"The Russian government simply does not understand that Washington regards Russian appeals to diplomacy, law, facts, evidence, as signs of extreme weakness and lack of confidence"
Russians are having a difficult time comprehending their Western enemy or even understanding that Russia has an enemy that seeks the destruction of Russia.
Has it occured to Russia that it is very strange that the UK, a country of no military significance, a country that could be completely destroyed forever in a few minutes by Russia, would concoct false charges against the Russian government, announce these charges publicly without providing any evidence whatsoever, bring the unsupported charges to the UN, issue an ultimatum to Russia, dispell Russian diplomats and seize Russian assets on the basis of mere allegations, all the while refusing any evidence and any cooperation with Russia, as required by law, in the investigation of the charges?
Russians, both government, media and youth brainwashed by American propaganda and the Washington-funded NGOS that the Russian government permits to operate against itself in Russia, seem to think that the many accusations and threats issued against Russia are some kind of mistake that can be rectified by recourse to evidence and law. Apparently, after all these years the Russians still do not understand that Washington and its vassals have no interest whatsoever in facts or law.
At the UN the Russian ambassador, in response to the evidence-free accusation by the UK prime minister that the Russian government had used a military-grade nerve agent to attempt to kill two people on an English park bench, went through all the legal reasons, including the requirement of collaboration with Russia in examining the evidence, to establish that the UK accusation was in violation of law and unsupported by any evidence.
The British government of Tony Blair cooperated with the George W. Bush regime in propagating the lie that Saddam Hussein in Iraq had “weapons of mass destruction.” This lie was used to invade and to destroy Iraq and to leave the country 15 years later in chaos.
The British goverment also supported the lies about Gadaffi in Libya and participated in overthrowing the Libyan government. The British government also supported the lie that Iran had a nuclear weapons program. There was never any evidence, but evidence was of no interest. An agenda was in motion, and the agenda was independent of evidence.
Although the British Parliament voted down British participation in Obama’s planned invasion of Syria, the current British government supports the lie that Assad is using chemical weapons “against his own people.”
By now one would think that Russians, both government, media, and public, would understand that all the West is capable of is to lie. The purpose of the lies is to demonize Russia and to set up Russia for military attack.
The inability of Russians to understand the West, which Russia stupidly wants to join, is the reason that World War 3 is near at hand.
What if, instead of reciting the legal process and the law governing it that the UK PM refused to follow before publicly accusing Russia without the presentation of any evidence, The Russian UN Ambassador had simply said: “If the UK exists tomorrow, it will be due entirely to the forbearance of the Russian government.”
By relying on law, about which no Western country gives a hoot, the Russian UN ambassador permitted Washington’s French puppet and other of Washington’s European puppet states to say that they supported the British charges against Russia despite the absence of evidence. Perhaps the Russians noticed that none of those European governments required any evidence that Russia was responsible. All that was required was the accusation.
In the exceptional, indispensable Western World ruled by Washington, accusation alone is proof of Russian mendacity. When British Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn asked PM May if she actually had any real evidence that Russia had tried to kill the former British double-agent, Corbyn was shouted down not only by the corrupt Conservatives but also by members of the Labour Party that he heads. How much more evidence does Russia need that facts are not important to the West?
What if the Russian government simply told Washington: “If you or your terrorist mercenaries attack Syrian forces, we will eliminate your presence in the Middle East and Israel as well.” This is something that Russia can do at the drop of a hat.
What would the British and Washington do, other than wet their pants? Clearly, they would get the message and decide that peace is a better idea.
The Russian government simply does not understand that Washington regards Russian appeals to diplomacy, law, facts, evidence, as signs of extreme weakness and lack of confidence. Washington and its puppet states do not need any facts. They have an agenda. By calling for facts, the Russians show their weakness.
The Russian display of weakness encourages Washington’s aggression. Does Russia’s desire to be a part of the West exceed its desire for national survival?