Why does the West not understand how a Russian soldier fights? Notes on the note
How much has already been written about Russia and Russian. I recently heard an interesting statement from an American MMA fighter. "Russia is a country of warriors." Honestly, I took it at first as a compliment to our athletes. And only then I understood. No, an American really treats Russians (and this concept for him includes all who live in our country) as fighters, as warriors.
And I received confirmation of this thought from one western publication. Today, thanks to the capabilities of the Internet, one can read, more precisely view, publish in any country of the world. View? Just because, no matter how much you want to be fluent in foreign languages, you have to use a translator. What is automatic translation, most readers already know from personal experience. Just then it is necessary to translate once again from Russian into Russian.
Readers will remember a series of articles in our media after the departure of the Navy ships from the Mediterranean. What we just read then! And about some technical overlays on "Admiral Kuznetsov". And about the failures of flights of aircraft. And, conversely, about the heroism of our pilots and sailors. On the implementation of complex military-political tasks. About examples of courage and perseverance of our soldiers and officers.
The only topic that our liberal politicians often tried to raise, but which did not completely touch the hearts of readers, is the topic of "poor old men and orphans who were left without means of livelihood." "The funds that Russia spent on Syria could be spent on retirement benefits." Remember? Even the Minister of Defense was forced to somehow speak out in the spirit that the Ministry does not exceed the limit of funds allocated for defense by the budget. Therefore, the topic in the Russian media "has fallen out" and has never been raised.
Indeed, it is strange for a country in which, even in the Stalin era, when there were no businessmen and honestly earned money, there were people who bought for their own savings Tanks, airplanes and other military equipment. The main thing is victory. The main thing is to survive and not give the homeland to the enemy. No matter what kind of faith you are, what language you speak at home, are you blond or brunette, narrow-eyed or long-nosed. Nothing matters when the enemy is at the gates of your house.
And here is the article of a Western correspondent. An article about our operation in Syria. But it’s from there. Passing by was just beyond my strength. It is interesting to see the difference. Some excerpts, interesting precisely because of the difference of views on the war, I will give in the form of quotes.
The article is called "The true price of the Syrian campaign for Russia" (The real cost of Russia).
"Russia has been involved in the Syrian conflict since September 2015 of the year. Six months later, Vladimir Putin said that military operations had cost the Ministry of Defense 483 million dollars."
“Russian analysts claim that the operation with the participation of Admiral Kuznetsov cost 170 million dollars, and this amount is less than the price of two fifth-generation F-35 American fighter jets.”
This is the essence of war for a Westerner. How much is? It does not matter everything else. War is the same investment as any business. I have invested my money, which means that I have the right to demand a report from the military on dividends. Otherwise, what is a profitable business?
It is striking how meticulously calculated all the actions of the Russian army. This is what transparent business accounting means! With the participation of "Admiral Kuznetsov" 420 combat missions were made. Of these, 117 is nightly! Destroyed 1 252 targets ...
Do you think that this interesting in this article ends? Not. This is only the beginning of the analysis. In business, especially for its shareholders, it is important to clearly understand where and what money is spent on. As "capital increased".
"... these investments more than justified militarily. Moscow and Damascus signed an agreement on a 49-year lease on the Syrian port of Tartus with the right to deploy forces fleet. The port will be modernized and will be able to accept 11 military vessels at the same time - so the Russian fleet will have its own base in the Mediterranean. "
"In the future, ships of the predominantly Black Sea Fleet will arrive in Tartus and will form, according to the Ministry of Defense of Russia, a permanent operational connection of the Navy in the Mediterranean. Such a development was not a surprise for anyone, since the resumption of the Russian military presence in this region was one of the main provisions RF Marine Doctrine 2015 of the Year. "
The author does not even try to find the words. Nothing personal. Russian money properly invested in Syria, gave here such an income. And this income far exceeds the profitability of Western investments.
True, in fairness it should be noted that the conclusions of the author are quite logical. And, in my opinion, absolutely true. With the exception of the "western skate" about human rights. But here I will not even argue. We are accustomed to the fact that everything, whatever Russia does on its own, there is always a violation of these very rights. Russians are not even laughing. Just take it for granted. The dog barks, the wind blows ...
