Putin's games with the West | The Economist

[Fledermaus]

I can't really see the reason to debate with you further if there is a number of proofs that these chemical attacks were staged, victims confessed and final report on this attack contains only vague formulations on the use of chemical weapons with allegedly, possibly or highly likely.

Look up the word 'Proof'.

Although, I'll take my time to answer you.
Having studied chemistry in the lab for several years and seeing most of the substances in real life it was fascinating to read. The report contains vague formulations which can be interpreted in many ways, either chlorine gas was used or either there were used alternatives chemicals substances which resulted in the presence of chlorine on the samples.
You can also read the whole final report:
https://web.archive.org/web/2019030...lt/files/documents/2019/03/s-1731-2019(e).pdf
Claims based on
witnesses’ /interviews testimonies - videos expose the chemical attack was staged and victims came to the Hague, I sent the links in previous posts to the briefing and add a few additional ones from Douma:
YouTube
YouTube
YouTube
If you're not satisfied with this argument, then you can dive into the OPCW report:
8.48 Medical staff interviewed by the FFM team members provided their account of events at the hospital on that day. A number of these witnesses reported that there were many fatalities (not all) caused by suffocation from dust and rubble as a consequence of the heavy shelling. The number of deaths was exacerbated by the absence of ambulance and
rescue services.
8.52 Some (but not all) of the medical staff who were interviewed did not hear about the alleged chemical attack from videos circulating on the internet or from other people until a couple of days after the alleged attack on 7 April.
8.54 A number (A number. Nebulous. And definitely not all) of the interviewed medical staff who were purportedly present in the emergency department on 7 April emphasised that the presentation of the casualties was not consistent with that expected from a chemical attack.
8.83 All treatment was reported to be based upon observed signs and symptoms. No diagnostic tests were performed on any casualty. (Because the team was not allowed to visit until weeks later)
8.103 "based on the information reviewed and with the absence of bio-medical samples from the dead bodies or any autopsy
records, it is not currently possible to precisely link the cause of the signs and symptoms to a specific chemical."
environmental and biomedical samples analysis results
2.11 (p.4) - based on the information reviewed and with the absence of biomedical samples from the dead bodies or any autopsy records, it is not currently possible to precisely link the cause of the signs and symptoms to a specific chemical.
detected chemicals (a) chemical triethanolamine, which was detected at trace levels in various clothing samples belonging to alleged victims and in grouting from the tunnel beneath the hospital; and (b) chemical known as “AmgardV19” which was detected at trace levels in one item of clothing of one alleged victim. The presence and concentration of both
chemicals are readily explained given their common use in surfactant and flame retardant formulations in textiles.
<Snipped>

To finalise, even though the conclusion states that highly likely chlorine was allegedly used, the report substance itself proves that there is no direct evidence of chlorine use whatsoever with only highly likely as usual, and later used as a bulletproof truth in the non-biased western media sources. Superficial yellow press, nothing to add more.

Why did you not include 2.1 through 2.17 which discusses the chlorine, the delivery method and the results?

Or 9.1 to 9.12 where they give their findings?

There was a chemical strike.

There were aerial "barrel bombs" consistent with Syrian use.

The chemical was chlorine.

The claimed rebel warehouse wasn't the source of the Chlorine.

 

[Fledermaus]

and also according to logic.

RT (formerly Russia Today) is a Russian international television network funded by the Russian government.

 

[MarcoLT]

RT (formerly Russia Today) is a Russian international television network funded by the Russian government.

The former head of the channel Simonyan openly stated that the channel's intent was to have a "professional format" akin to the BBC and Euronews that would "reflect Russia's opinion of the world" and present a "more balanced picture" of Russia.The channel's slogan is "Question More", and the network aims to provide its international audience with the Russian viewpoint on global events.

There is no secret in that at all about the background of this channel. Nevertheless being Russian, RT channel presents more impartial position than many of the aforementioned BBC, Euronews or CNN. After the previous critique that channel presents the worldview of decaying west and ignores domestic problems, RT has changed its policies and became more balanced in its reports and started presenting news of Russia's domestic policy. Then, after the UK accussed RT of impartiality on Skripal case in 7 reports - RT reviewed its policies again and started presenting even more balanced position, e.g. the first what comes to my mind, is during the US troops withdrawal from Syria, presenting the position of everyone involved into this - Kurds, Syrian govt, opposition, etc, which wasn't presented anywhere else. Reading RT is not about the fully believing everything what is being said, but about asking, analysing and being sceptical towards impartiality of conventional sources of information presented by western media outlets.

 

[Litwin]

only according to your tv.ru propagandacondoms´ logic

 

[Fledermaus]

The former head of the channel Simonyan openly stated that the channel's intent was to have a "professional format" akin to the BBC and Euronews that would "reflect Russia's opinion of the world" and present a "more balanced picture" of Russia.The channel's slogan is "Question More", and the network aims to provide its international audience with the Russian viewpoint on global events.

