Military Review

In Iraq, expressed the desire to see the military presence of the Russian Federation

90
According to the online editionLook"With reference to RIA NewsOn July 24, Iraq’s Vice President Nouri al-Maliki concluded negotiations with Federation Council Chairman Valentina Matvienko that “Russia has historically strong relations with Iraq.” Based on this in Baghdad, "we would like Russia to have a weighty presence in this country politically and militarily."

In Iraq, expressed the desire to see the military presence of the Russian Federation


In this way a balance would be created that will serve the good of the region, its people and its countries.


According to him, the authorities of the country have a desire to "strengthen cooperation in the field of energy, electricity, oil."

This also applies to scientific cooperation, scholarships, university training, in economics and trade, as well as in the political and military spheres.


First, during a meeting with Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, Nuri al-Maliki appealed to Russian companies to invest in the economy of Iraq, "this applies primarily to energy."

Our interest is that friendly Russia be present in Iraq, thereby creating a balance. We do not want this equilibrium to be disrupted politically in favor of one or another external side. Now that we are done with ISIS [a terrorist organization banned in the Russian Federation], Iraq needs investments in energy and trade.


90 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Spartanez300
    Spartanez300 25 July 2017 07: 34
    +7
    It is necessary to strengthen cooperation between Russia and Iraq in the field of energy, electricity, oil, yes, but without a military presence.
    1. P0LYM
      P0LYM 25 July 2017 07: 38
      +25
      It will not work without a military ... In this region there is no other way to protect your investments, except by a powerful military presence and prompt and harsh response to threats and, in these circumstances, this is the only real way to maintain an elementary order there ... everything else - "grandmas in the wind" ...
      1. Stirbjorn
        Stirbjorn 25 July 2017 10: 09
        +4
        Quote: P0LYM
        It will not work without a military ... In this region there is no other way to protect your investments, except by a powerful military presence and prompt and harsh response to threats and, in these circumstances, this is the only real way to maintain an elementary order there ... everything else - "grandmas in the wind" ...

        Offer now to fight the Kurds? Kirkuk’s oil fields are under their control, and Iraq’s army, after the worst losses near Mosul, is almost gone - and the Kurds want independence on 25 September! Here Iraqis are looking for fools who are ready to fight for their interests, for promises to share oil revenues
        1. P0LYM
          P0LYM 25 July 2017 10: 17
          +4
          This is where you read that I offer something? I just expressed the opinion that without a military presence in the region in which the legal field has been destroyed, there are no other ways to preserve their investments, and other interests.
        2. P0LYM
          P0LYM 25 July 2017 10: 43
          +2
          and the Kurds want independence to proclaim September 25!

          Who cares what the Kurds want? Yes, they effectively act against the IG, with the support of the Americans ... that's great, but what will lead to their self-determination? This will lead to a rupture and practical final destruction of Iraq as a state, with far-reaching consequences. in the prospect of an unpredictable redrawing of the entire Middle East. who needs it? Well, Kurds ... Well, Americans, who else? but besides them there are other interested players. at least Turkey and Iran ... and they are interested in everything to remain as it is ... No one needs a big war there ... and the Kurds with their state will be damned if it starts ... that's why they call Russia, because that the presence of another strong player, from the point of view of stabilization, is very desirable ..
          1. Stirbjorn
            Stirbjorn 25 July 2017 10: 46
            +1
            Quote: P0LYM
            and the Kurds with their state will be damned if it starts ... that's why they call Russia, because the presence of another strong player, from the point of view of stabilization, is very desirable ..

            maybe they’ll damn it, but it won’t change anything - who will drive the Kurds out of the oil fields of Kirkuk? Behind them, by the way, the Americans are
            1. P0LYM
              P0LYM 25 July 2017 11: 14
              +3
              many earned money on adventures under the shouts of “Hurray! America is with us!” ... if they count on this, then the history of this state will be short-lived ...
              1. Shurik70
                Shurik70 25 July 2017 15: 16
                +3
                Nafig!
                They pruned the country when it was necessary to take up arms and fight.
                And now they don’t like walking in a dollar collar.
                We will trade. And let the Americans protect them from terrorists.
                There is nothing for our troops to do there.
                And our investments there also have nothing to do. After the USA, this is a black hole, no matter how much you invest, everything will burn.
                We would rather invest in Syria and Iran, if we have money. At least these guys are ready to fight. And our budget is not bottomless, unlike the United States, we do not print pieces of paper issued for money
        3. zoolu300
          zoolu300 26 July 2017 04: 26
          0
          It is not necessary to fight with the Kurds, but to support, for the destruction of Turkey is an archy task. If this Iraqi non-government wants to trade in sovereignty - please, but first write down penalties for them. And also to negotiate with Iran, so that in case of what they "throw".
          1. Shurik70
            Shurik70 26 July 2017 07: 26
            0
            Quote: zoolu300
            It is not necessary to fight with the Kurds, but to support, for the destruction of Turkey is an archy task. If this Iraqi non-government wants to trade in sovereignty - please, but first write down penalties for them. And also to negotiate with Iran, so that in case of what they "throw".