"At present, Russia has secured the right to use a strategically important naval base, thereby depriving NATO of its former capabilities in the Eastern Mediterranean. Moscow is pursuing a pragmatic policy, supporting the" legitimate "government, while bravely combating terrorism, despite how the change of regime and respect for human rights correlate. And all this finds a positive response from a number of countries in the Middle East. "
And the last words of the article are a masterpiece. "This is a good payback for military costs of less than 1 billion dollars." This is the whole western man. More precisely, the Western way of thinking. Russian business worked better than ours.
Americans, who are all the wars of the last century, and indeed all the wars that have been fought over the period of their country's existence, are perceived "from the side," you can understand. They do not know what real war is. They know the Hollywood War. A war where only enemies die, and "ours" always win. Therefore, they probably believe that war is just one of the types of business.
Europeans, no matter how they today praised their military exploits during the Second World War, they hand over cities and raise their hands at the first danger. Why fight if the enemy has more tanks? Or airplanes? Why didn't blockade Leningrad surrender? Why is Stalingrad and many other cities completely destroyed? Better to keep what you have. It is better to give up and wait for the invader himself to leave your edges.
Or Russians will chase him away.
Good or bad, not for me to judge. But the fact that we are not exactly them is clear to me. And God forbid us to become the same.
And people with such convictions will never be able to defeat us. I remember an old joke about the power of the Russian and German armies. The Germans are winning because of congenital pedantry, the Russians because of congenital "horniness". We are able to "rest against a horn" so that even iron bursts on the resistance of a simple soldier. And we do not rest in order to earn. We want to win, and we win.
Probably, the understanding of the fact that the Russians do not consider it when they fight, inspires respect, and more often it is the fear of all these "common people" and "fighters for the rights of everyone and everything." And rightly inspires. The West wants to see the face of the Russian Bear ... They would have gone to the zoo. It is only in fairy tales a bear is a kind and cute bastard. In life, the bear beast is fearless and strong.
And he has no face. As such. There is a terrible, with huge fangs, muzzle. And even claws, some more knives. And if you cause a strong irritation in a bear, then you can really see this face ...
And I received confirmation of this thought from one western publication. Today, thanks to the capabilities of the Internet, one can read, more precisely view, publish in any country of the world. View? Just because, no matter how much you want to be fluent in foreign languages, you have to use a translator. What is automatic translation, most readers already know from personal experience. Just then it is necessary to translate once again from Russian into Russian.
Readers will remember a series of articles in our media after the departure of the Navy ships from the Mediterranean. What we just read then! And about some technical overlays on "Admiral Kuznetsov". And about the failures of flights of aircraft. And, conversely, about the heroism of our pilots and sailors. On the implementation of complex military-political tasks. About examples of courage and perseverance of our soldiers and officers.
The only topic that our liberal politicians often tried to raise, but which did not completely touch the hearts of readers, is the topic of "poor old men and orphans who were left without means of livelihood." "The funds that Russia spent on Syria could be spent on retirement benefits." Remember? Even the Minister of Defense was forced to somehow speak out in the spirit that the Ministry does not exceed the limit of funds allocated for defense by the budget. Therefore, the topic in the Russian media "has fallen out" and has never been raised.
Indeed, it is strange for a country in which, even in the Stalin era, when there were no businessmen and honestly earned money, there were people who bought for their own savings Tanks, airplanes and other military equipment. The main thing is victory. The main thing is to survive and not give the homeland to the enemy. No matter what kind of faith you are, what language you speak at home, are you blond or brunette, narrow-eyed or long-nosed. Nothing matters when the enemy is at the gates of your house.
And here is the article of a Western correspondent. An article about our operation in Syria. But it’s from there. Passing by was just beyond my strength. It is interesting to see the difference. Some excerpts, interesting precisely because of the difference of views on the war, I will give in the form of quotes.
The article is called "The true price of the Syrian campaign for Russia" (The real cost of Russia).
