🤔 Trump’s Ukraine Plan Falling Apart? | “Throwing in the Towel?” – CrossTalk Debate

4/23/2025

🧩 Is Trump’s Ukraine strategy already unraveling?

In this intense episode of CrossTalk, host Peter Lavelle is joined by Ryan Cristian, Thomas Fazi, and Drago Bosnic to explore the growing frustration in Washington as the new administration realizes that ending the Ukraine conflict “in a day” was never realistic.

Key topics discussed:
🔹 Trump’s campaign promises vs. real geopolitical challenges
🔹 Why Russia seeks lasting peace, not just a quick deal
🔹 Can Trump simply walk away—or is he now trapped in this conflict?
🔹 Is the U.S. heading for another foreign policy failure?

🎙️ A must-watch debate on diplomacy, strategy, and what comes next in Ukraine.

📢 Like, Comment & Subscribe for deeper insights into global politics and power moves.

#CrossTalk #UkraineWar #TrumpUkraine #RyanCristian #ThomasFazi #DragoBosnic #Geopolitics #Trump2024 #RussiaUkraine #ForeignPolicy #TrumpStrategy #USPolitics #WarAndPeace #GlobalAffairs #ConflictResolution #DiplomacyFail #PoliticalAnalysis #UkraineConflict #RussiaPeace #USAdministration

Transcript

00:00Hello and welcome to Crosstalk, where all things are considered. I'm Peter Lavelle.

00:25The new administration in Washington is frustrated. Ending the Ukraine conflict in a day was nothing

00:31more than campaign hype. And Trump's whole approach is flawed. He wants a deal. The

00:37Russians want a lasting peace. Thus, the impasse. Can Trump simply walk away?

00:42Crosstalking Ukraine. I'm joined by my guest, Ryan Christian in Nashville. He is founder and

00:56editor of The Last American Vagabond and host of The Daily Wrap-Up. In Rome, we have Thomas Fadzi.

01:03He is an author as well as columnist for the British Unheard and the American Compact

01:08Magazines. And in Serbia, we cross to Drago Bosnich. He is a geopolitical and military

01:13analyst. All right, gentlemen, Crosstalk rules in effect. That means you can jump anytime you want.

01:17And I always appreciate it. Ryan, let me go to you first. And in Nashville, at the end of last week,

01:22Marco Rubio apparently speaking for Donald Trump, saying that their patience is running out. They

01:27want some kind of deal. It'll basically be a plague on both your houses if an agreement isn't made.

01:32Then we heard yesterday that Trump is going to announce sometime this week, in the next few days,

01:39his plan. Now, you know, as usual, there's always leaks. And from what I can discern,

01:45this is a plan that's dead on arrival. So what's the whole point of this here?

01:51There's so many different areas that we can go with this. Ryan, you start out first.

01:57Well, I mean, I'm very pessimistic when it comes to government processes in general. But when it comes

02:02to something like this, especially when it's wildly politicized, I don't believe, cut to the

02:07chase, I don't believe there's any real interest, especially coming from the Western Ukrainian side

02:10of any actual peace, just like we've seen in the Israel dynamic, is that ultimately,

02:15and even going back to like Yemen and Saudi Arabia, like the continuing effort that I've seen

02:19from usually Western ceasefire proposals is that the argument is laid out and some kind of a

02:24self-serving dynamic. And if it's accepted, it's abused nonetheless. There's no real stop.

02:29There's no real stop to the aggression. And we've seen this from the Ukrainian forces going well

02:34back before this current iteration of the war, from Donbass and so on. And so, I mean,

02:39they've repeatedly shown themselves to not really take these things at face value or even care about

02:44them at all. And that's my opinion. And so when it comes to this new head, I don't believe that

02:48they would take at face value the claims that have been offered. And typically the deals go back and

02:51forth and it's clear that it's one-sided in nature. And so right now, I don't see why Russia would

02:56engage with this honestly expecting anything different. And so right now, I think what this

03:02is about is trying to prolong this in a way that makes, personally from an American perspective,

03:06Donald Trump's interest appears as if he's a peacemaker in this process. And I think right

03:11now what we're seeing is this kind of spinning out and elongating this in hopes that he can offer

03:15like some kind of a positive trade agreement to either side in hopes that this somehow at least

03:20falls into some sort of ceasefire breakdown or a pause so he can benefit himself and say that he

