Posted 9 декабря 2021,, 12:36

Published 9 декабря 2021,, 12:36

Modified 24 декабря 2022,, 22:37

Updated 24 декабря 2022,, 22:37

Biden raised his hands - TV decided that he gave up

Biden raised his hands - TV decided that he gave up

9 декабря 2021, 12:36
The most curious thing is that this time the TV did not sin against the truth. The long-awaited Biden-Putin summit began with this very scene. Biden raised both arms above his head, and Putin happily moved his legs under the table.
Сюжет
Television

Sergey Mitrofanov

How did we know about this? The second camera captured Putin from the side. Thus, nothing prevented TV from declaring the results of the summit a victory for Putin and the surrender of the West.

However, the plot was divided into two distinct narratives - before and after the summit. Before the summit, the stakes were raised, and TV constantly asked experts, including Ukrainian ones: "When will we attack you?" The question, I must say, is strange and to the wrong address, and it is strange that the guests in the studio did not pay attention to it. After all, you need to ask not the experts, but the talk show hosts directly. The question should have been directed in the other direction: "When will you attack Ukraine?" And the answer: "We are not going to attack Ukraine" Or: "We are not going to attack Ukraine if we are not forced".

What drew attention these days was that the theses of Russian television people always consisted of two parts in one sentence, connected or, on the contrary, separated by a comma or a particle of opposition.

In the first part - a positive message, in the second its negation or some kind of reservation, leveling the positiveness of the first part.

"We are peaceful people, but our red lines are on the sidelines." "Until Ukraine joins NATO, nothing bad will happen to it." "Russia is looking for good and predictable relations with the United States and is not going to attack anyone, but it does have red lines." What comes after the word "however" reduces the positive message of the first part of the phrase. "Red Lines" - this is such a mined space, you step and - Bdym!

First Deputy Chairman of the State Duma Committee for CIS Affairs Konstantin Zatulin: "We have never done anything if there was no reason for it." However, there is no doubt: the seeker will always find a reason for it. Isn't that the reason for the Kiev coup of 1914, the Vlasovites in power, the oppression of the Russian people, calling for liberation? Reasons above the roof. Does this mean that they are going (or were going to) attack? Did we understand Zatulin correctly?

Is it possible to consider as peacekeeping the thesis of the director of the International Institute of the Newest States Alexei Martynov (by the way, in the heat of the talking shop he was introduced as Markov, Serega Markov - a Freudian slip of the tongue): "For Ukraine to return to its native harbor, no invasion is needed."

That is, the invasion is, in principle, necessary. But you can get by with lower costs, Martynov, as it were, thinks. And if it doesn’t work out at a lower cost ... then there’s nothing to do, you still have to invade. Likewise, Korotchenko cannot be considered a peacekeeper, who suddenly declared that Ukraine does not interest us, since we will bomb the decision-making centers. And the coordinates of the Pentagon - de we know.

Obviously, this is all - inflating poker rates to an unattainable (common sense) height.

Disposition after the summit

Biden, although he raised both hands up, he hardly gave up in the first seconds of the meeting. The meeting itself was not shown to us, but you can calculate what was there by the consequences. The next day, the intensity of threats and promises decreased somewhat, the discourse returned to the "Minsk agreements", which, however, mean such an unpleasant thing for a patriotic intoxication as Russia's recognition that Donbass is still Ukraine. And no matter that the Minsk agreements are impracticable in principle, it is important that in this case the grounds for defending the Ukrainian Donbass with Russian high-precision weapons are lost, as Korotchenko and other comrades promise. The return by Ukraine of its seized territories (with the exception of Crimea, it is difficult to return it) will not be considered in world public opinion as an attack on Russia.

It's a bitter pill, but it's sweetened. All this time, agents of the West have frightened Putin's elite with a crusade against its foreign assets. In exchange for a promise of non-aggression against Ukraine, Putin secured them somewhat, and this was stated not by enemy voices, but by our patriotic TV in plain text.

From the US military budget, they say, as if by magic, the lines about sanctions against Nord Stream-2 (which means gas will go to Europe, and currency from Europe) and against Putin's inner circle (about 30 oligarchs), who hold assets (common funds ) in the West. So we can assume that the seemingly pointless and costly movement of troops along the border with Ukraine paid off in the end. Loot defeated evil. The money was saved.

And although Vitaly Tretyakov, Dean of the Higher School of Television, joyfully yelled that he dreams of turning off SWIFT (the most terrible scarecrow in the West), one should not take this statement seriously. He does not keep his capital there, in the West, at least in a tangible amount, but for the oligarchs, this is apparently critically important. I repeat, I understood this from the context of our TV, and not from the messages of enemy voices. New frankness!

"