Maybe in this case, Putin is doing it. Overall, I suspect that the project Cold War II is driven from East AND West likewise (Syria looks like a proxy war to me).
On this I agree. Everyone is familiar with Russian security apparatus being in control of the state, but similar influence is largely ignored, unknown or even supported in Western countries. CIA agents employed by Trump to be senior ministers, CIA operatives proudly running their credentials to run for office, jeopardizing their political impartiality -
and bringing their particular views on US pre-eminence and how to maintain that hegemony on the world stage (which despite its claims of stability, usually entails destabilizing every country which moves towards a multipolar world), shit's rather fucked.
I was looking for that. True, the UK said to provide samples, but there is no mention whether the UK has called for an investigation. As far as I could find out, this is unknown at present.
The UK government has asked the OPCW to investigate the use of novichok in the attempted murder of the Russian former spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia in Salisbury. Theresa May said in a Commons statement on Wednesday: “We are working with the police to enable the OPCW to independently verify our analysis.”
Well they didn't exactly send the sample to be a museum piece 
Sorry Loud Whispers.
Let's see now how the investigation goes!
No worries fam
PS: and martinuzz, I know the feeling that someone else seems to be bought on the internet very well, but I assure you it is not the case with me.
At least paid shills aren't doing it for free lol, but that's another thing entirely
I grew up discussing with my children friends how the nuclear war would wipe us all out and how our country would be defended by our allies bombing it into oblivion to stop the advancing soviet troops.
Glory of freedom bombing! But this is a rather interesting conundrum, particularly since I heard it both ways. Of the French who believed that NATO would prefer USSR occupation of Europe to a nuclear war, of the German who believed that occupation by the USSR would be preferable to its vigorous defence - would the gulag leave more survivors?
I am surprised, I have not perceived the UK media or the UK government being too critical of itself.
UK media is critical of the UK government, but not critical of UK media. The UK government is critical of its internal opposition, but not when mutual crimes are involved. Too much of both UK media and UK government hold much of the UK people in disregard, and at times even contempt :<
I'd say between states moral standards are only important to the point over which someone could lose their job (which is one use of shady agencies).
As an aside, between states moral standards are of paramount importance. States exist for as long as people believe in the moral superiority of the state, especially if it has been divorced from the institutions of the past. Remove moral superiority, remove historical institutions, and all you have left is force, and that's when things fall apart
This is one possibility, and if it is the truth I completely agree with you, but it may also be what you are made to believe. At present, I do not think you need to be a conspiracy theorist to see how other scenarios also have at least moderate plausability. Never forget the last time Nato was dragged into a war based on lies, there even was fabricated evidence. You can believe what you want of course, but if you really wonder what the truth is, I'd suggest to wait a bit more.
The spreading of disinformation by Russian media apparatus or their ministries suggests to me that it'd be foolish to attribute equal probabilities to which is true. Without evidence of a false flag or mafia hit, Putin's disinformation and threats to defectors speaks volumes.
I fear you are right. I think it is terrifying to live in such a situation with a direct neighbour and if a cold war turns too hot, it will be good for the UK to be an island, but it won't help continental Europe. However, as implied before, I think the actions of Nato are equally responsible for this mess as is Putin's behaviour, and the reason in the background is an overlap in the respective desired spheres of influence. Russia has interests beyond its borders and Nato's interests end no earlier than Russia's borders.
No point fearing a hot war tbh, Russia is much too outgunned by its neighbours. It'd have a tough time dealing with its security concerns in Finland, Poland, Ukraine and China before you factor in any of the major powers like Italy or Germany, never mind France or the UK.
And this is obviously ignoring the American juggernaut. The actions Putin has taken has benefited him, allowing him to borrow the language of a superpower. Why else does he talk so much of his nuclear arsenal? It is a yearn for prestige lost with the collapse of the USSR, a desire to recapture it without provoking conflict with so many foes. Furthermore, it should seem readily apparent how self-defeating Russia's foreign policy is if it wished to avoid NATO encroachment. The nations joining NATO or the European alliances, are banding together voluntarily because they fear Russian invasion. Waging war against your neighbours to stop them from joining alliances against you is only providing a bigger list of reasons why they should seek protection against you. The UK's status as an island is only useful in so far as maritime defence is assured; the English channel is very narrow, D-Days can go both ways. Should the continent fall, the islands would be in a rather perilous position, thus I don't think the Eastern Europeans need fear anything but the ineptitude of our Prime Ministers when it comes to defence commitments.
Yes and no, as I already said above. I think we are in a cold war-like phase and both sides act correspondingly. And if there will be a war, countries are being destroyed and people are dying and both sides won't care about them, we can thank the elites on both sides because they did not manage to get along in their greed for power. Just ask around in Ukraine or Syria, those people already know.
While lamenting the pointless destruction of Syria, I do think Ukraine is a poor example. While I further disagree with the employment of revolutions as a useful tool for advancement, or in the support of revolutions supported by particularly potent Westerners, Yanukovych's corruption was extraordinary even for an ex-Soviet nation and his strategy was alike Russia's - being useful only for alienating the majority of people by turning an ally into a common enemy. It's how you turn a country such as Ukraine, the birthplace of Russian civilization, from a populace pro-Russia into a populace inviting NATO and the EU to its borders.
Author
Topic: The friendly and polite Europe related terrible jokes thread (Read 1107111 times)