            Kurds - yes. Weakening Turkey is the only goal in this region where it is worth cooperating with the United States.
            And the "penalty" from Iraq - WHAT?
            The country is ruined. Their only wealth is oil. But mining is fraught with such investment risks that it is better if anyone else takes risks.
            Agree, what would "throw"? Are we Americans, that they will print cheap green papers, and then they "risk" them, robbing the whole world? We are Russians. While we work honestly with us, we will behave honestly.
            But you don’t need to do business with corrupt cowards.
    2. Banker
      Banker 25 July 2017 07: 39
      +3
      Quote: Spartanez300
      but without military presence.

      I just wanted to write the same, enough, we’ve already been at war!
      1. P0LYM
        P0LYM 25 July 2017 07: 49
        +30
        Then you need to close within the border and do not stick your nose out. It turns out, I think, not to fight for 5-6 years ... then poptrut from all sides ... stop the hell ... Then we will fight from the heart. By God, you’re living in some imagined world ... if you think if you don’t go anywhere, then everyone will forget about us and no one will ever want to check what the gut of the Russians is there? Naive ... Life does not seem to teach us anything ...
        1. Banker
          Banker 25 July 2017 07: 51
          +4
          Quote: P0LYM
          Then you need to close within the border and do not stick your nose out. It turns out, I think, not to fight for 5-6 years ... then poptrut from all sides ... stop the hell ...

          here’s a Soviet ideology: “We won’t get used to living without a war ..” But is China an example for you? The most powerful state, but it’s not fighting anywhere.
          1. P0LYM
            P0LYM 25 July 2017 07: 54
            +8
            Wow ... straight and nowhere ???? .... maybe you should read the story ... ???? maybe it will be very entertaining and instructive ... China, as a powerful power and competitor to the Americans, is 40 years old by force ... right? .... and how many troubles have the USA delivered to them ???? Nooo? didn’t hear ??? ... Suddenly, peace-loving China has become one of the main threats to "the most peace-loving and democratic nation on Earth."
            1. Banker
              Banker 25 July 2017 07: 55
              +2
              Quote: P0LYM
              and how many troubles did the tan deliver to them ??

              Who are you?
              Quote: P0LYM
              maybe you should read the story ...?

              for what period?
              1. P0LYM
                P0LYM 25 July 2017 08: 03
                +2
                for the last one ... the United States directly supports tensions in the region ... the same Taiwanese question ... about China under its nose .... etc
                yes ... this is what concerns the Americans ... but we should also remember our history ... the damansky peninsula ... doesn’t mean anything? with Taiwan in 1958 ... with India in 1962 ...
                1. Banker
                  Banker 25 July 2017 08: 27
                  +2
                  Quote: P0LYM
                  for the last one ... the United States directly supports tensions in the region ... the same Taiwanese question ... about China under its nose .... etc

                  I asked about the wars of China against anyone.
                  Quote: P0LYM
                  yes ... this is what concerns the Americans ... but we should also remember our history ... the damansky peninsula ... doesn’t mean anything? with Taiwan in 1958 ... with India in 1962 ...

                  it borderline conflicts. Where is Iraq and where is Russia?
                  1. P0LYM
                    P0LYM 25 July 2017 09: 03
                    +3
                    Since when is border conflict not a war ?! Well, yes ... they don’t kill people there ... Chesslov, it’s amazing what you can get in defending your point of view ... it’s not right, but to write that “yes ... blurted out without thinking” not ... not it turns out ... he said ... China is a peace-loving country .... that means peace-loving, but the fact that it behaves aggressively along borders is not considered. This, if not in the know, is what is called "double standards!"
                    1. Banker
                      Banker 25 July 2017 09: 48
                      +1
                      Quote: P0LYM
                      said ... China is a peace-loving country ...

