in preparation for such scenarios.

New Section

The speaker emphasizes that it is crucial not to underestimate Russia's capabilities and readiness for conflict.

Underestimating Russia

• Comparisons are made between the experiences of the United States and Russia during times of conflict.

• While the United States has not faced significant military invasions since 1812, Russia has a long history of defending against invasions.

• The losses suffered by Russia during World War II were immense compared to those experienced by the United States. This highlights the different realities faced by each country.

New Section

The discussion continues on underestimating Russia's capabilities and reliance on them in certain areas.

Reliance on Russian Support

• Despite claims about Russian weakness, the United States has relied on Russia to transport its astronauts to the International Space Station for almost 20 years.

• Russia possesses advanced military capabilities such as hypersonic missiles and superior electronic warfare capabilities compared to the United States.

• The notion that Russia is militarily weak is challenged, highlighting the disparity between perception and reality.

New Section

The speaker agrees with the concerns raised by former presidents and emphasizes bipartisan ignorance regarding Russia's capabilities.

Recognizing the Gravity of the Situation

• Both former presidents accurately recognize the seriousness of the current situation.

• The speaker shares personal conversations with friends who underestimate Russia's potential impact on global events.

• It is important to acknowledge Russia's historical resilience and military strength when considering potential conflicts.

New Section

The discussion highlights how different countries have experienced conflict throughout history.

Contrasting Experiences

• The United States has not faced a significant foreign military attack since 1812, while Russia has a long history of defending against invasions.

• The losses suffered by Russia during World War II were immense, with millions of lives lost. In contrast, the United States had relatively fewer casualties.

• These contrasting experiences shape each country's perspective on conflict and their preparedness for potential threats.

New Section

The discussion continues on underestimating Russia's capabilities and reliance on them in certain areas.

Dismissing Russian Capabilities

• It is emphasized that dismissing or underestimating Russia's capabilities is misguided.

• Despite relying on Russian assistance to transport astronauts to space, there is a tendency to overlook their technological advancements in various fields.

• From electronic warfare capabilities to hypersonic missiles, Russia possesses significant strengths that should not be disregarded.

New Section

The discussion concludes with a reflection on the bipartisan nature of ignorance regarding Russia's capabilities.

Bipartisan Ignorance

• The speaker highlights that the issue of underestimating Russia is not limited to one political party but is bipartisan in nature.

• Both Democrats and Republicans contribute to this lack of understanding and awareness.

• It is crucial to recognize the reality of Russia's capabilities and avoid falling into a state of ignorance or complacency.

New Section

The conversation wraps up, and information about how to stay connected with the speaker is provided.

Conclusion and Contact Information

• The host expresses gratitude for the discussion and expresses interest in having the speaker return for future conversations.

• The speaker shares their website, sonar21.com, as a resource for those interested in learning more or staying updated with their insights.