Conclusions and thoughts about meeting between presidents Trump and Putin

The Presidential Palace Helsinki Finland
(Wikipedia)

https://kirjabloggaus.blogspot.com/

Kimmo Huosionmaa

The meeting between Putin and Trump is over, and the conclusion is, that only man who made mistakes is Trump. There are only stories, how Trump was under Putin's rule, and this is the very remarkable thing. In the newspapers is not a single word, what Putin made, except that he had a Beriev A-50 recon plane escorting his personal aircraft. The thing, that Trump claimed, that USA have been made mistakes is taken as the weakness in the front of Putin. And this is the very interesting point. When John F. Kennedy made partially nuclear test ban treaty between the Soviet Union, that man was prosecuted for being soft in the eyes of the Soviet Union.


This is the very interesting thing because if the international community wants that the peace is built for something else than nuclear weapons, must the talking do in the base, that there are humans in both sides, and humans make mistakes. Accepting the reality, that even the President Of The United States can make mistakes is the way to open talking about serious things. When we are thinking about the complicated relationship between superpowers, there is only one thing, what is good for the people. And that is peaceful co-operation between those nations, even if somebody doesn't want that advantage.


When we are looking at the results of the meeting, we can say, that in the world we have found optimism and positivism is the relations between superpowers. And the advantage is that the meeting between the leaders of those nations has been done. Talking is the road to concrete conferences and then contracts. This is the beginning of real actions for the peace. And when the results of the meeting are under the observation, we must say that there was so short a time to make preparations for that meeting that the concrete contract was not possible.


And when we are looking at the position of Donald Trump, we must remember, that this man is the president of the democratic country. He must stand the critics and there are always people, who have different opinions than he has. When we are talking about court etiquette of Great Britain, there should be somebody, who will tell about the rules for the people, who are not often visiting in the Buckingham Palace.  Maybe Trump learned his lesson about this very important etiquette.

Who takes a part in other countries internal politics?

http://kirjabloggaus.blogspot.com/2018/07/who-takes-part-in-other-countries.html

Kimmo Huosionmaa

The great point of meeting between Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump is closing, and here is one very interesting notification about this meeting, and about criticising those leaders. The thing is, that Trump is prosecuted by taking a part in the United Kingdoms internal politics because he said something about it. But meanwhile, the Russian military personnel are charged with hacking the computers in the election process of the United States president.


And this is a very bad thing because hacking of those computers can influent the result of the election. This is the very interesting thing because if some intelligence service would want to influent the election of other states leaders, that is taking part in internal politics of that country. When we are talking about how those leaders would be dealing with media, we are noticing that is a difference about attitudes, what is tolerated by those leaders. Everything, what Putin makes is right, but when Trump says something, he makes everything wrong.


There is something that makes Russian intelligence operations more acceptable than United States intelligence operations. And I must say that this is the very interesting attitude. By the way, the term "intelligence operation" means actually the getting information. The hacking of the computers and influence the internal politics of some other land is "covert action", or "Black Operation". And when we are thinking about the situation, that Russian intelligence officers have made the influential action in the election campaign, that would happen by order of Kreml or somebody else, and this kind of actions can be marked that every connection to the head of the state would deny.


That means that the persons, who might be behind that action are covered. Maybe Putin knew that or maybe he didn't know about those hackings. But there are also other people, who might claim that Putin was involved because that would slow the investigations. This hacking brought some thoughts to my mind. One of them is "how many times this has made before?". I think that those persons, who are behind that operation might not be first-timers for making that kind of things. And how many times that kind of influence has been given to the election campaigns in the small countries, what would not be so loudly to protect their benefits? So is there other nations, where is made this kind of hacking operations, where the election of the head of the state has been influenced by cyber operations, what are made by the foreign actor?


One part of information operations is that the enemy would tell that the resistance would be doomed even before the war have begun. The opponent is trying to metalize the targeted nations, that they would not have any change in the real military conflict. And after that, the "wise men" would lay down their weapons and start to take a spoon in their beautiful hand, and start to follow the opponent's orders. There is one thing that information warfare specialists always highlight. That is that "why own military personnel must risk their lives for some other country?". The purpose of this kind of argumentation is to break coalitions and for this kind of action, the single parts of the coalition would give the benefits like free trade contracts if they slip off the front. Fear is one of the best weapons in the word. And if another side would be doomed to lose, that would give change to grow the own position in the international area.