TV | RUSSIAN AGGRESSION

Welcome to the special edition of Hold the Line. I'm Buck Sexton. Look, the Russians are not new to military incursion, invasion of other sovereign countries. We understand that this is something they've done numerous times. They've gone into Georgia, They've already taken Crimea and much of the Donbass region of eastern Ukraine. They've also had a military intervention in Syria on behalf of the Assad regime. They've gone into Afghanistan back in the end of the Soviet era as well.

You'd think they might have learned a very painful and high casualty lesson from that, but it turns out their imperial ambitions continued even after the fall of the Berlin Wall. Let's take a look at current NATO nations and Russia to get a sense of where we stand here. As you can see, Russia still views itself as under threat from NATO and therefore wants to expand territorially and also in terms of its military and economic influence in ways

to counter what's happening here. Counter the NATO alliance that is arrayed was arrayed against the Soviet Union. Back in February, Putin gave a speech in which he talked about the current situation that's underway here. He said, for thirty years, we have persistently and patiently tried to reach an agreement with the leading natokas the principles of equal and inviolable

security in Europe. In response to our proposals, we constantly face either cynical deception and lies, or attempts to pressure and blackmail. While NATO, despite all our protests and concerns, continues to steadily expand. The war machine is moving and I repeat, is coming close to our borders. So here's Putin trying to explain that he viewsed this, believe it

or not. He views offensive measures such as what we're seeing right now in Ukraine with the war there, but also previous offensive measures, whether it's taking the Crimea and the Dawn Boss region, the separatist area of Eastern Ukraine, Russian backed separatism of course, and also South Ossetia and Abkhazia in Georgia. He views all of those maneuvers as defensive in nature because they are against the NATO alliance.

So this is also how he justifies military incursion military aggression against countries with which he is not at war. Putin is claiming and has claimed, including in his speech in February, that the West took Ukraine hostage. What is happening today, he said, does not come out of a desire to infringe on the interests of Ukraine and the Ukrainian people. It is related to the protection of Russia itself from those who took Ukraine hostage and are trying

to use it against our country and its people. This is fashionating. This is quite a reversal, isn't it. Here you have someone who has engaged in multiple acts of aggression against military aggression against neighboring countries and does send troops around the world when he decides as necessary, including to Syria, in order to expand Russian influence at the expense of other countries in the region, at the expense of movements determined to either out's dictators or achieved freedom,

or any number of things. He thinks that whether it's the incursion into Czechnia, which the Russians engaged in under Putin's Putin's leadership, or the various Russian incursions into neighboring territory Georgia and Ukraine, most notably, that this is fine, that this is actually defensive in nature, because Russia has to stand up for itself and its allies. Quite a

an experience of reverse psychology here. Putin, By the way, I also told the West not to intervene in Ukraine, and said to anyone who would consider interfering from the outside, if you do, you will face consequences greater than any you have faced in history. All the relevant decisions have been taken. I hope you hear me. I mean he is threatening, certainly major military reprisals against any Western country

that would try to stop this madness in Ukraine. But also in the background, many say he's essentially brandishing his nuclear arsenal in order to back up the military aggression that he has engaged in in Ukraine. Where is all of this heading. Well, we've certainly seen that Russia has used previous invasions as a testing ground for both tactics and the response from NATO and the West and the

international community. So what can we learn from those previous military military decisions that Russia has made to go into foreign countries? Does that give us some template, some insight into where this conflict in Ukraine is headed. That's what we're going to address tonight in this special We've got a great lineup of experts to give us insight into