"Russia has been involved in the Syrian conflict since September 2015 of the year. Six months later, Vladimir Putin said that military operations had cost the Ministry of Defense 483 million dollars."
“Russian analysts claim that the operation with the participation of Admiral Kuznetsov cost 170 million dollars, and this amount is less than the price of two fifth-generation F-35 American fighter jets.”
This is the essence of war for a Westerner. How much is? It does not matter everything else. War is the same investment as any business. I have invested my money, which means that I have the right to demand a report from the military on dividends. Otherwise, what is a profitable business?
It is striking how meticulously calculated all the actions of the Russian army. This is what transparent business accounting means! With the participation of "Admiral Kuznetsov" 420 combat missions were made. Of these, 117 is nightly! Destroyed 1 252 targets ...
Do you think that this interesting in this article ends? Not. This is only the beginning of the analysis. In business, especially for its shareholders, it is important to clearly understand where and what money is spent on. As "capital increased".
"... these investments more than justified militarily. Moscow and Damascus signed an agreement on a 49-year lease on the Syrian port of Tartus with the right to deploy forces fleet. The port will be modernized and will be able to accept 11 military vessels at the same time - so the Russian fleet will have its own base in the Mediterranean. "
"In the future, ships of the predominantly Black Sea Fleet will arrive in Tartus and will form, according to the Ministry of Defense of Russia, a permanent operational connection of the Navy in the Mediterranean. Such a development was not a surprise for anyone, since the resumption of the Russian military presence in this region was one of the main provisions RF Marine Doctrine 2015 of the Year. "
The author does not even try to find the words. Nothing personal. Russian money properly invested in Syria, gave here such an income. And this income far exceeds the profitability of Western investments.
True, in fairness it should be noted that the conclusions of the author are quite logical. And, in my opinion, absolutely true. With the exception of the "western skate" about human rights. But here I will not even argue. We are accustomed to the fact that everything, whatever Russia does on its own, there is always a violation of these very rights. Russians are not even laughing. Just take it for granted. The dog barks, the wind blows ...
"At present, Russia has secured the right to use a strategically important naval base, thereby depriving NATO of its former capabilities in the Eastern Mediterranean. Moscow is pursuing a pragmatic policy, supporting the" legitimate "government, while bravely combating terrorism, despite how the change of regime and respect for human rights correlate. And all this finds a positive response from a number of countries in the Middle East. "
And the last words of the article are a masterpiece. "This is a good payback for military costs of less than 1 billion dollars." This is the whole western man. More precisely, the Western way of thinking. Russian business worked better than ours.
Americans, who are all the wars of the last century, and indeed all the wars that have been fought over the period of their country's existence, are perceived "from the side," you can understand. They do not know what real war is. They know the Hollywood War. A war where only enemies die, and "ours" always win. Therefore, they probably believe that war is just one of the types of business.
Europeans, no matter how they today praised their military exploits during the Second World War, they hand over cities and raise their hands at the first danger. Why fight if the enemy has more tanks? Or airplanes? Why didn't blockade Leningrad surrender? Why is Stalingrad and many other cities completely destroyed? Better to keep what you have. It is better to give up and wait for the invader himself to leave your edges.
Or Russians will chase him away.
Good or bad, not for me to judge. But the fact that we are not exactly them is clear to me. And God forbid us to become the same.
And people with such convictions will never be able to defeat us. I remember an old joke about the power of the Russian and German armies. The Germans are winning because of congenital pedantry, the Russians because of congenital "horniness". We are able to "rest against a horn" so that even iron bursts on the resistance of a simple soldier. And we do not rest in order to earn. We want to win, and we win.
Probably, the understanding of the fact that the Russians do not consider it when they fight, inspires respect, and more often it is the fear of all these "common people" and "fighters for the rights of everyone and everything." And rightly inspires. The West wants to see the face of the Russian Bear ... They would have gone to the zoo. It is only in fairy tales a bear is a kind and cute bastard. In life, the bear beast is fearless and strong.
And he has no face. As such. There is a terrible, with huge fangs, muzzle. And even claws, some more knives. And if you cause a strong irritation in a bear, then you can really see this face ...
Information