[ad_1]
President Trump's national security adviser, John Bolton, was in Moscow last week to hold a historic summit between his boss and Russian President Vladimir Putin. Bolton, who has been asking the US for years to inflict "pain" on Russia, and more specifically Putin, has been instructed by Trump to change his mind. He was forced to lose some of his neo-conservative skin and participate in the establishment of peace. Trump certainly deserves credit for that!
As expected in the current US political climate, neo-conservatives have teamed up with left-wing anti-Trump forces – and US satellites abroad – to challenge each other To vigorously counter the movement towards peace with Russia. As expected, the Sudel media reinforce any objection to any move away from a confrontation with Russia.
Bolton had barely left Moscow when the media began their attacks.
US allies are "nervous" about the planned summit, Reuters reported. They did not mention an American ally who claimed to be nervous, but they speculated that Britain and Ukraine would not be happy if the United States and Russia improved their relations. But why is it? The current Ukrainian government is in power solely because the Obama administration has waged a coup against the democratically elected president to bring American puppets to power. You are right to be nervous. And the British government is rightly worried. She swore that Russia is behind "poisoning" scripts without providing evidence for their claims. Hundreds of Russian diplomats have been expelled from Western countries solely for their word. And in recent months, each of their allegations has turned out to be false.
The response to Bolton's trip to Russia by the US-funded US think tank in the 1950s was particularly extreme. Their "expert" based in Russia, Anders Åslund, tweeted that Bolton, a long-time anti-Russian hawk, was "captured by the Kremlin" and must now be considered a Russian agent to help arrange a meeting between Trump and Putin . Do they really want a nuclear war?
"Experts" are generally wrong when it comes to peace pens. They depend on having "official enemies" to live on. In 1985, national security expert Zbigniew Brzezinski attacked the idea of a summit between President Reagan and Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev. Such things are "degrading" and "tactically imprudent," he said, as the Washington Times reported. Such a meeting would only "raise" Gorbachev and make him "the first among his peers", he said. Fortunately, Reagan Gorbachev has met at several heights and the rest belongs to history. Brzezinski was wrong and the peacemakers were right.
President Trump should understand that every step towards better relations with Russia has already been approved by the American people. His position with Russia was well known. He strongly encouraged the idea that the United States of America should put an end to the hostility towards Russia that characterizes the Obama administration and find a way to work together. Voters knew his position and voted against Hillary Clinton, who was also very clear about Russia: no more confrontation and more aggression.
President Trump would do well to ignore the neo-conservative speakers and "experts" of think tanks that were to be paid by defense contractors. He should ignore the "never-deceiving ones" who have not yet made a coherent political argument against the president. The extent of his opposition to Trump seems to be exhausted in that he "is mean and rude." Hopefully, a Trump / Putin meeting will take a step towards true reconciliation and the removal of the threat of a nuclear war.
Original article Who's afraid of the Trump / Putin summit? of 2 July 2018
Source http://www.antikrieg.eu/aktuell/2018_07_03_werfuerchtet.htm
Source link