Russia's aggressive military policies. Coming up. It was called the Soviet Union's Vietnam Moscow's nineteen seventy nine invasion of Afghanistan was devastating and devastating for the Afghan people, but it might also have been the final nail in the coffin of the Soviet Empire. What do we learn from this? Stay with us. On December twenty fourth, nineteen seventy nine, the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan. That invasion kicked off a brutal decade of warfare that would ultimately call as many

as two million lives. According to some estimates, conflict would also mark the last major military operation of the Soviet Union, which felt less than three years after the war ended. During Now for a closer look at the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, as the director of the Heritage Foundation Center from National Defense, retired Army Lieutenant General Tom Sport. Tom,

thanks for being with us, Thanks for having me, bug. Okay, So let's just understand first what was the decision making process, and given what we're seeing right now with Putin in Ukraine, might be helpful understand the calculations at the time of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, what led up to what

were they trying to achieve? Yeah, and so Afghanistan had had a Marxist communist puppet regime if you will, for a couple of years prior to their invasion, but that regime was kind of under pressure from the Islamist in Afghanistan and they were actually losing that war. And so the Soviet Union under that Secretary Braznev starting to get

the sense that Afghanistan was going to collapse. And was that that reading of what was going on in Afghanistan that ultimately caused them to choose to intervene in Afghanistan? How did it go in the early phase as the Soviets ramped up military operations there against the Afghan resistance, they clearly had air superiority. I mean, how did the military operations look in the early phase of what turned into a decade long war. Yeah, the Soviets had initially

a great success. I guess you would say they dropped airborne troops right into the capital Kabul. They were successful and finding the guy that was acting as president at the time and essentially neutralizing him, taking the reins of power, and then capturing the major cities of Afghanistan. So you think Kandahar and others, those fell relatively quickly to the Soviets, unlike you know what we are seeing in the Ukraine today.

And so I think you'd have to say that the first few months the Soviets had to been happy with how things went. Now, what were some of the changing the tipping points, if you will, or some of the momentum shifts that occurred with the Mujahadeen And why was it that the course of this conflict sort of to turn against the Soviets. Yeah, the Mushadean even before the Soviets got there were a powerful fighting force. That's you know, that is what they do, that's their history. And so

they were never a cohesive one group of Muhadeen. They were multiple war lords, but they kind of coalesced, and frankly, the Soviet invasion of their country really kind of made them have a common enemy that they all gathered around.

And there were at least eighty eight hundred different Muhahadeen bases that they worked out of the support of multiple nations, including the United States, the UK, Pakistan, and surprisingly enough even at the time, China helped keep the Muhadeen supplied and they became over time a more and more effective force, employing famously Stinger missiles to bring down Soviet hind helicopters

and the like. So the changing of the advantage that the Soviets had from the air specifically, that was I mean, this is known to most people as it's depicted in the movie Charlie Wilson's War, right that that was actually a major tactical shift then away from the complete air dominance superiority of the Soviets had had because of those Stingers. Yeah, that and plus the Muhadeen really controlled the countryside. So the Soviets kept and held the major cities, they really

never lost any of them to the Muchadeen. But the countryside, the roads, the connecting roads, those are really under the Muhadein's control. And so in a situation like that, you can never really consolidate power if you only can venture out of the city's in limited situations. So there was almost from the start the Soviets were in trouble in

that invasion. What was the political calculation like for the Soviets towards towards the end of it too, It was it just purely casualties in a sense that the military wasn't going to accomplish the mission of installing a communist puppet regime in Cobble. I mean, what brought about the end of the conflict, Yeah, a realization that they were not winning. They were just it was just a stalemate.

They had a change of leadership. Corbetchov came in, you know, widely viewed as a reformist kind of leader for the Soviet Union. He could see that they were spending billions of rubles, had spent thousands of lives, and really had nothing to show for it, and so like in other areas, Corbetchov decided to reduce their losses in that area and started the withdrawal, I want to say, in around nineteen

eighty seven and it ended in nineteen eighty nine. Did you give us a sense of the kind of suppression tactics and the level of brutality that the Soviets willing to engage into in military parliamce perhaps pacify to two oppress the resistance in Afghanistan? We know there was a very high civilian casualty account. What were the tactics that the Soviets used, What kind of of tactics and maneuvers

were they deploying? And the Soviets used what are widely recognized as war crimes to kind of suppress the Afghans. So they slaughtered entire villages that had, you know, had the temerity to fight back against the Soviets. They raped the women of Afghanistan, they killed millions of Afghans, bombed schools, churches, hospitals, and so really the sky is the limit when you when you want to think about what went on in Afghanistan and what they did to the poor people of

that country. Still unable to break the back of the resistance though, as we know, and the Soviets had an ignominious withdrawal at the end of this. Some say that the ultimate collapse of the Soviet Union, if not triggered by, was hastened at least by this failed war, this failed military invasion of Afghanistan. What do you say to that.

