The basic question is why doesn’t Russia do more to respond to US provocations. The Saker’s answer, linked in the first sentence, is well worth reading. So to is Roberts’ response to the Saker. From Paul Craig Roberts at paulcraigroberts.com:
The Saker has answered my question: http://thesaker.is/reply-to-paul-craig-roberts-crucial-question/ Except for his belief in the predominance of US military force over Russia in Syria and his possible misreading of my phrase, “turning the other cheek,” to imply Russian meekness rather than a calculated strategy that might be mistaken, I agree with him.
The difference, if there is one, is that by “provocations” I am addressing a broader arena than the possibilities for military confrontation in Syria/Iran and Ukraine. My concerns include, for example, the orchestrated “Skripal poisoning” by a “deadly nerve agent.” This story, despite the total absense of any evidence—indeed, the presence of much evidence against it—continues to develop with ever more absurd accusations. The purpose of this story is to put Russia and its president in the worst possible light, thereby creating a climate of belief for the next false flag attack to be blamed on Russia.
The question is: How much can Washington and its two-bit punk European vassals demonize Russia before it is impossible for the West to deal with Russia in a realistic and responsible manner? What was the Democratic Party and presstitute media thinking, assuming that they are capable of thought, most likely a risky assumption, when they lied, cheated, and stole in order to put Hillary Clinton in the White House? For the United States to have a president who forecloses in advance all negotiation and all trust between the US and Russian governments by declaring the president of Russia to be “the new Hitler” guarantees not only an escalation of dangerous tensions but also guarantees the inability to reduce them. It is this type of escalation more than a possible confrontation between US and Russian forces in Syria that can lead to explosive results.
The most scary fact of our time is that the two men most committed to peaceful relations between the US and Russia—Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin—are the two most demonized people on Earth. The demonization of Trump and Putin is the principal activity of the US media and the Democratic Party.
The demonization goes on all day every day. For example, the fake, nonsensical NY Times op-ed written by the NY Times itself and not by an anonymous “senior Trump official” was the principal focus yesterday of NPR. There was nothing balanced about NPR’s coverage. The NPR presstitutes rounded up every anti-Trump demonizer it could find to add to the conclusion that Trump was unfit for office and needed to be removed.
The previous day Putin was NPR’s target. NPR had the vice chairman of “Open Russia,” a Russiaphobic organization, spewing like a broken fire hydrant the most vile lies and accusations about “Putin’s Russia.” There was no contrary opinion. The NPR host treated it all as the exact truth. In other words, it was a propaganda show, not a news report. What is the purpose of these orchestrated demonizations? Is the purpose to further peace? Understanding? Defuse tensions? Better relations between nuclear powers? Obviously, none of the above.
How can the US media be so utterly stupid and irresponsible as to create a situation in which if a crisis erupts the leaders of the two major nuclear powers cannot speak to one another with an iota of trust? What is more dangerous for the world than the climate of hate Putin/hate Trump that the presstitutes, Democrats, US military/security complex, neocons, and crazed Republicans like John McCain have created?
The fact is this: In the United States and UK, political and media voices are doing everything to make impossible a responsible relationship between the two great powers. What could be more certain to result in war?
Many thanks to Ron Unz for hosting this exchange between Martyanov, The Saker, and myself.