                      so do not distort what I wrote and everything will fall into place. At various times, the USSR was positioned as a peace-loving country and, in general, as a fighter for peace, but this did not prevent it from participating in various conflicts and local wars.
                      Quote: P0LYM
                      Since when is border conflict not a war?

                      and with what - war? Therefore, border conflict has such a name (a term in international law) because it does not even attract local war.
                      1. P0LYM
                        P0LYM 25 July 2017 11: 08
                        +2
                        yes, of course, and in general the insignificant fact that it (a border conflict) may be accompanied by military operations (and then it is classified by international law as an armed conflict), of course, does not matter. this is not a war ... but the difference is what? ... but just that the goals are stated for easier ...
                        and in general ... all this is a matter of terminology ... in fact, China is quite an aggressive state, and now it is gaining strength and weight confidently ... both neighbors and Americans are beginning to take it seriously and we should not relax. so an example about peace-loving china is past the cash register. all I wanted to say about this ..
                        ps you can still read about the Sino-Vietnamese war (which was already mentioned above) in 1979 ... I also
                2. Nehist
                  Nehist 25 July 2017 08: 32
                  +3
                  Have you forgotten Afghanistan !!! Where China valiantly inserted sticks into the wheels of the USSR Armed Forces, and now having its own interests for NATO forces, it is plentiful that now they are putting weapons and instructors there
                  1. Banker
                    Banker 25 July 2017 08: 38
                    +1
                    Quote: Nehist
                    NATO troops

                    Quote: Nehist
                    putting weapons and instructors there

                    who supplies instructors and weapons?
                    1. Nehist
                      Nehist 25 July 2017 08: 57
                      +2
                      Friendly tribes!
                      1. Banker
                        Banker 25 July 2017 11: 38
                        +2
                        Quote: Nehist
                        Friendly tribes!

                        to NATO? recourse
            2. faiver
              faiver 25 July 2017 08: 40
              +3
              Well, about 40 years, you have bent, 20-25 no more ... hi
              1. P0LYM
                P0LYM 25 July 2017 09: 12
                +1
                Well, yes ... as a threat ... perhaps yes ...
          2. faiver
            faiver 25 July 2017 08: 41
            +3
            Well, yes, how, in Vietnam, they tried sunflower, so the militia piled on them and then a big brother from the north showed a fist ... they swelled ...
            1. Sergej1972
              Sergej1972 25 July 2017 13: 14
              0
              But this is still the PRC before the start of modernization, the model of 1979.
              1. faiver
                faiver 25 July 2017 13: 46
                0
                those. After modernization, has China become peaceful? the largest army in the world bully
                1. Sergej1972
                  Sergej1972 25 July 2017 13: 51
                  +2
                  A border war with the SRV took place before modernization began. And the initiator was China. Although, to be honest, the Vietnamese behaved in some cases provocatively. And the policy of the Vietnamese leadership in relation to its ethnic Chinese in some cases was discriminatory and sometimes boorish.
                  And why should not a country with a population of 1 billion 300 million and the third territory in the world have the largest army?
      2. Berber
        Berber 25 July 2017 09: 03
        +9
        If we do not defend interests abroad. The war will come to Russia. It is proved historically.
      3. Kabistan
        Kabistan 25 July 2017 09: 39
        +1
        Quote: Banker
        Quote: Spartanez300
        but without military presence.

        I just wanted to write the same, enough, we’ve already been at war!

        In the 90s, we became white and fluffy, abandoned the army and ... like we fought.
        1. Banker
          Banker 25 July 2017 09: 52
          +1
          Quote: Kabistan
          abandoned the army and ... like fought.

          abandon the army and these different concepts were fought. You can have an army, but not fight
          1. P0LYM
            P0LYM 25 July 2017 11: 28
            +3
            nuzhi ... do not blame me ... I can not help but shake))). an army cannot be ... it must have all enemies ... because the army, as it is not unfortunate for the pacifists, is ... how to say this ... matter or something ... it just needs to fight, not cut into the counter, namely to fight ... then only this is the army, otherwise - rabble
            1. Banker
              Banker 25 July 2017 11: 53
              +2
              Quote: P0LYM
              namely, to fight ... then only this is the army, otherwise - rabble

              that is, there is no peace without war? But what about the Red Army, which constantly, from the moment of its formation, fought in all sorts of local wars so, excuse me, was paraffinous against the Finnish army that had not been fighting since the 20th year? Or take Germany and France-Great Britain, all had the same combat experience, and why did their chances roll out like babies in a foreign field? Say Poland? Well, