Tucker: Russia-Ukraine conflict could become a world war

close

Video

Tucker: Russia-Ukraine conflict could become a world war

Fox News host reacts to Russia waging war on Ukraine on 'Tucker Carlson Tonight.'

This is a rush transcript of "Tucker Carlson Tonight" on February 24, 2022. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

TUCKER CARLSON, FOX NEWS CHANNEL HOST: Good evening and welcome to TUCKER CARLSON TONIGHT.

Russia invaded Ukraine last night as you know. Russian troops completely overwhelmed the country's air defenses in just hours. They moved faster and much more aggressively than anyone, including the U.S. State Department and certainly this show ever anticipated.

The fighting continues as we speak. U.S. officials say they believe Ukraine's capital could fall to Russian forces at any time. The casualty numbers we are getting at this hour seem puzzlingly low, given the scope of the invasion, 137 dead is the number we just have though we should tell you that much of what you hear at the beginning of a conflict like this later turns out to be mistaken. It really is as muddy as they say.

So we will be as careful as we can in telling you what we know.

With that in mind, we want to begin tonight as close as possible to the center of the story. Our Lucas Tomlinson joins us now from Ukraine.

Lucas, what do you see there? What's the state as of right now?

LUCAS TOMLINSON, FOX NEWS CHANNEL PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: Well, Tucker, all is calm here in the Western Ukrainian City of Lviv. It is the cultural capital. It's about six hours west of Ukraine's capital of Kyiv.

Of course, it is three in the morning here. You wouldn't expect a lot of people out tonight. Earlier, the authorities actually came to our live shot position here and said we weren't allowed to show any of the lights.

What we saw on the streets today was people very concerned, people worried. It wasn't just the State Department, Tucker, but actually people on the ground here were not expecting this large scale invasion.

Three lines of attack, north from Crimea, south from Belarus, just two hours from the Capitol and east from Belgorod. And Tucker, the U.S. officials say that the Russians fired over 160 short range ballistic missiles and cruise missiles in this country.

Now, as far as reports are concerned, you're right. We have to be careful about what we're hearing. The Ukrainian authorities say that they massacred a Russian air assault that was taking place into an airfield just about 20 minutes outside the capital.

Now, how did we get here, Tucker? Let's go back.

This is a crisis 30 years in the making. The fall of the Soviet Union in 1991 in the woods of Belarus at a hunting lodge. They didn't even have a computer or typewriter. That's where the end of the Soviet Union took place. The leaders of the Soviet Union, Ukraine and Belarus.

For Vladimir Putin, it was one of the saddest days of his life. His goal has been to put the Soviet Union back together, that 5,000 word essay he penned over the summer in July, he says he read that two days ago.

He thinks the Ukrainians and Russians are one people. That's what he wants to see. He wants to see this come back together. Of course, he also fears NATO expansion.

You know, President Putin is on his fifth U.S. President. He has been President for over 20 years. Back in 1999, when NATO expanded to the Warsaw Pact, countries of Hungary, of Poland, and the Czech Republic, Vladimir Putin -- that really made him angry.

He saw the NATO bomb Serbia three weeks later. He thought, you know, it could be Belgrade now, it could be Moscow next. That's one of the reasons he has been very angry to see NATO expansion. He does not want to see it come to Ukraine.

Of course, the irony of that, Tucker, is if Vladimir Putin is successful in taking Ukraine, he will of course, be bordering a whole lot of NATO nations, but that's one of the reasons he is very concerned.

Also, there was a NATO conference in Bucharest in 2008, where President Bush at the time, he wanted Georgia and Ukraine to become members of NATO. It was actually Angela Merkel, in a communique that put that language in there that says Georgia and Ukraine will become members of NATO.

In fact, Putin wrote about it in the Russian response to Ambassador Sullivan in Moscow. It is one of the reasons Russia claims their security assurances are not being met.

That angered Russia so much that after that communique was written, Tucker, Russian forces invaded Georgia four months later, Ukraine six years later.

Remember Nikita Khrushchev gave Crimea to the Russians. Vladimir Putin was angry about that, he wanted it back, and of course Catherine the Great said the only way to make my country better is to expand the border.

Certainly, President Putin seems to be adhering to the Tsar or in Catherine the Great's case, a Tsarina -- Tucker.

CARLSON: Lucas Tomlinson from Ukraine for us tonight. Thanks so much for that.

So what is happening in Ukraine, whatever its scale, and it is not totally clear right now, but whatever it is, it is a tragedy, because war always is a tragedy, and the closer you get to it, the more horrifying it seems. It's the ugliest thing that men do -- ever.

Vladimir Putin started this war. So, whatever the context of the decision that he made, he did it. He fired the first shots. He is to blame for what we are seeing tonight in Ukraine.

The question is, once we've established that and it is obvious, how should the United States respond to what he has done?

So, within minutes of the outbreak of the war last night, the usual liars on television began leveraging this tragedy for partisan political gain.

If you've ever watched the aftermath of a school shooting, you're familiar with how they behave, it's contemptible. But we're going to ignore it tonight because there is too much else going on that actually matters, and the main thing that matters in any crisis is deciding what's most important, creating a hierarchy of concern.

So until last night, the main purpose of our foreign policy was to prevent Russia from invading Ukraine. Obviously, that failed. At some point, we should figure out why. But what's our top goal now? Well, there's several of them.

Here are first three. First and most obviously, avoid a full-scale war with a nuclear armed adversary. And to be fair, very few people in Washington want anything like that. War with Russia is so obviously a bad idea. But that doesn't mean we won't have one.

Wars often breakout accidentally, or more often, incrementally, things escalate, and the next thing you know, you've got Verdun with many thousands dead.