I think that's very true. And so, you know, we think about the big moments, you know, Ronald Reagan saying, mister Gorbachev, tear this wall down, and we think about the Star Wars initiative. I think you have to put the war in Afghanistan and their failure there and all the millions of dollars of rubles they spent there that really I think helped to bring down that evil regime.

And as we look today at the situation in Ukraine, do you feel that there are lessons learned from the international community and from the Western Powers about what happened to the Soviets in Afghanistan and what should be applied now to Ukraine. Yeah, I think there's a lot of lessons. There's a lot of similarities, I mean, and there's a lot of differences to the Soviets thought they were going to have great I think initial success in the Ukraine

and underestimated the resistance there. And you can see the same thing playing out again in the Ukraine now, and so I think that it's hard for the Ukrainian people. I think making a difference. We can't see it now because we're so close to the conflict. Now, as we zoom back and as we see this maybe from a little bit more distance, I think we're going to see that their bravery is going to make a huge difference. Tenant, Colonel, thanks so much for being with us. We appreciate it, sir,

Thank you, sir. In nineteen ninety two, a small territory known as chechney And declared its independence from the Russian Federation, a move that would lead to two brutal wars with Russia and cost thousands of lives. When we come back, Jim Brooke of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies joins us to give his insight into the Chechen Wars. Stay with us. A year after the fall of a Soviet Union, Chechen, a small territory in Russia's southwestern region,

declared independence from the Russian Federation. Unlike other republics. At the time, Chechny's independence was rejected by Moscow and would spark two wars. Of the course of the next decade and a half. Chechen separatists waged a brutal guerrilla war against Russian forces, and the wars would ultimately cost tens of thousands of Russian and Chechen lives. Join me now is Russia Ukraine. Fellow at the Foundation for Defensive Democracies

and former Moscow bureau chief for Bloomberg Jim Brook. Jim, thanks for being with us. Thank you so, John. Let's start with the first Chechen War, which started in nineteen ninety four. What's the background on this and why, for example, wouldn't the Russians after the fall of the Soviet Union

allow cheching us a seed like other territories. Head well, Chession is an overwhelmingly Muslim population, a long history of mountain guerrillas, fierce fighters, and the Russians are afraid of letting Chessnion go because there's a whole swath in Russia. It could cut the country and a half that is Muslim tartistown, but shorts a stand some of the little stands there They happen to be called they're on the Volga,

and they could literally cut Russia in half. So first Yeltsen then Putin wanted to send a very clear message to the other Islamic majority republics which are inside Russia that they were not going to get independence and the country would not be cut in half. And so how did hostilities begin and what was the so that the Russians went in under what pretext into Chechi in nineteen ninety four obviously to stop the stop the secession movement there,

But how how was it in the early days. Obviously we're looking at the situation Ukraine now trying to figure out if there are any parallels or you know, strategic comparisons in dral Yeah, and your video shows terrible parallels. It was basically scorched earth. It started off with the ethnic Chechen members of the Red Army basically formed their own army and took their own weapons with them, and

there was a Chech in general who became president. They launched their own war genocide against ethnic Russians, and they fought Russia into a stalemate. They got independence recognized by virtually nobody. And that brings up to about nineteen ninety nine two thousand, when Putin was up for the presidency.

Then things get very sinister. There were three apartment bombings in the Russian part of Russia which killed hundreds of people, and the third one they discovered some FSB which is the later KGB operatives, basically piling fertilizer into the basement of a building. These men were detained arrested. But the thinking is that Putin and his FSB cohorts planned these terrible apartment bombings, I say, killed hundreds of people to rally the country behind him and his tough policies. With Chechia.