03:25stopped all this. That's the genuine perspective for me. And I think it's only going to get worse

03:29unless we go back to the kind of the original borders from where this began. And really Donbass

03:34and Crimea for the main part is where Russia wants to be pulled back from, I think. And if that gets

03:39to that point, then we'll see some kind of a stop in this. Yeah. Well, Thomas, I think that the problem

03:44is it's one side is zigging and the other is zagging. I mean, the Russian position has been made very,

03:50very clear over and over and over again. Steve Witkoff should know it by now, by heart. I mean,

03:56it was spent five and a half hours with Putin. I mean, did he get the message? Apparently he did,

04:02but it's not going to work out the way that he, the way he explained it to Trump, apparently,

04:07because as I said in my introduction, the Russians, I'd want a lasting peace. They want this thing to be

04:12wrapped up. So it's not going to start all over again in two or three or five years. Donald Trump just

04:18wants a ceasefire. He wants a win. That's what he's looking for. He's not looking for peace.

04:24Thomas. Yeah, I think it's not surprising at all that these negotiations aren't going anywhere.

04:29I mean, I think we've spoken endlessly these past few years about the failure of the Minsk

04:33agreements, right? But what the U.S. or what the West is offering now is in many ways even worse

04:38than the Minsk agreements. At least that was on paper a comprehensive agreement where most Western

04:42governments were nominally at least on board, even though we now know that from the perspective of a lot

04:47of countries, especially the U.S., that was just a ploy to give Ukraine time to rearm and prepare

04:51for a full-scale war against Russia. So from Russia's perspective, I think what the West and

04:57the U.S. is offering now is even less than that. I mean, on the one hand, you've got Western

05:02governments, unlike back then, at least on paper, are very divided about what to do with the situation.

05:08You have the U.S. on one side apparently willing to concede to some of Russia's demands,

05:13especially in terms of recognizing Russia's control over Eastern and the Southern territories

05:17of Ukraine. But then you have several Western European governments that continue to talk about

05:21restoring Ukraine's full territorial integrity and supporting Ukraine for as long as it takes,

05:26and even saying that that is a precondition for any deal, which is, of course, a non-starter

05:31for Russia. Now, I think the U.S. could maybe potentially force a deal on Ukraine and even on the

05:37Europeans by completely withdrawing military support for Ukraine. I think there's an argument to be made

05:42about that. But I think beyond that, and this is where Trump comes into play, I think it's also

05:46clear that Trump doesn't seem to be willing to engage with Russia on its wider security and

05:53geopolitical demands beyond Ukraine's territorial, beyond Ukraine's territories. And that mainly means

06:00in European security architecture, a new geopolitical deal, a new reform of the international system that

06:06avoids these proxy wars from happening again in the future. And that means redefining the global balance

06:11of power. I mean, what Russia wants is really a geopolitical grand bargain, I think. And Trump

06:17doesn't seem to be ready or willing to concede to Russia's demands on these points. And I think

06:24that's because he's ultimately still beholden to a kind of supremacist view of American power,

06:29where he sees ending Ukraine just as one step towards restoring American dominance in the world

06:35by focusing on what he considers to be the main enemy, China. But of course, this is the exact

06:40opposite of what Russia is demanding, right, in geopolitical terms. So you can see why, you know,

06:45this is really not going anywhere. I think there's also a lack of diplomatic abilities when it comes to

06:51America and the Trump administration. I mean, America hasn't, America hasn't had to, hasn't

06:57been involved in serious diplomacy for a long time now. And you can clearly see that nowadays. I mean,

07:03often watching these negotiations, it feels a bit like watching a wrestler trying to play a chess game

07:08with a chess master. You know, it's like, you can see why he's struggling, right? Because it's not

07:14something that he's used to do. Well, obviously, I agree with you. They want to deal with the larger

07:18European security issues. And that's the, at the heart of all of it. You know, unfortunately for

07:23Ukraine, it's a footnote in all of this here. Drago, I mean, the, the, the problem for the Trump

07:28people was created by the Biden people is that the United States is not a mediator. It is a party to

07:35this conflict. And that is what Trump can't seem to comprehend is that it just is that Thomas just

07:41said there, just pull the plug on Ukraine. Okay. That'll end the war in a matter of a day's weeks.

