The hello welcome to one of the parts more than a year and a half into the active face of the ukrainian conflict. It is still being for trade by western media as an unprovoked, heinous and indiscriminate attack by russia, against its free spirited graves and dexterous neighbors. Reaching bipolar with logic should prevail sooner or later, thanks to the high morales of its troops. The generous support of its allies is this scenario as a voltage, if, as it may be passing the reality check. Well discuss that. Im now joined by Larry Johnson for my analyst with the Us Central Intelligence Agency and c o. O berg associates. Mr. Johnson, its great to talk to thank you very much for your time. Thank you for having the oaks on us. If you read them before the, what the rushes pursuing in the ukraine should not be termed as of war. That because the russian didnt go all in its uh, using its uh, forces and resources and theyre pretty limited. And i think still selective fashion. But people watching us would ask uh, why should we care about how we term it because people are dying any way. Why engage in this, linguistically taking . Well, because the amount of people that are dying around talking civilian is, is, so would be drastically higher. If this was an actual war, if, if youre looking at an actual war. But while were talking about russia would be taking out all intelligence surveillance, reconnaissance assets that are in the air, in or around russia and ukraine. Theyre not doing that. They would take out the attack satellites, theyre not doing that. They would be destroying every government building a kiddo that voters in any way involved with assisting the war. They havent done that. So there are a lot of things that russia has not done. And i think part of it is one to avoid cavellas killing civilians. Not necessarily thats, you know, quite a contrast to the past conduct of countries like my own, the United States in Great Britain during world to where there were some discriminant bombing of civilian areas without regard to the civilian casualties. So, i think the existing does matter. Now, mr. Johnson, Many Americans are people from the west life to sort of refer us to history a long way back. But um, what strikes me about this whole, this course in the west, theres that somehow it seems that the, the, the very notion of a nations using is military or forced to defend its strategic interest has been a lot. Its considered a legitimate wheres the west is in actuality, the Largest Military blog and it has to be sad. The its, it hasnt been shy of using force in Foreign Countries in recent decades, not just in world war 2, right. But then the date is, and i think when we look at the context of american war in afghanistan or in the rocket, it cannot be described as particularly discriminated. So why do you think so many people a shock that the russia would use . Its military or forced to defend what it repeatedly described publicly described as a frag. The major part of the problem is this call it the parochial nature of the United States. The vast majority of the us citizens are not well read. They 2, they pay very little attention to uh, Foreign Policy and they would have trouble located in ukraine on a map. And as a result, theyve been very susceptible to a steady stream of propaganda that has painted russia as this aggressive imperial pal. Youll hear the Many Americans talk about the imperial ambitions of russia, completely clueless about the reality to that of since 1990. The only country in the world that has carried out expeditionary military operations in more than 6 other countries is United States, not russia. So when you try to point out to people, the fact that if the United States was facing of Chinese Military activity in mexico or Russian Military activity in mexico or in canada, United States would take action. We would use that as a direct threat to us. Yet when the United States does the same thing to russia by, in fact, over the last us 2014, if carried out over 8 military exercises with nato and us troops and, and ukraine. That of the russia could only interpret as a preparation to attack russia. And yet, in the United States, you dont see that at all is provocative for a, as a, causing the russians to, to react. Now, is it done being clueless or is it them assuming that you know the United States to has the right to do whatever it wants . Because its on the right side of history and russia simply for whatever reason and kind of use the resources at its disposal. To defend its own. So the, i think is, i think what were looking at is clue, look, clueless us. And then the people that have been overwhelmed with propaganda says, you know, when, when ever the United States has faced about an opportunity to get engaged overseas. Theyve taken advantage of the noise painted it in terms of were fighting them there so we dont have to fight them here. That this isnt the pursuit of freedom of so you know, the states invaded, rocked twice, and didnt leave that country any more feet or prosperous. The same thing for afghanistan, upward engaged, were currently engaged in syria with absolutely no legal justification. And yet, the vast majority of americans arent even aware of that kind of involvement. So it is its, its really a function of the lack of education in this country. And the control of information which has become really said to me, i like you, im old enough to remember the days of the cold war during the seventies and eighties when we saw on the soviets side a control of information and, and of the failure to tell the truth about a lot of states. Well, now weve seen the roles reversed. The United States is operating very much like the old days of prov, done toss under the soviets. You pointed out in other interviews that victory in uh, in, in, in our home. So it depends not only on whether you happen to find yourself on the us, a good us