I was sort of in and out of Russia around that time. By the time I got there, which is two thousand and six, the war was still going on. And I visited Chesnia Grosny the capitol, in twenty twelve, and it was like a disneyland. It was everything was cute. Avery's rebuilt. There was even a toy Orthodox church. He had leveled Grosny, the capital of Chechia. It looked like Stalingrad. It had been totally leveled, and then when he got

control again of Chesnia, he rebuilt it. So that's a scary parallel that he basically destroyed the capitol and destroyed this so called country in order to keep it inside underneath the Russian umbrella. How did I know? There were two Chechen conflicts, and we're trying to give at least some background here on both of them. Everybody watching the

first Chechen War ended, how and why? The church first Chester War ended basically with a victory of the guerrillas, and Yelson drudgingly kind of gave up, and the gorillas announced a independent nation which is recognized by virtually nobody, and that lasted for two or three years, and then the socially when Putin came back, the Russian side to have another go at it and used even tougher strategies, including essentially carpet bombing, really destroying the city. So so

that would be the second, the second conflict. So let's say that the first, the first Chechen incursion into Chechen fails. Yelson says, all right, and there's a something of a day facto independence for chech being during that period, as you say, doesn't get everybody to actually recognize in the international scene. Then Putin takes charge and nineteen ninety nine again in nineteen ninety nine, they roll in and different tactics. What's what's the approach? Well, as I said, it scores

to earth. Now, the Chechens had a lot of Saudi Jahadist money, so they were not orphans. Let's say on the international scene, they had money and weapons. And I think one of the Saudi kings threatened several years ago. You know, we can turn Cheching it back on a centister threat. But to answer your question, bouten one control of Chechi through very vicious brutal methods scored short. I said, heavy bombing, tons of civilians were killed and basically batted

them into submission. And when I moved to Moscow in two thousand and six, it went on for several more years. But there was a huge amount of sensitivity in Russia too, dead soldiers coming back, and there are these committees and mothers of soldiers and the burials were hidden, and they really did not want to repeat of Afghanistan, although they they lost thousands of men in Chess by all accounts.

So there are reports right now that there are specific Chechen fighters men loyal to catterall right, the authority character leader of Czechnia that they're going to be fighting that they are fighting in Ukraine. What can you tell us about that? Well, they're apparently Chechens on both sides. Chechens are very brutal fighters. Their national sport is wrestling. They really enjoy fighting. They're natural born fighters, knife fighters, gun fighters.

And the Chechens who lost the war against Putin have either been an exile in Europe or elsewhere and they've come back to join the Ukrainians. So the Ukrainian government has a few Chechens on their side, and then the Russian government has said sent Chechens into Ukraine, reportedly to assassinate President Zelenski. And we know the Chechens have been in the Russian controlled parts of southeastern Ukraine since twenty fourteen. Oh further ago, I don't know. There's a very interesting memorial.

The World War Two Museum in Kiev has a section to the foreign volunteers Chechens and Georgians who come to fight in Ukraine against the Russians. So this is not totally new that men Chechen and Georgian men looking for a chance to shoot Russians would go to Ukraine. Jim, we want to come back in a second here and talk about Georgia. Stay with us if you would please, because back in two thousand and eight, Vladimir Putin invaded the Republic of Georgia using a lot of the same

pretexts we're seeing here in Ukraine present day. When we come back, we'll be rejoined by Jim Brooke, who's going to give insight on the Russo Georgian War and how some of those tactics are being replayed right now in Ukraine. Stay with us. Many consider it the first European war of the twenty first century. In two thousand and eight, Russia invaded the Republic of Georgia, a former Soviet state

which had achieved independence in nineteen ninety one. The war would only last two weeks and had ended with Russia's recognition of two regions in Georgia as independent of Khazia and South Ossetia. Although these two areas are not internationally recognized, they become de facto countries closely aligned with Russia, and outcome many believe Vladimir Putin wants to repeat in Ukraine.

Joining once again is Russia. Ukraine fellow at the Foundation for Defensive Democracies and former Moscow Bureau chief for Bloomberg Jim Brooke, Jim, thanks so much, Thank you buy And I was also the VA Voice American bureau chief in Moscow, which brought me to places like Georgia and Grosne, which you just mentioned. Indeed, so the Russian invasion of Georgia Gym is seen by many today as the most analogous to Putin's invasion of Ukraine on a number of levels.

