US Spokesperson: We will not dictate to other countries! The reporter couldn't hold back his laughter when he interruptedThe essence of international politics lies in "realizing one's own interests and weakening other countries", so this involves a game process, the basic characteristics of which are "a game of wisdom and strength", and deception and hypocrisy have become "inevitable phenomena". According to a report by Phoenix Satellite TV on February 29, U.S. spokesman Miller said at a press conference that he wanted to emphasize a fact that is often forgotten, that is, Israel, like other Middle Eastern countries, is a sovereign state with "independent decision-making power", and the United States "will not instruct" Israel what action it should take, "just as we will not dictate to other countries."
Miller had intended to praise the superpowers, but a reporter sitting in the bottom row suddenly interjected and went on to say "unless we invade these countries", instantly revealing the hypocrisy of Miller's speech. The reporters in the audience immediately "burst into laughter", and even Miller himself couldn't help but laugh, calling the answer "very clever". So why did Miller and the reporters who listened to the briefing laugh "so happily"? It is understandable that the reporters are happy, after all, they have exposed the hypocrisy of the United States, but why is Miller, as the spokesman of the United States, so happy?
There is only one reason, whether it is the ** reporter in the audience or the spokesman Miller who spoke on the stage, everyone knows very well that the so-called "will not order any country" of the United States is actually very "hypocritical". In the words of the journalist, the United States "does not dictate to other countries" and "unless we invade them." In other words, countries around the globe will either accept the "long-arm jurisdiction" of the United States or just wait to be "invaded". Does this expose the "ugly face" of American-style hegemony? However, journalists and politicians alike consider this to be "normal".
That's right, that's how the "great power game" and "international politics" are played. Of course, out of the need to "speak nicely", the superpowers either "do not recognize" giving orders to other countries, or find various excuses to demonstrate their own behavior, such as invading other countries under the banner of "anti-terrorism". Miller laughed, laughing at why reporters were so ignorant and "telling the truth"; And the reporters also laughed, because someone directly exposed the hypocrisy of the United States ** and said their "heartfelt words". However, they do not blame each other, because everyone knows that this is how "international politics" is played.
Miller kept saying, "The United States will not dictate what any country must do." However, the next day, the U.S. Policy Planning Division held a "U.S.-China Foreign Policy Consultation" with Chinese representatives in Shanghai. In short, isn't this about having an impact on China's "foreign policy"? To put it more bluntly, isn't it interfering in Sino-Russian cooperation and trying to drive a wedge between China and Russia? Although it may not count as an "order", isn't it "interference"? What's more, earlier, US Ambassador to China Burns was disappointed in China's "support for Russia", and as a result, the United States and Europe jointly imposed sanctions on Chinese companies.
Since it claims to "command no country", to what extent has China's relations with other countries developed, in what areas are involved, and what does it have to do with the United States? Could it be that the US ambassador to China will be "disappointed" by this? What qualifications do the United States and Europe have to impose "sanctions" on Chinese companies? Therefore, the so-called statement of "not giving orders to other countries" is completely empty words of the United States "putting gold" on its own face. It can be seen from the laughter of Miller and other reporters that even America's own people "disagree" with such a statement, thinking it is "ridiculous", but they still "have to say".
How should we deal with the behavior of the United States of "being a and erecting a memorial arch again"? Putin's approach can be learned. According to the global network on February 29, Russia's Putin said in his state of the nation address that "no one will be allowed to interfere in Russia's internal affairs." Putin stressed that Russia's strategic nuclear forces are in a state of full readiness and are effectively using the "Dagger" hypersonic missile, the test of the "Haiyan" nuclear cruise missile and the "Poseidon" nuclear torpedo is about to be completed, and the "Sarmat" missile, which is known as the "world's strongest nuclear bomb," has already been put into use, and "its power will soon be demonstrated."
In the face of the United States' attitude of "standing up and standing up" and interfering in the internal affairs of other countries while holding high the banner of democracy and freedom, Russia made a resolute and clear response, directly slapping a certain superpower and telling him that this is the consequence of interfering in Russia's internal affairs, and that you should deal with it yourself and stop "consulting" with us. It is precisely Russia's "hard-hitting" attitude that makes the United States feel quite jealous. Recently, the White House, the Pentagon and the United States have said that they will not send troops into Ukraine, and Putin once again satirized the United States in his speech, warning that NATO will be "absolutely miserable" if it enters Ukraine to fight.