07:46Okay. But no, he wants to be a mediator. It's, it, it can't work that way. That's why this is

07:52dysfunctional. Drago. Yeah, exactly. Just what you said. The U S is still providing certain weapons

07:59to Ukraine. And that's why it cannot be a mediator or some sort of neutral side. I think Trump realizes

08:07that it's just that he doesn't want to say it out loud because then he has to admit that the United

08:12States has been strategically defeated in Ukraine. And of course, that's bad for votes. You know,

08:17you need to win the next election. You need wins. You need geopolitical wins for the United States

08:24because the Biden administration has been disastrous in that regard. They lost the war in Afghanistan.

08:31They've essentially not been able to project American power in the Middle East,

08:35effectively at least. So if we don't count Syria, so of course, Trump needs something to,

08:43you know, some sort of a win. And of course, the U S being on a downward spiral in its geopolitical

08:49power, it needs a way out of Ukraine, but a way without making it seem like a loss.

08:55Well, I mean, but so this is all about narrative, right? That's, that's all this is what this is

09:00about. Yeah. That's just what, you know, Ryan, um, what Trump and his people need to do is try to,

09:06how to, how to spin it as a win. Okay. I mean, a win for them and a strategic defeat for Russia,

09:12which is of course devoid from, uh, divorced from reality. Ryan.

09:17Right. I agree. And what I think, I think it's also worth considering a more, a higher elevation

09:22view in all of this that, I mean, that I think static reality that clearly they're trying to

09:27just project, I mean, more than ever, at least for an American perspective, just yelling what

09:31they want to be the truth. Even if it's the diametric opposite, it's a crazy time, but,

09:35but I think it's worth considering that there may be something else going on in all of this in

09:38regard to, I mean, we all can see actions that are being taken that are very destructive. Like,

09:43I mean, like an inherent level to like fundamental American perspectives or global dynamics. And

09:47why would that be the case? Why is it a benefit to continue to, I mean,

09:51I would argue right now, the obvious benefit to Trump would be to legitimately project something

09:55that they might actually agree to. And you could probably, I would argue, force Ukraine through

10:00their funding for both Israel and the United States and their, and their influence on their

10:04actions to agree to probably what they would want to happen there. And that would be a huge win for

10:07Trump, wouldn't it? From every perspective. So why is that not the immediate game? Like,

10:11why is it that they go for something that seems designed to fail? I think there's more of a

10:15engineered destruction to a lot of this. I think Israel plays a major part in this.

10:19They both fund the Azov movement going back a long way. And I think a lot of this is proxy

10:23elements and just destabilization. And I could argue a lot of reasons. I think that might be

10:27the case, but I think we can see that this is in a way designed to cause sort of the collapse,

10:32at least like of an American, I guess, influence in the world. And I don't know if that makes sense

10:38to people outside of understanding how much I think Israel's influencing US policy, but I just think

10:43it's worth considering that it may not be just kind of a bumbling Trump administration,

10:46but more so a designed kind of tactic.

10:49Yeah, but it's already been mentioned here before, is that the US doesn't have much practice with

10:54diplomacy. This is a real handicap, Thomas, for the Trump administration. You know, you have

11:00National Security Advisor Waltz. I mean, he has no idea what diplomacy is at all. Go ahead, Thomas.

11:07Yeah, absolutely. I think there's that. And I think there's also what we may call maybe a

11:12temporal mismatch in a sense that Trump started out with what seemed to be an understanding

11:16that the US is overstretched, it's empirically overstretched, and that the current global

11:22arrangement is not working in America's interests anymore. And hence his focus on ending US

11:27involvement in Ukraine and also reshoring manufacturing to the US and finding a new

11:32arrangement in US-China relations. I think the problem is that all this requires time, right?

11:38This is a very long-term process. It's the time which I think Trump knows he doesn't have because

11:44he's working on a limited timescale, you know, four years at best. And I think this is why,

11:49you know, he seems to be wanting to solve all these problems as quickly as possible. And

11:53paradoxically, this is having the opposite effect. It's accelerating all these crises. It's

11:58entrenching these crises. And as was mentioned, not just in Ukraine, but we're seeing the same

12:01thing playing out in the Middle East in terms of US-China relations. And so I think part of the

12:06problem is also structural in a sense that the limited sort of cycle of US and Western politics

12:12more in general doesn't seem to allow for the kind of long-term planning that solve these prices

12:17requires. All right, gentlemen, I have to jump in here. We're going to go to a quick break. And

12:21after that quick break, we'll continue our discussion on Ukraine. Stay with RT.

