Hi everyone, Glenn Dyson here and I'm joined today by Alexander Mercuris and also Glenn Greenwald,

who has on several occasions done the world with his excellent reporting.

And yeah, the topic we really wanted to discuss with you today was escalation in Ukraine

and what seems to be the media's excitement or at least a very supportive role towards

this end. As we see now, well, Ukraine is very much exhausted. The front lines appear to be collapsing

and we see that the NATO response has been to send long-range weapons to strike inside Russian

territory.

The French are rumored to send troops, and across Europe we are looking at how to squeeze some more bloods out of the Ukrainians by either encouraging Ukraine to a lower

conscription age for its soldiers, but also we're now speaking openly about deporting Ukrainian

refugees to refill the trenches.

So I guess my first question would be, what are the strategic thinking here in terms of

where is this going? Are there any more steps on the escalation ladder after this?

And how is even a NATO victory defined from your perspective?

Well, first of all, thank you for having me back.

It's great to talk to you guys again.

You know, I'm big fans of the work that you do, so I'm always happy to come on.

I think this question really goes to the heart of the problem, which is at the beginning of

the war, when the Russians sent this large force into Ukraine, NATO and the United States made these

sweeping proclamations about their war aims and how they defined victory. They didn't say

that they wanted to prevent the Ukrainians from conquering or the Russians from conquering Ukraine.

They didn't say they wanted to expel the Russians from this new territory that they were now occupying.

They made these maximalist proclamations about how victory would be defined,

...