Tuesday, December 01, 2015

Cameron's 70,000 Moderate Fighters and Freedom of Speech

Sometimes reading Western media reveils true gems of journalism (albeit seldom without some specific Western taste).

Now it's Independent and an article of Robert Fisk titled "David Cameron, there aren't 70,000 moderate fighters in Syria - and whoever heard of a moderate with a Kalashnikov, anyway?". You are very welcome to follow the link and read it yourself, it well worth it.

However, the author cannot just pass by, leaving Russia untouched.
Vladimir Putin comprehends this. He knows that Turkey is helping Isis – this is why he is going to destroy the Isis oil smuggling route to Turkey – and, as a former serving KGB officer, he understands the cynicism of any crisis. If an American aircraft had strayed into Turkish airspace, he asked at his Kremlin press conference with François Hollande last week, does anyone believe that Turkey would have shot down the US pilots? We all know the answer to that. If Turkey wished to destroy Isis, why does it bombard Isis’ Kurdish enemies? Why does it imprison two of Turkey’s top journalists for reporting how the Turkish intelligence service smuggled weapons to Islamist fighters in Syria? And Putin is hardly going to object if the EU is bent on suicide-through-fear.
You know what?

The EU members do remember, I hope, advantages of unification and joining forces. So do we, former citizens of the Soviet Union. It's just natural, for people to unite. And unnatural — to disintegrate. The USSR fell apart due to problems carefully fed up by external forces using hot and cold warfare; and it became a geopolitical tragedy that cost tens millions of lives; at least 13 millions for Russia alone; quite close to losses in the WW2.

Now some external forces are striving to blast the EU from inside. And it looks like some people see some profit Russia could get of it. I would greatly appreciate if you explain me the reasons of such thoughts; I just do not see any advantages for Russia from Europe in flames.

It looks like authors are just obliged to bite Russia and/or Putin at least once. In the "world of democratical rights and freedoms" only that speech is free, which is politically correct and meets some "corporate standards", isn't it?

No comments:

Post a Comment