12:31Welcome back to Crosstalk, where all things are considered. I'm Peter Lavel. To remind you,

12:35we're discussing Ukraine.

12:45Okay, let's go back to Drago. Another issue that isn't really talked about very much,

12:50because it doesn't seem obvious to the Western world, but from a Russian perspective,

12:56the United States is at war with Russia. Now, they need to take care of that issue as well.

13:02And when American weapons and American technology and intelligence, okay, it's in a third party's

13:08hands, are killing Russians in Russia, that's war. Drago.

13:12Exactly. I mean, that's the first thing that the Trump administration has to deal with. And they

13:18haven't been able to do that yet. We see a lot of talk about, you know, the peace, but we don't see

13:24anything concrete. And as your respected guest already mentioned, the US has a problem with

13:29diplomacy. It hasn't been conducting diplomacy for decades, because for the last 35 years,

13:35there's been an entire generation of American politicians and leaders who have only relied

13:41on brute force, you know, and essentially arm-twisting other countries to do whatever

13:45they want. So, whatever the US wants, to be specific. So, that's why the US has a problem

13:52of conducting diplomacy with Russia, which has actually had to rely on diplomacy for the last

13:56three years. It has some of the world-class diplomats, such as, for example, Lavrov.

14:01So, this is the issue for the United States. They've—it has become accustomed to, you know,

14:09a very aggressive posturing, and this is impossible. It's impossible to conduct diplomacy in this way.

14:14And that's why they will have to change their viewpoint and their narrative, and, of course,

14:20the way they do things. And also, Russia understands that the United States is trying to focus on China

14:24now, and the Asia-Pacific. So, Russia has an advantage in several—on several levels, and it's willing

14:31to use it, of course, and the US is not happy about that.

14:35Yeah. I mean, you know, speaking of the lack of diplomacy, Drago, I think they started unlearning

14:43diplomacy when they destroyed the former Yugoslavia. A topic for another program.

14:49Okay. Ryan, the American administrations don't understand the word compromise as well. And I

14:58would add to that, you know, you know, I don't want to waste a lot of time on it, but, you know,

15:02not one step east, NATO expansion, the coup in Kiev in 2014, the war against the Donbass,

15:13then we had Istanbul, the Minsk process. Why should the Russians trust the Americans?

15:21Exactly. And I think it's clear that there's no honest process going on historically. Like,

15:27precedent clearly matters in all of this. And you can clearly see that there's never been a real—like

15:32I said, whether going back to Saudi Arabia and Yemen, or any other examples where the US has

15:35played this mediator role, or rather their, you know, allies, proxies, however you want to look at it,

15:39it's the same conversation, that ultimately it's never really held to those ideas. And almost every

15:45time I've seen, it's taken advantage of. And so in the same way here, like you're highlighting,

15:49is that like, for example, the Times months ago in the UK was reporting that the US helicopters were

15:55literally flying in missions with Ukrainians into Russian territory. I don't know how you can—I mean,

16:01it's actually mind-blowing to me that Russia is not in a much more—I mean, I think it behooves them

16:05to play the role they are right now, which is why they're doing it, to show the world that they're not

16:08the blustering kind of might-makes-right kind of mentality as the US, but it just doesn't make

16:13any sense that you can strong—it's the same old analogy. You can't negotiate with a gun to

16:18someone's head. That's not negotiation, right? The strong-arm tactics. And that's why I kind of

16:21keep falling back to this mindset, or at least questioning, is why is this the case? Either we

16:26found ourselves in a position through our own sort of self-fulfilling broken policy that we keep

16:30getting worse—I mean, that's what lesser of evils brings you—worse people with less insight and less

16:34diplomacy, or they're doing this for another reason. And it seems like a self-sabotaging

16:38idea. But I agree. I don't think this is going to leave anything meaningful if you go the same way.

16:42I tend to agree with you, at least in this point of time, because, Thomas, I mean,

16:47Trump's plan, is it designed to fail? Is it designed not to be accepted?

16:54Well, I mean—

16:55I mean, we haven't seen the complete outlines of it, but I think we all have a good idea.

16:59You know, Western troops—what, NATO troops? I mean, the Russians have already said that this

17:06is a non-starter. But, you know, I read in the New York Times, well, we could have Western troops,

17:11European troops, buffers, and then the Keith Kellogg character. You know, Thomas, take it away.

17:18Yeah. I mean, I think when it comes to sort of the stance of European countries and the,

17:23you know, proposals that they're making, they're clearly done in bad faith. I mean,

17:26they're specifically made in order to be rejected by Russia so that Europeans can turn around and say,

17:31oh, you see, Russia is interested in negotiations. I mean, I think that's pretty clear from the

17:35perspective of European governments and, you know, from the Zelensky government as well.

17:41It's unclear whether, you know, this is Trump's strategy as well, or if you just

17:45not understand that these are red lines that Russia is never going to accept. I mean,

17:50of course, you know, I think the question, and that's already been mentioned, is, you know,

17:53what's happening behind the scenes? I mean, Israel has been mentioned, but I think we have to

17:57also take into account the, you know, I'm sure very heavy, you know, pressure that the globalist,

18:03imperialist establishment, the US permanent security state is doing behind the scenes.

18:08I mean, I think this is clear when it comes to Europe. I mean, I think this whole idea of a

18:12Europe versus America, I mean, I think this is a very simplistic reading. I mean, this is

18:16the European, you know, kind of European leaderships are definitely opposing Trump,

18:21but that doesn't mean they're opposing, you know, the whole American establishment. In fact,

18:24I would say that they're likely, um, sort of, uh, acting in coordination with at least factions

18:30of the US. Absolutely. Absolutely. Collusion, collusion. Okay. Yeah.

18:35For sure. I think there's a lot of collusion going on there. So, and I think that,

18:39you know, and this is a problem. I mean, even assuming that Trump is in good faith,

18:42I mean, the fact that the Europeans, you know, in coordination likely with the American

18:46security state are trying to derail these negotiations is a big problem. And the question is,

18:50you know, to what extent are they also applying very strong pressure on the Trump administration

18:55itself, uh, directly? Yeah. But Drago, try to explain to me and our audience here. Okay. Trump

19:02makes the proposal, the Russians reject it. Meanwhile, the conflict in Ukraine continues

19:09and more Ukrainian soldiers, Russian ones as well, but Ukraine gets smaller and smaller. And then

19:15maybe are we going to have another round after Kharkov falls or Odessa? And it gets smaller and

19:22smaller. I mean, when can the West say yes? Well, I mean, I think the whole point is to destroy

19:29Ukraine. I think that was the plan from the get-go because, uh, NATO would rather see Ukraine destroyed

19:35than, you know, than Russia having, uh, you know, Russia controlling it. So what we see now,

19:41it's all, all just a ruse essentially. And I mean, just like the Minsk one and two were a ruse, uh,

19:46to buy time for the Kiev regime, any sort of a peace agreement now would be a ruse, uh, to,

19:51to essentially rebuild the Ukrainian military. Uh, so in, in, in this regard, we, we simply cannot

19:57have peace because, um, as the, as, as, as your respected guest said, um, the Russians simply don't

20:04have, it's not in their interest to sign any peace agreements now, because it would just buy time for the,

20:10for the Kiev regime. And in the end, they would have to do it all over again. So it's much better

20:15for the Russians to continue grinding down the Ukrainian military, destroying it, dismantling it,

20:20essentially, and also demilitarizing parts of NATO itself because NATO is providing all the weapons

20:25now because most of the old Soviet era ones have been destroyed, um, or severely damaged. So now the

20:31situation for Ukraine is only going to get worse. Uh, it's up to the Ukrainians to find some sort of, uh,

20:37agreement with the Russians, um, outside of the scope of NATO influence. But the problem is

20:42there are, there is no Ukrainian government. There is the Kiev regime, which is a NATO puppet,

20:47and it's going to continue using Ukrainians as cannon fodder in a, in a war against Russia.

20:52Yeah. If I could add one thing, jump in, jump in.

20:56Just, I think it's really important to consider as well, that that's either way works for that

20:59outcome that ultimately, let's just say they don't, the Ukrainians aren't able to make something

21:04happen. And it ultimately ends up to the absolute destruction of the Ukrainian people in Ukraine.

21:08Well, that will be used to rationalize occupation, like through NATO, through US government in a way

21:13to actually then take the territory, which I think Israel has a play in as well. And so that may very

21:17well be the design in order to not let it happen. So it can be driven to a point where they have to

21:21rationalize full on occupation against the Russian threat. That's, that's one of the things I see most

21:26likely in all this. Yeah. But Drago, what, what is going to be left of Ukraine when all of this is said and done?