Could he just walk us through what was the pretext for Russia's invasion of Georgia. What were the factors at play right before and in the run up to this, Yeah, Black, very good question. I was in George of the first week of the war, just almost by accident, and then in the fag of war we really didn't know what was going on. But now journalists and historians have put

together the TikTok the timeline. What happened was that George W. Bush went to the NATO summit in Bucharest in April and strongly urged Europe to accept Georgia and Ukraine as members of NATO. The Germans, of the French and the Brits kind of pushed the whole thing off until December. The Russians got very alarmed and we now know within a week started drawing up a plan to invade Georgia. The same time the Russian Duma, as president putin to

recognize these two separatist areas of separate republics. I bring this up because all this happened again with Ukraine. Then the Russian railroad troops. When Animajazia reinforced the railroad, which and where the Russian railroad troops go, soldiers followed, so people should have drawn connections there. Then there were two weeks of maneuvers just north of the Georgian border. And when the maneuvers are over, they left behind a thousand

pieces of equipment. They did not go home. I'm talking about armored personnel carriers, tank trucks, chiefs, the sort of thing. That weekend, and when I was in Georgia that weekend, they started to accuse, accused George of genocide, and they started to evacuate civilians from South Assetia. And I saw these hysterical reports out of South Assetia by Russian correspond So they were loading women and children on buses and

sending them up into the safety of Russia. This is exactly what happened in the last two weeks with Ukraine, there was the Duma asked Boutin to recognize the separatist republics as independent nations. There were maneuvers, the equipment did not go home. Boutin accused Georgia, accused Ukraine of genocide, and the civilians were evacuated. Then, in the case of Georgia, back in August twenty eight, two eight, there's a lot of cross border shelling, light across line shelling, and that

was so the warm up. In that case, the president of Georgia, Mihail Sakshavili, fell for the bait and he actually attacked. You know, it's the mouth of Royty attacked Georgia.

Georgia attacked Russia, and that led to the Russians whacking back very severely, and they poured through the only tunnel through the Caucass mountains, and they cut Georgia and a half Georgia's an east west country, and they cut the railroad, they cut the highway, they bombed gory Or the birthplace of Stalin, and then they started moving east and stopped about twenty five miles short of the capitol, which is Tabilisi.

So they did it. Um you can pick nits with how the military behave, but they basically took Georgia in about ten days, as you say, and then they had to sue for peace. So these two j ash sorry, these two areas of Georgia that were, as I understand it, largely Russian speaking south pasttia An Abkhazia, they were the separate They're the separatist enclaves that was over what over a decade ago. Now where do those countries or separatist

enclaves whatever we call them, currently stand. Have they been formally absorbed into the Russian Federation. No, they claim to be independent countries. And I've visited up Ahazia for Voice of America and it was kind of a creepy place because the population is half of what it was before the war. Now, the Georgians had done their own bit of ethic cleansing, so they're not totally innocent in this, but the population of one hundred and fifty thousand compared

to three hundred thousand before the war. It's a beautiful part. All these rivers that come down, they're wonderful beaches. It's it's subtropical, it's lovely, but it's this kind of phony country. And I got in hot water with VA and Washington because I dateline my stories. You know, Sumi or Sakumi Abhazia, and they said, Wellias is not a country recognized by the United States or anyone in Europe, so you cannot

put that dateline on your story. So these two areas continue to claim their independent they have their own flag, but they're one subsidized by Russia. The basic extension of Russian power south of the Russian border. There are thousands of Russian troops primarily station in both places. So is your expectation then in Ukraine, the Georgia secession or Georgia separatist enclave playbook is going to be what the Russian strategy is, at least in the east, in the dawn

Boss region. I mean, how does that play out in your mind? Yeah, but kids already happened in the Duma recommended that the two separatist regions of Ukraine be recognized as countries, and Putin did just that last week. He recognized these two areas of separate countries, and then he made his big invasion like the next day. I don't know what's going to happen in Ukraine. My fear, on

one level, Russia's losing on the ground. My fear is that Putin will lose patients and come back with the air war and flatten a couple of Ukrainian cities to give them a lesson, so to speak. Jim, you go ahead, go ahead, No, I mean this is Boutin did. That's one way he won in Zechiam, and it's what he did more recently in Syria. He flattened much of this Idlib province without hitting a hospital's, department, buildings, whatever. And he is ruthless and has no compunction about killing civilians.

And unless there's a note fly zone over Ukraine, which the US you don't really want to do, and it would be the US that have to maintain it, he will be fairly free to bomb the heck out of Ukraine. Jim Brooke, thanks so much for joining us today. Appreciate the expertise and perspective. Thank you. In twenty fifteen, is Bashar al Assad, president of Syria, fought for his life during the Syrian Civil War. Russian force is intervened to

help prop up his regime. We come back. Bill Rogio of the Foundation for Defensive Democracy stopped by to give his insight into Russia's intervention in Syria. They right there. It's now day seven of the war in Ukraine. Russia continues to bombard the country with pomps and missiles targeting crowded population centers, and the capital city is for now

still uncaptured by Putin. But we'll see. Our next guest says that sympathy for the outnumbered and outgun defenders of Kiev has led to the exaggeration of Russian setbacks, misunderstanding of Russian strategy, and even basis claims from amateur psychoanalysts that Putin has lost his mind. Bill Roggio, senior fellow at the Foundation for Defensive Democracies, joins now to explain, Bill, thanks for being with us, Thanks for having me Buck. So let's just start with what's the latest today with

the Russian advance. How is this going? Yeah, in the north at Kiev, the capitol, Russians are preparing their encirclement that could happen within days, and they're preparing to link up with I'm seeing I think this is close to happening, cutting off two provinces north of Kiev, and that would secure the entire border between Ukraine and Russia, as well

as elders. But more importantly in the south, the city of Kerson, which is in the Black Sea on the coast of the Black Sea, city of three hundred thousand people has just fallen to the Russians. The mayor of Kerrison said that ten Russian officers have come to the building and he's handed over control. The Ukrainian troops have retreated to a nearby city, and the Russians continue their advance. So let's look at what Biden said last night in

general about this Russian invasion of Ukraine. I want to have your respond to it. Play. Six days ago, Russia's Vladimir Putin sought to shake the very foundations of the free world, thanking he could make it bend to his menacing ways. But he badly miscalculated. He thought he could roll into Ukraine and the world would roll over. Instead, he met with a wall of strength he never anticipated or imagined he met Ukrainian people. Now that he's acted,

the three Free world is holding him accountable. Putin is now isolated from the world more than he has ever been. Putin has unleashed violence in chaos, But while he may make gains on the battlefield, he'll pay a continuing high price over the long run. What's your assessment of Biden the Commander in chiefs analysis of Ukraine in that speech. Well, you know again, I do agree with the Ukrainian people had put up a hell of a fight, but it's just not enough. And I think he's overly optimistic. He

claimed that Russia sought a quick victory. And one of the things that I analyzed in that Daily Mail article is that in fact, the Russians have a plan, and this is a plan that will take time to execute. It's not it was never going to be a quick victory. Um, we'll see how how the West, the West and the international community holds up. Is it willing to do Sanctions are easier today, what about next week, next month? What about next winner when Germany needs that fifty percent of

its gas comes from Russia. UM. I think this is a you know, he is It's not as overly optimistic as I expected. Um, it's him to be. I expected to hear him say things like the Russians are failing, But I think it's this is certainly the best case scenario. The rosy glasses scenario that he painted. Um. The reality is the West needed to do far more months prior to this invasion to both deter the Russians and prepare

the Ukrainians for war that didn't happen. And by the way, this does not make him a wartime commander in chief. This country is not at war with Russian and does not have plans to go to war with Russia. So there's a lot of reporting on this forty mile long Russian military convoy that is on the way to Kiev. Is the the basic strategy here that they will be deploying soon to just encircle the city and demand the government and Zelenski effectively, you know, resign, give up, call

for surrender. How do you think this plays out? Yeah, I think that's exactly right. I think this this formation, it's already pushing west, south and west of Kiev, and I do believe it is being um It's goal main purpose is to surround the city and forced the catipulation of the government. I also think that it will look to link up with troops that are currently in the south and this would split Ukraine in half. This would and this really would be endgame. You'd have much of Ukraine,

Ukraine's military trapped behind enemy lines. If there troops and the Caucuses can link up with the troops in Kiev, then I really think that we'd be talking end game here for Ukraine as a viable state. You might get a drop kra Ukrainian state or who may decide to take the whole thing and push to the post border.

That's that's really the next level question there. So how much do you think the air campaign, the Russian air strikes and also long range artillery strikes, missile strikes is going to escalate and play a major role in this in the days ahead, Because up to this point there's a lot of footage of Russian convoys getting you know, getting hit looks like getting hit pretty hard with some of those anti tank munitions that the Ukrainians now have

because of Western partners, and I've been they've been getting those for a while. So there is this view that people have of, well, it's just going to continue to be a hard slog on the ground for the Russians. Do you think they're just going to take to the air much more heavily and start pounding Ukrainian positions in a way that the Ukrainian defenses aren't really able to handle at all. Well, I think they can't do that.

And if they can do that via the air and via artillery and rocket rocket munitions as well, I mean, look, we just saw a city surrender after a couple of days of fighting, to basically surrender without a fight. Do the Ukrainians have this kind of fight? By the way, the Russians are taking casualties, that's without a doubt. The Russian military doctrine is the old Soviet military doctrine. You throw a lot of force at it, you expect to take losses, but in the end you win. But the

Ukrainians themselves are also being depleted of munitions. Why is that convoy, that forty mile long convoy that is just north of twenty miles north of Kiev and advancing westward, why is that not being strike to The Ukrainians have

the capability and munitions to do this. The Karrainians are being bound down as well, you know, And I think the example set at curse On maybe one, and particularly if the Russians are able to rule a city like curse On and not have reprisals against civilians, which I don't think is in their interest anyway. They want to ruled the country, not dominate and crush it. You know, it sends a message to Kiv, the people a Kive

that you may want to surrender this one. It's you know, it's better than being you know, better to live than being crushed. What do you think that Putin's strategy looks like as it plays out over the Weeks Ahead Bill? At this point, I think Putin has calculated that as far as sanctions go, that there's probably a time limit on these. I think that his calculation. I don't know

whether he's made the correct calculation or not. Militarily, I think that you know what I described earlier, that pushed from the south from from Crimea is looking the link up with Kiev that'll sever the country and have trap

a large number of Ukrainian forces. And if Kivan takeover Kiev and a couple of major cities and show the Ukrainian people that you know, the Russians are in control, they've won this work, then the only real question is does he want the whole country or is he looking for a rump state that is neutral or is governed by a crony of his I think that's what you know. That's what we're looking at here in the next days and months. The real big question for me again is

does he want at all? Or is he happy with half of Ukraine and then appliable state to the West Bill. What could be done, if anything, to stop that? In your mind of this, it's just really all all the Ukrainians or their outside sanctions, economic activity, economic actions that could be taken to make him change his calculation. I think short of a NATO military intervention, which I do not advocate for, that concreases the risk of direct what it would be, direct war with Russia and increases the

risk of a nuclear war. Short of that, I think what you're going to see and I don't can't tell you if it takes days, weeks, or months, that the Russians will conquer most, if not all, of the Ukraine. And I don't think there's sanctions won't stop this, Diplomatic actions won't stop this, prevention of flights, Russian flights, things, so that that's not enough. Putin has put all of his cards on the table. He has gone all in on taking Ukraine. He can't turn back now he would

he would no longer be president of the country. If he did, he's playing to win, while I think the West is just playing to get a best case scenario out of this, get some type of rump Ukrainian government out of this. At this point, Bill, I agree with you. I think I hope we're both wrong, but I think you're right. Thanks for being with us as always. Good

to see. If that's all the time we have for this special edition of Hold the Line, like, thank my guest Tom Sport, Jim Brooke, and Bill Rogio for sharing your expertise. Bill O'Reilly comes up next, Shield Tige