There is no secret in that at all about the background of this channel. Nevertheless being Russian, RT channel presents more impartial position than many of the aforementioned BBC, Euronews or CNN. After the previous critique that channel presents the worldview of decaying west and ignores domestic problems, RT has changed its policies and became more balanced in its reports and started presenting news of Russia's domestic policy. Then, after the UK accussed RT of impartiality on Skripal case in 7 reports - RT reviewed its policies again and started presenting even more balanced position, e.g. the first what comes to my mind, is during the US troops withdrawal from Syria, presenting the position of everyone involved into this - Kurds, Syrian govt, opposition, etc, which wasn't presented anywhere else. Reading RT is not about the fully believing everything what is being said, but about asking, analysing and being sceptical towards impartiality of conventional sources of information presented by western media outlets.

RT lies.

Repeatedly.

 

[MarcoLT]

RT lies.

Repeatedly.

Everyone lies, if you didn't know that. Who tells the truth in your case? American Endowment for Democracy?

 

[Fledermaus]

Everyone lies, if you didn't know that. Who tells the truth in your case? American Endowment for Democracy?

The business of RT is to lie.



Why did you not include 2.1 through 2.17 which discusses the chlorine, the delivery method and the results?

Or 9.1 to 9.12 where they give their findings?

There was a chemical strike.

There were aerial "barrel bombs" consistent with Syrian use.

The chemical was chlorine.

The claimed rebel warehouse wasn't the source of the Chlorine.

 

[Evilroddy]

Great points . do you agree with Garry Kasparov?

Litwin:

The video and Mr. Kasparov deliver a good analysis of the problem posed by the Putin Regime in Russia, but unfortunately presents a weak recipe for solving it. It is easy to say the West must isolate, contain, sanction and restrict Russia and its present leadership but that's very hard to do because even Western states have other priorities to balance against disciplining the Putin Regime.

Presuming for the moment that America could somehow get all of the European states to go along with such a focused plan, Eurasia won't cooperate and Russia can eventually shift its economic efforts eastward rather than westward.

As Russia becomes less dependent on Western trade, it will see the barriers to taking a much more aggressive stance against the West as weakening and thus the potential for friction leading to covert conflict leading to overt conflict with the West will increase. Eastern Europe is the Achillies heel for the West as it does not have the longstanding experience and attachment to liberal-democratic institutions and ethos. This makes Eastern Europe fertile ground for the Russian Regime's efforts to undermine democracy and promote authoritarianism in order to entangle Europe in its own squabbles between the Rule of the Demos and the Rule of the Strongman/woman. This sub rosa battle has the added benefit to Russia of exposing the rot of oligarchy, plutocracy, cororatism and elite-driven politics which has gripped Western politics and alienated more and more of the Demos in Western countries like Italy, France, Britain, Germany and to a lesser extent Spain. If the Putin Regime can do more damage to the West from within while the West damages Russia from without, then Kaparov's plan will fail miserably.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.

 

[MarcoLT]

Litwin:

The video and Mr. Kasparov deliver a good analysis of the problem posed by the Putin Regime in Russia, but unfortunately presents a weak recipe for solving it. It is easy to say the West must isolate, contain, sanction and restrict Russia and its present leadership but that's very hard to do because even Western states have other priorities to balance against disciplining the Putin Regime.

Presuming for the moment that America could somehow get all of the European states to go along with such a focused plan, Eurasia won't cooperate and Russia can eventually shift its economic efforts eastward rather than westward.

I agree.
1) Continuing isolation will lead western states to deeper internal division. The harsher it is, the more obligations states will have among each other to avoid any kind of cooperation with Russia. But western states cannot isolate Russia because they are at least energy dependent without any viable alternative. Firstly, look on the Nord Stream 2 and internal division on it among the European states. Secondly, look at yesterday's meeting of Estonian president with Putin in Moscow, terminating the 10 years lasting diplomatic silence with Russia and resulting into mixed reaction among the leaders of Baltic states (at least, internally. In Lithuania this move was vocally criticised during the presidential election debates). Thirdly, look at the level of economic losses by European businesses because of these sanctions. Variety of the western states (Germany, Poland, Norway, etc.) after imposing sanctions started looking for alternatives, selling products to Russia through Belarus and Asian countries. Business is not politics.
2) These visa restrictions and the seizure of economic capital is playing only in favour of Putin. One of the main goals of him was to return all assets stolen by oligarchs in 90s and return them back into the Russian economy. Oligarch stolen in Russia cannot simply put in offshore, and this is leading to increased investments into the Russian economy and motivating these Oligarchs to develop their businesses in Russia. Look at the annual business forums in St.Petersburg, gathering more and more investors into the Russian businesses and economy, including the skyrocketed numbers from the western states.
3) The events such as World Cup 2018 in Russia increase the internal division of western states, while tourists coming to Russia with the concern of their safety, return back to their homeland with their own positive opinion which is totally incongruent with the narrative of western media. Youtube with other alternative sources of western mainstream media only continues doing exactly that.
4) Russia can eventually shift its economic efforts eastwards.

I am pro-European, studying European politics and believe in a bright future of the EU. Nevertheless, let's not be blind on the matter of isolation, containment and other restrictions of Russia by blindly believing in the strategies coming from the neocons and their sixes, especially from such controversial characters like Kasparov.