Because Russia is an aggressive and hostile entity.
So is the European Union, as I have elaborately explained, but this is not as widely recognised, due to widespread inadequacy.
Desirable attributes that the European Union's inherent qualities threaten (notice the word 'inherent'):
1) Maximum protection against internal threats (lack of political or cultural safeguards against subversive elements, lack of proper and rigid national (including racial, which has massive tactical value) definition, etc).
2) Maximum protection against external threats (Islam and Islamification with all of their deadly and destructive effects, South Asian child rape gangs, belligerent African activity, hostile espionage, alien tribe subversion (How long before a 2009 Fort Hood Shooting-like attack?), etc). These aspects are all enabled by racial heterogeneity and continue to be so.
3) Full sovereignty and autonomy (the European Union is a federal system that seeks to assimilate all other European nations and force its malignant and hostile conditions on them). Loss of sovereignty renders civilisations vulnerable to external elements.
4) Maximum general physical attractiveness (assimilating foreign racial composition, with the exception of Scandinavian, into the national population, without adequate preservation measures (which is also a genocidal act), threatens this) The result: Severe reduction of proportion of good-looking people in society. The proportion continues to decline (more rapidly now, with the assimilation of non-European races). This aspect has several serious defensive properties.
It also has an affinity for totalitarian laws, corruption, deceit and exacerbating economic problems.
Is May right to welcome Trump putting sanctions on Russia 'because of the Salisbury poisoning'? I'm afraid she's lost me with this...?
IF May asked America (Trump) to become involved in this because of International Law, I might have understood BUT the cause of this hasn't, as far as has been made public, been proven. Has it? I happen not to agree with sanctions in general as the only people to be affected are the people, NOT the leaders. Whatever, as reported it still appears that Trump IS sticking his nose into OUR affairs and it's not different to how it has been with Brussels.
- Yes. It is a response by'the international community' against a country using chemical weapons against its own citizens. Mrs May might wonder why the Americans took so long to act, but she wouldn't be the first.
Britain has obligations to various organisations and treaties - she is still a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council and a member of NATO which are quite different set-ups from the EU. The initiative here is actually being driven by Congress - the American Leader is uncharacteristically reticent over the matter.32
- She's lost me too, but well before this.
The way I look at the poisoning affair is that it is the fault of the British for being so inept as to allow a foreign assassin or assassination squad to get past the UK border. Throwing out diplomats belonging to the suspect country was a standard way of dealing with such an embarrassment.
Sanctions against Russia are stupid, particularly when Russia can get everything she needs from the rest of the world. So sanctions are like a mentally ill teenager cutting themselves as displacement activity.25
- She asked America for support, they agreed because the use of chemical weapons is against international law.
She also asked the EU leaders for support, for the same reasons.
Nothing to do with US intereference and nothing to do with the EU.
Intereference, that would be when obama made threats about back of queue.
Sorry if you have not had sufficient proof, the leaders of many western countries are satisfied, but regardless the claim US is interfering is very skewed and confused. Trying to make the story fit your prejudices maybe?
- America isn't interfering in British politics by offering their support and we have the will and freedom, to either accept or reject the offer. With the E.U, there would be no offer, there would be instructions, very different, VERY different!24
- Its all bollox to take real news out of the agenda.11
- we are going insane all the indications are there we are either jew haters or muslim haters or Russian haters and now European haters batty as a box of frogs they can man the Daily mail and Sun newspaper gas chambers I will not13
- I picked up somewhere during the past 24 hours, that the EU Referendum was ONLY AN ADVISORY REFERENDUM. That being the case, why has the?
- Who is behind the migrant caravan?
- Why is it we don't know whether Brexit is a good deal or a bad deal?
- What labels aimed at you do you find the most offensive?
- Who should be the next Tory leader assuming Theresa goes?
- Do you think that if there is another Referendum, it will stop the 'chaos' we are looking at right now. UK?
- Is the British government going to collapse?
- Why do Jehovah's Witnesses knock on your door while your family is trying to enjoy a Sunday lunch? Is this a deliberate act?
- So, the other 94 plus men get away scot- free ? And for the 6 men, that would be between 2 and 3 years for every year of abuse ?
- Are u enjoying the constitutional crisis?