Now that shooting has started in Ukraine, it is entirely possible no matter what they assure you that Americans could wind up getting hurt in Eastern Europe. We should prevent that, but preventing it will require wisdom and farsightedness and emotional control, all of which are never in abundant supply in Washington, and especially now that everyone is justifiably upset.

Again, what Russia has done is awful, but we could still make it worse.

Mark Warner, the head of the Senate Intelligence Committee just announced that Russia could be potentially close to triggering what's known as Article V of the NATO Alliance. That's a collective defense principle.

So if Russia were to launch a cyberattack on Ukraine, Warner explained, an attack that affects nearby NATO members like Poland and Lithuania, then possibly every NATO country, including ours, the United States would be obligated to declare war on Russia.

Here he is explaining.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. MARK WARNER (D-VA): One of the things that I'm gravely concerned about, is it Russia unleashes its full cyber power against Ukraine. Once you put malware into the wild, in a sense, it knows no geographic boundaries.

So if the Russians decide they're going to try to turn off the power, turn off all the electricity all across Ukraine, very likely, that may turn off the power in Eastern Poland and Eastern Romania that could affect our troops.

If suddenly hospitals are shut down, if those NATO troops, American troops, somehow have a car accident because the stoplights don't work, we are suddenly in an area, hypothetically, an Article V, where one NATO country is attacked, we all have to come to each other's aid.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CARLSON: So Warner is certainly right, that could add -- that hypothetical that he outlined could happen. Any cyberattack on Ukraine could well affect the infrastructure of the Eastern European countries. That would be bad, it would be a crime. The civilized world would deplore it.

But Article V is not a mechanical mechanism. Human beings have to decide to invoke it. And the question is, is what the Senator just described something that is worth risking a nuclear conflict over? And that is something we should pause very deeply to think about in the most sober possible way, and we hope that our leaders are.

But not all of them seem sober right now. Some of them seem reckless and as usual, ignorant. Congressman Adam Kinzinger of Illinois, for example, spends a lot of time on cable television talking about world affairs, he seems like an expert. And yet by temperament, he is certainly the last person you want anywhere near a nuclear button.

Today Kinzinger informed us that Russia's seizure of the defunct Chernobyl plant might quote, "trigger Article V." Okay, it could be interpreted that way. And then what happens? Clearly, Adam Kinzinger hasn't thought about that, not for a moment.

So you see the problem here? The question is not, who is at fault? We can say that Vladimir Putin is at fault for what happened last night. But then what? And that's the larger problem.

Once conflict starts, especially when that conflict is televised, it is really hard to know what happens next. So anyone who thinks the invasion of Ukraine couldn't become a World War either lacks imagination or is lying to you. It certainly could become a world war.

So that's the first goal, not making a terrible thing much, much worse. Here is the second coal, keep the energy flowing, cheap energy. We take it for granted. But it is the basis of all we have. No energy, no civilization.

Unfortunately, a huge percentage of Europe's energy now comes from Russia and Ukraine. The European Union relies on Russia for roughly 40 percent of its natural gas.

In Germany, which is one of the biggest economies in the world, that percentage is over half. Most of its energy in the form of natural gas comes from Russia and Ukraine.

So you don't hear that very often on television. This debate is framed exclusively in moral terms, and those are important. We shouldn't ignore them. But they're not the only terms we should consider.

The fact is that Vladimir Putin has the power to send Europe, and for that matter, potentially the United States into an economic depression. Putin has the power to turn off the lights.

So where did Vladimir Putin get this power? Well, there are a lot of reasons, but a big reason is the climate people gave him this power. Thanks to pressure from zealots like John Kerry, Europe has been shutting down nuclear power plants for years, and that's a very confusing strategy.

If you're worried about climate, nuclear energy is not the problem. Nuclear energy is the solution. It is reliable, it is domestically produced, it emits no carbon. So if you were genuinely worried about temperature rises, global warming, you would embrace nuclear energy.

But our leaders and not just ours globally across the West have done the opposite. Why? Maybe their donors and families are invested in so-called renewable technologies. Who knows? Whatever the reason, because of a series of very specific decisions made over time, the West is now dangerously dependent on Vladimir Putin for energy.

Now, our leaders may act like this is not a big deal. It is definitely a big deal and we ought to make decisions based on that fact.

And finally, a topic no one ever brings up, we must protect the U.S. dollar. America's power derives from its wealth. Rich countries get to do what they want. Poor countries must obey their masters or they get invaded. We just saw that happen. That is the unchanging rule.

In this country, control of the U.S. dollar is the key to our wealth. Our entire financialized debt based economy rests on the unique privilege of issuing the world's reserve currency. If the U.S. dollar is ever replaced, we are in legitimate trouble.

Our debt will come due, our government will go bankrupt, and millions of Americans will become poor immediately.

So this is the main thing we ought to be worried about and it is a greater risk now than ever before. Sanctions are an emotionally satisfying way to punish someone like Vladimir Putin, who clearly does deserve to be punished. No one is really against sanctions. But the question is, do they work?

Clearly, multiple sanctions did not prevent last night's invasion of Ukraine. Let's start there. At the same time, sanctions give Russia and many other countries across the world a strong incentive to dump the U.S. dollar, which is the means by which we enforce sanctions.

So last summer, for example, in a story that most people didn't pay enough attention to, Russia, in response to sanctions completely removed the U.S. dollar, its assets from its Sovereign Wealth Fund, its national wealth fund. The Chinese noticed. They understand exactly how this works, and in their effort to displace the United States, they are strongly in favor of it.

China is trying to become the first major country in the world whose Central Bank issue sovereign digital currency. If that works, and many efforts like it, it would be a huge loss for the United States, an irreplaceable loss that would change this country forever, much more than an invasion of Ukraine.

