You're taking Kerry's words WAY to literally. The US wanted Snowden and Russia said no, therefore the US had to respond. Kerry wasn't literally thinking "Oh my god! They said no! How dare they? What do you do now???"
The US knew what the answer was going to be before they even asked the question.
Re:Snowden’s whereabouts unknown
by anotherblue on Monday June 24, 2013 @10:33AM
(#5933145)
That's exactly what he said -- throwing a hissy fit because Russia is not treating the US as a superpower...
I think Kerry is 'troubled' because if a Russian whistleblower revealed FSB secrets, it's obvious that the USA will now feel entitled to offer them asylum and ignore Russia's demands.
It's not strange if you follow the news.
http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/eng/zxxx/t1049546.shtml
China's new President has made it a high priority to improve relations with the US which is why many were surprised Snowden was let out of HK quite so easily.
Extradition for espionage seems like it ought to be totally different from the regular kind. If a guy gunned down some children or something, sure, yell at anyone and everyone in sight to get him back. But why would you expect any non-allied country to give the slightest damn about espionage?
Re:Snowden’s whereabouts unknown
by kintamanimatt on Monday June 24, 2013 @10:20AM
(#5933037)
Maybe they know this but perhaps they're just grandstanding in front of their electorate.
This is kind of a strange statement. On what grounds could/would China or Russia "respond to espionage charges" in the absence of extradition treaties with the US?
Its also somewhat strange the US would expect any other country, especially these two, to care deeply about leaks against it that expose massive US/British spying against basically the whole world.