assign good or right side of history. But also, im pretty practical factors, manpower, and your access to weapons, as well as the ability of your man to operate all those weapons. And when we look at a, these hard data, its pretty clear that theres a huge gap between what your brain has to and what russia has and what the russian may have, you know, a couple of years or months down the line. Now i can understand that is a, this is not an interesting subject for le, public, but i cant believe that the american generals or native generals would not know these will not know about this gap. Why are they, you know, sort of going along with the story and the, the high morales, the grades, ukrainian soldiers will ultimately deliver the fixture in the thats the, one of the most remarkable and disturbing developments in the course of this uh, you know, the last 18 months since the start of the military operation, and in your train, the number of retired generals and were talking people were 3 the lower 3 and 4 stars, which meant that they were at the top of, of the military permit. People like david to trade spend hodges, who was the commander of the, to the in europe or the european command of the others. Like Stanley Mcchrystal and 10 jack t, you dont really go down the list. They all keep failing to acknowledge the logistics reality of whats taking place in this war. That for example, they all of a said that we need to look at the parallels of the United States and fading a rock. And that was our, our, our ability to overcome the sit on. So army was made possible because we had the air supremacy. And then in the next breath, they talk about ukraine being able to break through russian defensive lines. And you have acknowledging your crane to not have anything approaching our supremacy. They are on the opposite end of that spectrum. They have no air force that can effectively challenge or attack russian lines. It is rushed to that it has their supremacy. Now, mr. Mason, just the main subject here and ask you, what do you see of the main reason . Because again, the American Public can be clueless. So you kind of blame that for that, but military or war fighting is a profession. I mean, these people are being taught ridiculous. They have no decades of experience. They are supposed to know this stuff. Why do you think theyre going along with this fantasy thinking . Because as you said before, i mean they, they, they, they participated in all the competing, they know that its not just about what you imagine, its actually happening on the ground. Well, part of that is, thats kind of people that have been selected for command. The process is, its a bureaucratic process where those who dont ask critical questions. Those who do not engage with Critical Thinking dont get promoted. The people that get promoted or the folks that are saying, hey boss, thats a great idea or the, they do the staff work and provide this gentleman with choices. And all they have to do is say, im going to take a, b, or c my, you know, like choosing what the eat off of a chinese menu of. So when they get to these, the top positions, very rarely are you dealing with people who have demonstrated great Critical Thinking skills and independence skills. They dont do their own righty as they dont do their own analysis. They depend upon others for that. So that once theyre out of the military, they no longer have that kind of staff to do that work for them, so theyre left to on their own devices. And so what were seeing are basically people who have the lots of experience, but theyre not very intelligent. Theyre not very smart. They dont know how to do Critical Thinking. I mean im, you know, im not presenting myself with some g d a so i can figure out that if one side of the engaged in the conflict is firing a 100 but artillery rounds and the other side it aspiring a 1000 rounds back. That, that the, the, the side this fire were going to 1000 rounds, pass the advantage off the human told to this mass because i mean, this is firing only a 100 rounds. I mean is, is forced to lose many more people. Do you think that those, all those folks for glorifying the debris of your cranium soldiers and the grape ukrainian nation that actually carrying about the fact rather than ukrainian soldiers were leave to see another day . You know, theres, theres absolutely, theres 0 regard for the faith to the ukrainians. And in fact the, to, to manage the number of actual casualties and it, while exaggerating rushes casualties. Again, the target audience for that is just simply to persuade the American People to continue to support what is a lost cause. And the nature of that last cause has become more apparent. You get people like david to trace this to retire general. He also was the head of the c i a he just said the other day that that unlike rush of ukrainians, there are 5 being cuz the they look over their shoulders, they look back at their homeland. Thats what gives administration. And here, you know, completely clueless about russias history and fending off foreign invaders, making this chronic conflict even more relevant, given the neo nazi elements that dominate in ukraine, in the modern or in the modern era. The, the resurrection of people like stuff and bundle. So theyre dealing with a genuine nazi threat and they dont understand how that resonates among the people of russia who still carry the memory to world war 2. Most americans are forgotten about world war 2, but thats not the case in russia because so Many Russians died in that conflict. Absolutely, and thank you for Still Holding that the memory and bringing that history to a wider audience has. But so the time being we have to take a very short break, but we will be back in just a few moments say to the the welcome back to all the parts with Larry Johnsons former analyst with the Us Central Intelligence Agency, n c, o or burg associates isnt