So we should be watching that, attacks on the primacy of the U.S. dollar globally, every bit as intently as we watch the coverage currently on television of the hot war.

If at the end of this conflict, whenever that is, countries around the world have come to see the Chinese yuan as a stronger, more stable currency than the U.S. dollar, then this country will have lost more than we understand.

Somebody has to be paying attention to this. Let's fervently hope that somebody is.

Glenn Greenwald is an independent journalist who has been following this story for a long time. He's on "Substack." He joins us tonight.

Glenn, thanks so much for coming on. So what's -- this is obviously taking place as we speak, and it is hard to know the full outlines of it, but give us your reaction to it, if you would.

GLENN GREENWALD, JOURNALIST: Well, one of the most striking things is this immediate climate that has arisen where there's a lockstep unified script that everyone is required to follow. And if you don't, if you question it at all, you get accused of being a traitor to the United States and/or an agent of the Kremlin.

And one of the things most remarkable about this is that what you're not allowed to say now, is something that people at the highest levels of the U.S. government have been saying for many years.

For example, the idea that it is incredibly provocative, legitimately so from the perspective of the Russians to expand NATO up to Russian borders is something that if you say now, both to identify the cause of the tensions, but also a way out of this war, to say we won't expand any further including to Ukraine, you get accused of being a Putin spokesman, even though people like the director of the C.I.A., the current one William Burns said back in 2008, warning the Bush administration about expanding NATO on the grounds that it's not just Putin, but everyone in Russia, including his enlightened liberal opponents who view that as a grave threat to Russia National Security.

Of if you say, we believe that Ukraine is of vital national interest to Russia, but not to the United States and therefore the U.S. shouldn't risk war directly or indirectly with Russia, you get accused of being a traitor and yet that was Barack Obama's position for eight years, when asked why he wouldn't flood Ukraine with lethal weapons.

And so, so many of the things that have been long recognized suddenly overnight became taboo.

CARLSON: So you've got to wonder, I mean, in this environment, I think it would be very difficult for the Biden administration, and I think there probably are some people there who agree with you, but to say out loud: Look, we deplore the invasion of Ukraine, I'm speaking for myself here, too, but we are really worried about where this could go and the effects on our country and the world.

And so maybe it doesn't undercut our national interest to say what we've said for generations -- you know, for decades, we're not going to expand NATO to your borders.

What would we lose in that, a sincere your question, do you think?

GREENWALD: That is an important question, because this is an incredibly dangerous war, Tucker. There are two countries with the largest nuclear stockpiles on the planet on opposite sides. And this follows five years of extreme hostilities created in Washington due to Russia-gate and other things that demanded that we not even talk to Russian diplomats, and that we treat them as this grave threat.

It's an incredibly dangerous situation. We should have done everything we could to avert the war and should do everything now to try and defuse it, and so all we have to do, which is the Kremlin's position is promise that NATO will never expand to Ukraine, and have Ukraine say the same thing. Why aren't we doing that?

Maybe that wouldn't work. The Russians say it will, but why haven't we done that until now? And why aren't we doing that now, given how dangerous this war and how horrific this war is to watch it unfold?

CARLSON: Glenn Greenwald, appreciate your coming on tonight. Thanks so much.

GREENWALD: Thanks, Tucker.

CARLSON: So whether you agree with that conclusion or that recommendation or not, the way it was formulated seems like the obvious way to think about this. This is bad. How do we make it better? And more to the point, how do we prevent the United States from becoming weaker, and more endangered by what's happening now? That's the only way to think about this.

And if you start to think that way, you begin to wonder what China is getting out of this. Does the invasion of Ukraine embolden China? And what does that mean for the near and long term future.

Elbridge Colby was a DoD official in the last administration. His specialty is thinking about the future of the United States and China. He joins us tonight.

Elbridge Colby, thanks so much for coming on. So from China's perspective, what does this look like?

ELBRIDGE COLBY, FORMER TRUMP DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Well, I think it looks pretty advantageous, Tucker. I mean, Putin is tying the United States down based on the President's remarks, and how the reaction, it looks like any attempt to really prioritize Asia and China, which clearly is where Americans interest need to be prioritized, is very much in jeopardy.

CARLSON: So this is -- just to state it once again, as clearly as possible -- from the Chinese perspective, this is good news.

COLBY: Absolutely. I mean, look, I think their interests are expansive, and to, I think, ultimately dominate their region and impose as you suggested, you know, the one is only one piece of that. That's going to be a whole part of their vision of a preeminent place in the world that we're going to feel very acutely.

And I think you're absolutely right on this point, Tucker, that we need to think soberly, and clearly and rigorously. And frankly, I don't see a lot of that going on right now.

I see a lot of reflexive thinking, a lot of people saying, we're going to be in, you know, three theaters, and everything's going to be the same, we're going to have to triple the defense budget. Look, even if you think that's the right idea, it's going to take a long time for that to happen.

We are already in a position where we need to make tradeoffs and there are things that we absolutely need to do to the Russians. I think you're right about sanctions. You're right, it's their fault. There's also, we can arm the Ukrainians and we need to get the Europeans to step up.

But the fact of the matter is, if we're thinking about Americans interest as you always do, I think those are going to be determined in Asia, which is going to be more than half of global economy. That's the market we're all going to be working for.

And the Russians are a challenge, but we need to put them in the correct position, as you indicated in that priority scheme and that is not first, that's China.

CARLSON: That seems very clear, and I don't know why you're only one of the only people, one of the only veterans who says that out loud. But I'm glad that you do.

Elbridge Colby, thank you very much.

COLBY: Thanks, Tucker.

CARLSON: So in Washington, some lawmakers are calling on the administration to send more troops to the region. There appears to be bipartisan support for that. Here's Lindsey Graham.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R-SC): There should be a dramatic increase of American presence, along with our NATO allies in NATO nations' border.

Russia, we are sending fighters to Poland. We're sending additional soldiers to the Baltic nations, but our NATO allies also need to do more.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CARLSON: So you have to ask, where exactly would those troops go? What would they do and what would be the purpose of having them there? Again, these are recommendations made by the architects of the policies that got us the invasion of Ukraine last night, so it's fair to ask those questions.

Daniel Davis is asking those questions. He is a retired U.S. Army Colonel. He is a senior fellow at Defense Priorities and we are happy to have him join us tonight.

Colonel Davis, thanks so much for coming on. So let me just ask you quickly the broad question, what should be the American response to what we've seen?

COL. DANIEL DAVIS (RET), U.S. ARMY: Man, you know, the American response now should have been done beforehand. But it can still -- it can still have a chance to work right now, and that is we just need to come to just accept the reality of the situation that Ukraine is never going to come in NATO. It was never going to come in NATO and we recognize it's not going to.

Now once you've come to that first, just bottom line, then you have to say, why would we then want to keep the fiction that the NATO's door is open when we know it's not, when we know for sure that that is Putin's number one red line?

And look, this idea that Putin is saying that he wants to reconstitute the USSR, and it's all about denying freedom to people. That's a smokescreen. He has been unambiguous since 2007, fifteen years of consistently saying, it's NATO expansion to my border in Ukraine, and he said as recently as December, as he has this big buildup. He said, I am deadly serious about this. I don't know why people don't believe me, but I mean this. Now, he has shown that he means it.

All we had to do was say: Okay, we're going to, quote, "give in on this one point," which is something we didn't want to do anyway. It is in our interest not to do that, but we didn't.

And so we gave Zelensky false hope that if he just held out and didn't talk to Putin, that someday he would get that NATO protection. That was a false hope, and now that it has been exposed as such, even in this late hour, we can still say, okay, look, Zelensky, he needs to declare neutrality. He needs to say we're not even going to seek NATO membership.

We need to say it's not going to be extended. But we're going to continue to maintain our Article V obligations throughout NATO. So we're not going to be weakened by this, and it could stop the war because that's probably the one thing that Putin is just not going to give in on, NATO on his border.

CARLSON: Yes, I'm not I'm not sure what we would get out of having Ukraine in NATO anyway. I was always kind of confused. I mean, if you think about it through the lens of America's interests, I never understood why that was necessarily something we'd want, but --

DAVIS: Yes, you know, that's one of the things about NATO expansion is it has to improve NATO for any member to come into it and that is definitely not the case, because you're bringing in instability, and that would be bad for all 30 members.

CARLSON: Colonel Davis, thanks so much for joining us tonight.

DAVIS: Always my pleasure. Thank you.

CARLSON: So quick democracy, check the polls show, and these of course, are taken before the invasion that the vast majority of Americans oppose getting involved in the conflict in Ukraine.

Tulsi Gabbard has watched all this in the beginning. Of course, she is a military veteran currently serving, by the way, a former Member of Congress. She has been denounced as a foreign agent for speaking on behalf of the majority of Americans. She joins us tonight.

Congresswoman, thanks so much for coming on.

TULSI GABBARD, FORMER U.S. REPRESENTATIVE: Thank you.

CARLSON: So what's your reaction to what we've seen in the past 24 hours?

GABBARD: Well, first of all, I do not in any way support Putin's decision to go into Ukraine. It is causing and going to cause an immense amount of suffering for the people there.

CARLSON: Yes.

GABBARD: I've been to Ukraine a few times. I have personal friends who are still in Ukraine. People have nothing to do with politics, everyday Ukrainians, and they're afraid, Tucker, and they're angry. They are angry at Russia. They are angry at America, and they are angry at the failure of leadership that could have prevented this and that is the thing that is most tragic about this heartbreaking situation with this war is that it could have been avoided.

If President Biden and NATO had done exactly what you were just talking about and agreeing, hey, we're going to take NATO off the table for Ukraine, something that both the U.S. and NATO have agreed is not likely to ever happen and something that is a legitimate security concern for Russia that they won't accept having U.S. and NATO troops on their border within Ukraine.

Had the U.S. and NATO leadership done this, this situation could have been prevented. I think the problem here in America is that people who bring this up, people who ask these questions, people who challenge the decisions that the Biden administration has been making in this are smeared and caricaturized as traitors, rather than actually pointing at the truth, which is this administration is not acting in the best interest of the American people. They are turning their backs on the American people.

CARLSON: So now that the current policy has failed, and I don't know anybody who thinks the invasion of Ukraine is a good thing. How volatile a situation is it? I mean people don't seem to want to address that question, but these things tend to escalate in ways you don't anticipate like sideways. Are you worried about that?

GABBARD: I'm extremely concerned about it, and this is what you and I have talked about in the days and weeks leading up to this situation, forecasting exactly what we are seeing playing out today, where you see this back and forth, where you have the leader of Russia and the leader of the United States of America saying: Hey, yes, if they cyberattack, we're going to attack back stronger.

This escalation of a tit-for-tat will only continue to increase and no one -- no one in the Biden administration, the leadership in this country is saying: Where does this go? Where does it end? What does it resolve? And what will it continue to cost the American people?

The most dangerous thing is that we are talking about an escalation of conflict between the two great nuclear armed powers in the world who have nuclear armed missiles at the ready, prepared to launch at a moment's notice.

And so whether this could get to that point intentionally or mistakenly through a miscalculation, as we've seen happen numerous times throughout history, this is the seriousness of the threat that we're facing.

CARLSON: I think that's nicely put. Tulsi Gabbard, great to see you tonight.

GABBARD: Thank you.

CARLSON: This is a FOX News Alert. We're told Russia's military continuing to strike targets across the nation of Ukraine. You're seeing images on your screen of a Russian airstrike at an airport in Ivano-Frankivisk, that's in Western Ukraine.

For perspective on what we are seeing on the screen, we want to talk to someone who lives there within the country. Shlomo Rosilio is a resident of the capital city of Ukraine. He woke to the sounds of explosions Thursday morning. It's now 3:00 AM, by the way, on Friday in Ukraine. He has been helping others evacuate from the country.

He joins us tonight live from that nation. Shlomo, thanks so much for coming on. Where are you exactly in Ukraine?

SHLOMO ROSILIO, KYIV RESIDENT: I am in the Cherkasy region, which is basically the center of Ukraine. I am right now located in a place where it's a little bit shelter, because we got some intel that's going to be bombing. As I've heard, it's already started in Kyiv, and I'm sure it's going to get here too, like last night. So we're just taking precaution.

CARLSON: So the common view in the United States was that the Russians would only go into the eastern part of Ukraine if they did, but it sounds like they've gone far past that. What's your sense of where Russian troops are now in Ukraine?

ROSILIO: I would say they are mostly located near the Lugansk area more, but they are coming in. They are walking in. They are in the area of thereabouts, probably two hours away from Kyiv, already.

As we know, this morning, they took over the Chernobyl Energy Center, which is located not far from Kyiv at all, so that means they're not far. They are there and they are probably all over the place. In some ways, there are pro-Russians running around the cities and lighting the chaos around.

I've heard couple times about messengers that are running around circling on groups and things like this. So people that are asking all kinds of teenagers to come and get paid to create chaos in cities. And just, you know, make all this ready for those soldiers to come in and just take over. That's what I've heard.

CARLSON: Have you seen evidence of the Ukrainian military?

ROSILIO: I have seen evidence of the Ukraine Military, just evidence.

CARLSON: Okay, so are you planning to stay in? Are you concerned for your own safety?

ROSILIO: I am concerned, generally speaking, but I am going to stay until the last person that we decided to take out we are going to take him out and then we're going to leave, absolutely. We have a mission, and that mission needs to be, you know, needs to be completed.

CARLSON: How difficult is it to get out of Ukraine right now?

ROSILIO: I would say on the scale of one to 10, around nine.

CARLSON: Yes.

ROSILIO: And there's a lot of factors to it. The first factor which is very, very difficult right now is to find a driver and to find a vehicle. Most of the people that have vehicles already ran away to the countryside or to all kinds of places and most of the people, they don't have a car, they don't want to be found outside because they are afraid that there is going to be bombing and nobody knows where it's going to come from.

So, I'll give you a very simple example, I wanted to send it to the team but I didn't send it yet, but we had a group of about 70 families stuck in some place, foreign families that we wanted to take outside the border and we are unable to take them.

Eventually, we had to hire some buses, and each bus about two hours' drive cost $10,000.00 in Ukraine. So this is the reality right now and there is no transportation whatsoever. Nothing.

CARLSON: Last question for you, Shlomo, we are reading and I have no idea if it's true, that the Ukrainian President Zelensky has issued an order banning men from young men all the way into their 80s from leaving the country. They don't know the purpose of that, I don't know if it's true. Have you heard that?

ROSILIO: Yes, it is true, and it's not the Ukrainian President. It's the Foreign Minister Affairs, which created that order. And yes, it's still in place. And yes, I've got calls from the border asking me what to do about it. There's all kinds of ways to get around that. But yes, it's still in effect.

CARLSON: We won't ask you to elaborate on those right now. Shlomo, I appreciate you coming on tonight. Thank you. Good luck.

ROSILIO: I wanted to mention something. Our mission here in Ukraine is highly and very dangerous, and we would like to ask the people to go onto our website, it's on the screen, I think, or it's going to be on the screen to donate to us and support us. This is one of the most important thing for us. It's Hatzalah Ukraine, and we are working very hard here, and we need the support of the people.

It is very, very important for us. So I would kindly ask if they can put it on the screen. So we can the support of the people, which is extremely important in those tough times.

CARLSON: We appreciate it. Thank you. Good luck.

ROSILIO: Thank you so much. Thank you.

CARLSON: So we want some sense, it is hard when you're talking about countries on the other side of the globe to know exactly what is happening where, maps help. No one is better at explaining those than FOX's Bill Hemmer he joins us now to do that.

BILL HEMMER, FOX NEWS CHANNEL ANCHOR: Nice to see you, Tucker. Good evening.

I just want to show you a few things to give you a sense of what is happening today and what happened eight years ago, 2014 when the Russians went in, they took the southeastern clip here known as Donbas. They also took the peninsula of Crimea as well, that was 2014. Russia invaded time number one.

So what is the Russian Army doing now in the year 2022? Coming in really from three major areas, Tucker, based on some of the Intel we're getting. One is Crimea from the south. Not a lot of resistance we are told. One from the north, another country actually, Belarus, quite substantial resistance there and substantial fighting throughout the day, as well.

Then from the Northeast into the town of Kharkiv. Based on the reporting we're getting, fierce battles fought. Ukrainian Army on one side, Russian Army on the other. Kharkiv, by the way, is the second largest city in the country. It's not a small town, it's got 1.4 million people. The capital city of Kyiv has three million people.

But I want to show you this, Tucker, this is the town of Belgorod, and let me try -- yes, Belgorod. It's on the Russian side of the border and the reason I'm showing this is because just today, February 24th, we got these satellite images from a staging area, a military staging area in the Russian side of the border.

You can see quite clearly what is happening. For the Russian Army, they have got a field hospital here. This denotes a series of tents that are set up. These are military trucks over here and up in the upper corner here are attack helicopters and on the helicopters, Tucker, you can just -- I mean, it's plain as day based on the satellite imaging, you can count, one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten, eleven, twelve -- so whatever they're doing with this staging area, they are using to help support the forces that are going after Kharkiv, that second largest city that I mentioned a moment ago.

It is 3:30 in the morning in Ukraine. So you're about 90 minutes away from the first missile strikes in Ukraine 24 hours ago. So we're coming up into day number two.

Tucker, I think it is very important to watch the capital city. As day breaks there, we move into day number two. President Zelensky, several hours ago, said that Russian forces had penetrated the city. Can't confirm that, but if he is right that would not be a good sign.

So we are, I think at the moment this is the fundamental question. Does the Russian army penetrate the capital city and go after Zelensky, the President, and maybe his family members as well? Or can the Ukrainian military keep him out as we move toward day two? We will find out together very soon -- Tucker.

CARLSON: One of many questions. That seems like one of the biggest. Bill Hemmer, thanks so much for that.

We will have more on Ukraine and from Ukraine in just a moment.

Erik Prince joins us among others.

We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CARLSON: This is a FOX News Alert. War in Ukraine underway right now. Reports that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky refuses to leave the capital city. Russian troops apparently within miles of it.

Matthew Williams is a freelance reporter from Australia. He says he did not trust the media coverage of what was happening in Ukraine. He wanted to see for himself. So he went there, a choice that we admire. He joins us now.

Matthew Williams, thanks so much for coming on. How would you describe what you're seeing?

MATTHEW WILLIAMS, FREELANCE REPORTER: Hi, thank you for having me on.

What I am seeing, it is unbelievable. Yesterday morning when the first missiles hit, I was outside. You know, we were there walking down the street not really knowing what was happening and then seeing cruise missiles cruise 50 meters over the top of us. Absolutely unbelievable that it was actually happening.

CARLSON: Of course, you know in any war and it is hard to see the outlines of it when it's in progress, but we're not getting a lot of reports on the response from the Ukrainian Military.

Are there engagements between Russian and Ukrainian forces that you're aware of? Where's the Ukrainian Military? Do you know?

WILLIAMS: Yes, there are heavy engagements all around the border of the Ukrainian and Russian military. As far as the updates, and we are keeping very up to date with the updates, because where I am, we are trying to keep a corridor open, so I can still get out of this country if I need as I'm a solo independent journalist here. I'm still fine, and so I'm trying to maintain and know where it is.

But there is heavy combat, basically all around the border. That said, there has been multiple kills on tanks and helicopters, and fighter jets from the Ukrainians to the Russians, and vice versa, but a lot of the footage coming out, there has been heavy, heavy contact all around.

CARLSON: I have to ask you, there are not a lot of English speaking reporters who go unilaterally into conflicts like this. How did you decide to do this and why?

WILLIAMS: Well, Tucker, I am a veteran. I spent seven years in the Australian Army, in the infantry, I was a corporal and I served in Afghanistan. And I'm very disappointed in a lot of the Western media and the coverage of it.

I was kicked out of the Army due to cancer. I was discharged, and I wanted to see what was happening. I'm not a journalist, I'm not qualified for anything. I packed up my gear and my camera, flew over here and made my way down.

I spent my time in Kharkiv, the city, which is under siege at the moment, and down onto the frontlines in Donbas to see what was happening, and I've been reporting that in long form on my Instagram and YouTube, outside of any media, outside of anything, just to show people what is actually happening.

The language barrier, of course, has been difficult, but I'm doing the best that I can.

CARLSON: Sorry, I'm not sure if I heard you correctly. You said you were kicked out of the Australian military for cancer.

WILLIAMS: Not kicked out. Those are wrong words, I was medically separated. I was separated under medical terms due to a brain cancer that I got during my service.

CARLSON: Okay. Well, I appreciate it. It's a remarkable story, and I hope that you'll join us again, for as long as you're in Ukraine.

WILLIAMS: Thank you.

CARLSON: Matthew Williams, thank you.

WILLIAMS: Cheers.

CARLSON: So according to news accounts, the President, Joe Biden has reportedly been given options to launch a cyberattack against Russia, an attack that could disable for example, domestic transportation. I can understand the impulse. Is it a wise idea for our interests? That's worth considering as well.

Joe Kent is running for Congress in Washington State. He is retired Green Beret. He joins us tonight.

Joe Kent, thanks so much for coming on. So keeping in mind, as I know that you do, first and foremost, America's interest in all of this. What do you think of wise response is?

I'm afraid we have lost Joe Kent, but we will come back.

Over all of this, looms the threat and it is real that American troops could potentially be drawn into this conflict. Today, Joe Biden said he is considering sending U.S. soldiers to Germany and Poland, in fact, he plans to. Watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOE BIDEN (D), PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Over the past few weeks, I ordered thousands of additional forces to Germany and Poland as part of our commitment to NATO. On Tuesday, in response to Russia's aggressive action, including his troop presence in Belarus and the Black Sea, I've authorized the deployment of ground and air forces already stationed in Europe to NATO's eastern flank allies.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CARLSON: Erik Prince, a former Navy SEAL, the founder of Blackwater has seen more wars in more countries over more years than maybe any living American. We're happy to have him join us tonight.

Erik Prince, thanks so much for coming on.

ERIK PRINCE, FOUNDER, BLACKWATER: Thanks, Tucker.

CARLSON: So the concern again, I don't think anybody approves of what Putin did yesterday. I certainly don't. But the concern is that this could move in directions, we don't anticipate and end up ensnaring the United States to a greater degree than we'd like. Are you worried about that?

PRINCE: Absolutely. This is -- the permutations that can come from this are awful. What should have happened, right, effective executive leadership comes with carrot and it comes with a stick.

The carrot should have been of course, Ukraine does not need to be part of NATO. It doesn't benefit the United States and it doesn't really benefit NATO, and I can understand what the Russians need to be concerned about another NATO member moving farther east. Okay, so fine. Offer them that, but also offer the stick, okay.

What Franklin Roosevelt did before World War Two is he provided Lend Lease and planes and aircraft to the Brits to give them additional equipment. This year, already, the U.S. Air Force has announced 200 -- more than 200 combat aircraft are going to be retired, literally flown from an active combat squadron to the desert and parked okay, for a value of zero.

More than 50 F-15s, still one of the best air superiority fighters in the world, F-16s, perfect for ground attack, and for suppressing enemy air defense, and more than 40 A-10s, okay, literally the best tank killing aircraft designed from nose to tail to kill Russian tanks, all of those aircraft could have been provided to the Ukrainians on a Lend Lease program, just like American pilots showed up in World War One in France to help France fight the Germans, just like American pilots showed up in Britain to help fight the battle of Britain, just like American pilots showed up to fight the Japanese over China in the Flying Tigers.

That same model could have followed in trust me if 140X American combat aircraft showed up by well-flown aggressive carnivore pilots, believe me, Putin would not have invaded because that is the kind of deterrence he was not expecting, because he needs air superiority. That's why he's moved troops into the airport, just west of Kyiv to try to seize the capital. That kind of model is a failure of imagination by the administration.

I provided that kind of thought, a concept to the administration already in early December, and they just don't want to think outside the box. It's really frustrating, and so now, the permutations of what happens in this war, we certainly don't want to send troops, but for heaven's sakes, it should have been stopped before it ever started.

CARLSON: Yes. What a shame. So many of those.

Erik Prince, appreciate coming on tonight. Thank you.

PRINCE: Thanks, Tucker.

CARLSON: So cyberattacks, and not just from one side are suddenly part of the story. We're going to ask retired Green Beret, Joe Kent about that. He is back with us after a technical snafu. Joe Kent, great to see you.

So what do you think a wise response to this invasion from the United States would be at this point?

JOE KENT (R), CONGRESSIONAL CANDIDATE FOR WASHINGTON STATE: Well, Tucker, it's not opening up a new front and that front would be a cyberattack. I know there are some people in the Biden administration, there are lawmakers and there are hawks, offering up our cyber capabilities. And we do have cyber capabilities.

However, opening up a new front and directly attacking Russia with a cyberattack would be viewed as an act of aggression, and just plunge us further into this conflict.

What we should be looking for is every single opportunity that we have to dialogue with Putin and offer him an off ramp, in particular, taking NATO off the table, as opposed to beating the war drums even more, and also our cyber capabilities, considering how much infiltration there is in our own cyber network coming from China is extremely unwise at this juncture.

CARLSON: So Mark Warner, who is the Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee described a Russian cyberattack against Ukraine and potentially NATO allies like Lithuania and Poland as an act of war.

I think that is commonly acknowledged that a cyberattack that takes infrastructure offline or shuts down hospitals, that is an act of war, is that commonly defined? I think?

KENT: Absolutely. In this day and age, a cyberattack is most certainly an act of war. So we should be very cautious before we even recklessly discuss putting that out there. I think we should be very cautious with that. And again, looking for ways to de-escalate and not continue this march towards a total war in Europe.

CARLSON: Yes. You can be upset and wise at the same time. That is possible.

Joe Kent, great to see you tonight. Thank you.

KENT: Thank you.

CARLSON: So gas prices are going up, energy prices across the board. That means the price of everything. President Biden said today that sanctions against Russia will guarantee you're going to pay more for gas. Here's what he said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BIDEN: I know this is hard, and that Americans are already hurting. I will do everything in my power to limit the pain the American people are feeling at the gas pump. This is critical to me, but this aggression cannot go on unanswered.

If it did, the consequences for America would be much worse. America stands up to bullies we stand up for freedom. This is who we are.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CARLSON: Yes, so if you're telling us that domestic energy production is quote, "critical to you," but you've done more than any administration in our lifetimes to shut down domestic energy production, maybe you're lying.

Will they change their tune on that? Reopen the pipelines? Start the drilling?

Ned Ryun is CEO of American Majority. He joins us tonight. Ned Ryun, thanks so much for coming on.

NED RYUN, FOUNDER AND CEO, AMERICAN MAJORITY: Absolutely.

CARLSON: So will there be enough pressure on the administration to take its boot off the throat of domestic energy production that maybe there is an effect on gas prices?

RYUN: No, absolutely not. The Biden administration has declared war on fossil fuels because the Democratic Party has basically been captured by the infantile left that is determined and is convinced -- and determined to see that the hoax of manmade global warming continues on as one of their main priorities.

I mean, this is really an important National Security issue, Tucker, that Trump understood. He wanted to make us energy independent, not only because of lower prices for consumers and thousands of American jobs, but he realized that the National Security issue, not only for our own security, but also to use as a powerful negotiating tool against Putin.

I remember very clearly in the summer of 2017, his speech to the Three Seas Initiative in which he wanted to use American energy exports to undermine Putin's energy leverage over the rest of Europe. I mean, this is something -- it is pretty staggering that we have basically conceded a very powerful negotiating tool with our energy and basically done it without even a fight.

And so, I think this is one of the things that Americans are going to be slapped in the face when they realize this confluence of terrible energy policy from the by the administration, meeting with this whole Russian invasion of Ukraine, the energy costs are going to go through the ceiling, but it is of our own making.

CARLSON: And energy is your power. I mean, it's pretty simple.

RYUN: That's right.

CARLSON: Right. Yes, I know, it is weird how we don't recognize that. Ned Ryun, appreciate you coming on.

RYUN: I know.

CARLSON: Thank you.

RYUN: Thanks, Tucker.

CARLSON: So we've been told that sanctions, they told us for years would deter Russian aggression. Today, the President acknowledged the obvious that they didn't.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

QUESTION: The statement that he gave last night -- the threat that he gave the West will face consequences greater than any you have faced in history? Is he threatening a nuclear strike?

BIDEN: I have no idea what he is threatening. I know what he has done.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CARLSON: Clint Ehrlich is a Russia policy researcher, one of the wisest. He joins us, Clint, thanks so much for coming on. You'll notice they're deflecting blame immediately. Anyone who is concerned about becoming enmeshed in Eastern Europe is responsible for the invasion of Ukraine, you've got it.

But in real life, isn't it time maybe to think through the policies that failed to prevent this? Are we going to do that, do you believe?

CLINT EHRLICH, RUSSIA POLICY RESEARCHER: You'd think that we would do that, but it seems like if we talk about the policies that led us here, we're being labeled as traitors to America, that they are determined to repeat the same course of action that has led Ukraine to the slaughter.

And so I think that if these people are really concerned about Ukraine and the suffering that we are all seeing on television, then they should take responsibility for the choices that they've made that have brought the world not just to the precipice of a conflict in Ukraine, but frankly, to the precipice of a World War.

CARLSON: Well, that's -- thank you for noting the obvious, and I know that there are a lot of them, but just give us the top one or two policies that we should maybe rethink if we don't want this to become something even worse than it is.

EHRLICH: Well, there are so many. The immediate one right now is this claim that we should conduct cyberattacks against Russia. If we do that, Russia will retaliate. They will retaliate against our critical infrastructure and American civilians could die.

And so then, we're thrust into a situation where we have to decide, will we retaliate kinetically against Russia, it's just, Tucker, it is impossible to understate the severity of what these people are flirting with. They're flirting with open conflict with Russia, and they're not taking responsibility for it.

CARLSON: Yes, I think you're right. Hope you're wrong. I don't think you are. Clint Ehrlich, great to see you tonight.

EHRLICH: My pleasure. Thank you, Tucker.

CARLSON: Thanks. We're going to take a quick break. As you know, the war is now underway in Ukraine. And of course, we have been covering it.

Doug Macgregor and Brit Hume after the break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CARLSON: So this is still unfolding. It is still not clear what the next stage of the invasion will be and what Europe will look like when it's over. Doug Macgregor knows a lot about Europe. He is a retired Army Colonel. He joins us tonight.

Doug, what do you think happens next?

COL. DOUGLAS MACGREGOR (RET), U.S. ARMY: Well, this is an inherently limited operation. The Russian Army is a little bit over 400,000 smaller than the United States Army. The Russian economy is smaller than the economy of South Korea. They can't sustain these operations for very long.

Putin has allegedly already sent an ultimatum to President Zelensky. I can't confirm it, but the rumors are strong and I suspect he has, telling him that if he is willing to suspend any further interest in expanding to NATO, Putin will control the ground east of the Dnieper River along with Crimea and so forth, and our friend, Zelensky can have what remains, but he hasn't answered.

If he doesn't, then Putin is stuck with the requirement to cross the river and head towards the Polish border, which is something I think he privately would probably want to avoid.

NATO is fragmenting along cultural historical lines, particularly with the resurgence of the Russo-German relationship, which is very strong, and has been for hundreds of years. And then finally, our countermeasures are ineffective, completely ineffective.

CARLSON: That seems sadly true. I appreciate your coming on tonight. Doug Macgregor, thank you.

MACGREGOR: Sure.

CARLSON: Brit Hume wraps it up for us tonight. Brit, I know you are set about this. I think most people are watching it.

BRIT HUME, FOX NEWS CHANNEL SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST:* Bad day.

CARLSON: Bad day. I agree with that completely. What happens next?

HUME: Well, let me just make a couple of points. First, I don't think that the issue of Ukraine joining NATO is what this is about, and I don't think for a minute that some public forswearing of NATO including Ukraine would change anything.

Putin wanted Ukraine, wants Ukraine, and he's now trying to get it.

CARLSON: Right.

HUME: And I don't think that, you know, who speaks Russian where or any of that is really what this is all about. It sticks in his craw that Ukraine which has got a lot of resources, big agricultural producer, natural resources, sticks in his craw that that was lost when the Cold War ended and the Soviet Union collapsed. That's point one.

Point two is, there are a couple of things we could be doing and may have to do. One of them is obviously as other guests have mentioned, we need to unleash our energy sector.

Biden has put shackles on it. He shut down pipelines. He has cut off drilling and so on. We need to have that flowing full speed for two reasons. One is to supply our own energy sector, our own economy well, and also to give us the chance to shore up Europe's energy supplies if there's a cut off from Russia. Russia pumps out natural gas and now, the Nord Stream Pipeline has been stopped for now.

But we are exporting liquefied natural gas there now, we could do a lot more of that, and that would help Europe and strengthen Europe, so those are just two things we can do.

CARLSON: God, I hope someone is listening to you because you're right.

HUME: Two things we could do that would be peaceful means.

CARLSON: Amen. Brit Hume, thank you for that.

HUME : You bet.

CARLSON: That's it for us. We will be back tomorrow.

Here is Sean Hannity.

Copy: Content and Programming Copyright 2022 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2022 VIQ Media Transcription, Inc. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of VIQ Media Transcription, Inc. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.