I know that it’s an older article but it’s grounded with historical facts involving all the players and a view point that’s neither corporate funded nor orchestrated.
I expected better from Al Jazeera. Misses the mark. In looking at Leonid Ragozin's other articles, he likely gets paid by the Russian government for such pseudo in-depth looks. This is an opinion piece that pulls a muscle with each stretch. Paul4747 nails it in his comment.
This article is disingenuous at best. It attempts to portray Putin as extending only a hand of friendship ("reviving relations" ), when his real interest lies in having an America that will acquiesce in Russia's steamrolling its neighbors and regaining a sphere of influence from which other nations will be excluded. In fact, Putin is waging a new Cold War.
This quote in particular gave me a grim smile:
"This entire phenomenon stems from the stubborn denial by some Americans that we live in a highly globalised world, where the domestic politics of old sovereign nation-states are considerably less important than transnational political alliances that unite people on either side of the global political barricade."
Except that Russia, under Putin, is not seeking to "unite" with anyone, but to dominate, just as he currently dominates the relationship with Trump. Trump is a convenient foil and a convenient fool.
"Does this mean that when Jack Hanick - a founding producer of Fox News - set up the transnational media empire of the ultra-right, pro-Kremlin oligarch Konstantin Malofeev and helped to promote pro-Kremlin narratives in Russia and Europe, he was part of a conspiracy to keep Putin in power?" Yes. Yes, it does.
It's not "collective hysteria" when state-sponsored Russian intelligence actively attacked the DNC's cyber network for information they could pass on and leak. It's not "hysteria" when 3 intelligence agencies can examine the evidence and each declare that Russia took sides in the US election and set about tilting it toward Trump because Putin had a grudge against Clinton. And it's not "hysteria" when we know they've already done it again during the midterm elections and are preparing more of the same, and on a larger scale, for 2020.
This IS war. Putin has had his own citizens killed at home and abroad. He has attacked us in cyberspace. He has corrupted our election process.
What disturbs me most is how many Americans just don't give a shit because they prefer to believe Russia's lies. After all, those lies sound so much like Trump's lies, and his lies are so entertaining. And nobody liked Hilary anyway.
The hilarious thing is that the author's appeal for internationalism is one that neither Putin nor Trump would agree with, but I would... so long as we could get rid of leaders like Putin and Trump.
While do respect your opinion it is in fact just that an opinion.
You only know what you think you know purely based on the information given to you by a media that is as propagandist as RT is.
You just as the majority of people in this country purposely seek out information that best conforms to your predisposed ideologies and biases.
Which by the way is something that y’all have in common with the Fox News crowd and that’s ok to hate a reflection of yourselves even though it usually motivates change but can lead to subconsciously self loathing.
So anyway the cyber attack still hasn’t been proven to be 100% Russian and even if they had why has no one ever disputed the contents within.
And let’s not be ignorant if we were called out for interfering with the elections as well as the governments of who knows how many nations.
Seriously I could waste my day pointing out all the overwhelming hypocrisy and bias but I won’t give you anymore ammunition so that you can return and recite what you’ve been taught to believe.
So whatever dude I’ll just wait for you to return to my post with your dismissive, passive, aggressive bs that I always see from you especially after I post something. So until then