21:32I mean, all of this wasted time and, and words about this minerals agreement. I mean, I, I'm still

21:39scratching my head on that one. Okay. I mean, who's going to invest in Ukraine where there's no peace?

21:44Drago. Exactly. Exactly. I think that's the main issue. I, I, I don't think this, you know,

21:49the so-called minerals deal is anything worth even discussing because first of all, the areas that,

21:55where the mining is are under Russian control, which is in the, in the, in the Southeast.

21:59Uh, so unless they're, they, they're willing to find a company that's going to invest billions

22:05of dollars in the next 10 years in a country that has been ravaged by war and left with mostly

22:09pensioners and no viable economic future. Uh, I really don't see how that's going to work. And,

22:15and I mean, it's obviously not going to work. It's just a ruse, as I said. And, uh, in, in general,

22:20uh, you know, I, I don't think even Russia is ready to, to take all of Ukraine because first of all,

22:26it would then come on Russia's, it would then become Russia's responsibility to take care of

22:31all these people. And we're talking about, well, up to 20 million people who are not going to be

22:36economically viable because most of the younger ones are going to, uh, go. And those who are going

22:40to be left are either pensioners, uh, people who have, you know, uh, people who have been wounded in

22:45the war. Um, Drago also ultra nationalists. Exactly. Exactly. So for Russia, you know,

22:53even Russia doesn't want to take responsibility of this mess because it wasn't Russia's mess.

22:58What they want to do is take the regions that they need. And that's mostly, as you mentioned,

23:03Harkov and Odessa and Nikolaev, obviously. And the rest of it is, is going to have to become

23:08this sort of a semi neutral or neutral territory. That's not going to have any foreign troops, uh,

23:14there. So that's the only acceptable deal for Russia that I see in, in the foreseeable future.

23:19Thomas, you were nodding your head. Why?

23:22No, I mean, I think, I don't know if the, uh, let's say Afghanistanization of Ukraine is plan

23:28A for Trump, but it's definitely, I think a plan B that's acceptable for him. And, you know,

23:32it's, I would think it's plan A for large parts of the American establishment. I agree with the other

23:38guests on this. I mean, at the end of the day, a lot of American foreign policy over the past,

23:42you know, decades hasn't been a bit, hasn't been about achieving military goals. It's been about

23:46destabilizing and creating chaos and using that as leverage. And I think now more than ever,

23:51what the U S is losing control of the global processes, I think more than ever, it sees chaos

23:56as one way to at least slow down those global processes, which aren't working to, you know,

24:01to its advantage. And so I think in this sense, having, you know, an Afghanistanized Ukraine,

24:06uh, is it works both in terms of creating, you know, pressures and problems for Russia,

24:12but also in terms of keeping, uh, Europe divided from, uh, Russia. So I think the context of

24:18permanently strained and permanently militarized relations between Europe and Russia, uh, is, um,

24:25you know, is a goal that's, um, I think that's, that's very, very acceptable.

24:29Yeah. But Thomas, Thomas, we're rapidly, rapidly running out of time. Do you think European voters

24:35will be asked about this policy? Oh, no. No, no. Whenever, whenever tries to run,

24:40whenever a leader tries to run on an anti-war or anti-natal platform, he tends to get removed

24:45one way or another. So I think this is one, this is another thing that we'll see. I mean,

24:49the European elites have, uh, really invested so much in this war, uh, because it's really the last

24:57remaining sort of element of legitimacy that they have. You know, we, you know, we exist to protect

25:01you from Russia and to continue fighting this war. And it also gives them a very good excuse.

25:05Yeah. But they, they, but they don't, they put, they, they, they throw money at it that they don't

25:09have and they won't throw any, uh, skin into it. This is the type of people you're dealing with.

25:13Gentlemen, fascinating discussion. We've run out of time. I want to thank my guests in Nashville,

25:17Rome, and in Serbia. And of course, I want to thank our viewers for watching us here at RT.

25:21See you next time. And remember, cross-talk rules.

25:27See you next time.

🤔 Trump’s Ukraine Plan Falling Apart? | “Throwing in the Towel?” – CrossTalk Debate | Forbidden News

Category

Transcript

Recommended