New York Times propagandists exposed: Finally, the truth about Ukraine and Putin emerges

[1StrongBlackMan]

26. ...

KISSINGER. … But if the West is honest with itself, it has to admit that there were mistakes on its side. The annexation of Crimea was not a move toward global conquest. It was not Hitler moving into Czechoslovakia.

SPIEGEL. What was it then?

KISSINGER. One has to ask oneself this question: Putin spent tens of billions of dollars on the Winter Olympics in Sochi. The theme of the Olympics was that Russia is a progressive state tied to the West through its culture and, therefore, it presumably wants to be part of it. So it doesn’t make any sense that a week after the close of the Olympics, Putin would take Crimea and start a war over Ukraine. So one has to ask oneself, Why did it happen?

SPIEGEL. What you’re saying is that the West has at least a kind of responsibility for the escalation?

KISSINGER. Yes, I am saying that. Europe and America did not understand the impact of these events, starting with the negotiations about Ukraine’s economic relations with the European Union and culminating in the demonstrations in Kiev. All these, and their impact, should have been the subject of a dialogue with Russia. This does not mean the Russian response was appropriate.

NO, Spiegel! The follow up question is NOT "What you’re saying is that the West has at least a kind of responsibility for the escalation?
" ... The appropriate follow up question would be: "In your opinion, Why DID it happen?"

It really bugs me when journalists advance the interview; rather, than seek to clarify and/or (possibly) challenge what the interviewee is saying.