johnson before the break were, were talking about um, how one wins of war and whether the high morale is his enough for weapons or for training your soldiers properly. And you pointed out that the russians to have a deep spirited interest in and there are many volunteers for going to the front lines. But that in itself is not enough. The government has to provide no equipment and training so that the people survive. And this is one of what i want to ask you about because in the last couple of months, there is a new phrase that enter the russian vernacular. And i think i would term it as a unit or 2 procedure. This is something that you cannot import. I mean, even if you have the manpower, if you have the weapons, you need to make sure that the, you know, people can operate together effectively. And its not just a types of, you know, technical thing. Its a psychological thing as well. Um, and i know that from my insurance with uh for and gas that many uh, military professionals in other countries are watching that looking at how these conflict develops and how, you know, all the various background read the their watches providing can be all paraded and how successful, theyve been operated. What kind of lessons do you think theyre drawing at this point in as well, theyre certainly not accurately, per train. What is occurring in russia. They are projecting onto russia. The actual things that are transpiring in your training, for example, theyre talking about the poor, military leadership, the russia russians, generals, or exercises, that theres poor morale among the russian troops. That these conscripts that are forced into the Russian Military are poorly trained and poorly equipped. Now, none of that is true and what we know throughout history, regardless of the army that troops when they get it and get patient combat, they fight for each other. Up. What weve seen from russia is a Methodical Development of its troops and providing them adequate training over time. And thats the Training Service to purposes, primarily one big equip them with the skills they need to have to survive in a combat environment. But to, to build that unit, cohesion as they, as they get to know each other, they get to work together. They work on common task that builds a bond of, of that in last through callbacks. But what youre getting on the ukraine side is to drag and people off the street boys as young as 1617 years of age, and mid the, the 4th, 50 years of age and older though they just had the other day, the Financial Times reported a 71 year old guy that had been dragged into a to be a tank code running a tank. And hes been training in germany. I mean, this is unheard of. So it and when the ukrainians are only getting 4 or 5 weeks of military training at that level, is that not enough time to acquire the military skill to go into combat. But they dont develop the kind of unit cohesion which is also a critical factor. And so that, thats what the west is missing, they, they continue to paint russia as a Cartoon Version of a military without understanding. Is this a very serious military and quite capable . Lets talk about this one there. Weapon phenomenon, this ever expanding at least still flat supplies to ukraine. Can you explain the logic of this ever increasing nomenclature of weapons without addressing the quantity gap . Because even if youre supply, you know, all the times from all over the world to ukraine, thats not going to make your cravings more capable. If uh, if the numbers of those tangs a limited let alone if they dont know how to operate them. Yes, this is hollywood falls. I have a guardian because in hollywood youve got the silver bullet, the carrier tells the werewolf or the garlic that kills dracula. Or photo is the, you know, the ring of power thats going to control. The world is increases mentality that there is one kind of magical weapon that can change the entire landscape. And its just not true. You know, weve seen it over and over and over in the course of this conflict. You know, 1st it was the arrival of the emperor triple 7 howitzer with a 155 millimeters shells. Boy, that was going to be a game changer. Keep hearing that word. Then the high bars. No, no, thats going to be the game changer. And then now theyre the cluster munitions call, another game changer. The tanks, game changer f sixteens, the future game changer. None of the works that it, that has all of these weapon systems depend upon the most important factor, which is having the ability to actually do combined arms and having groups that are trained and properly led to tax. It gets those commands. So the weapons, those weapon systems are nice add ons, and they do provide some capability, but it is not the game changer and, and what you really have is i call is stuck as a hollywood legacy. It is convince people to believe that there is the magic weapon to come back and turn things around. Now speaking about this whole of with an influence or indoctrination, i would say i think well if its in my opinion, one of the secondary goals of this mail at your operation is to do away with this american mantra. That perception is reality. And i think that the americans and the west centers the ukrainians are still a student still seem to be convinced. The perception trumps every thing. Wheres the russians have a pretty much, well, they dont have many cook capabilities in and when it comes to in the global informational more. But i think the main focus is on creating, shaping and maintaining the realities on the ground. And the gap between the perception and the actual reality is widening. I wonder how, how long i am going to give it before it will become impossible to sustain it before the best narrative that is being set to global audiences will collapse on itself. I think were approaching that in game because youre, youre correct. You know, we, weve got historical examples of this fo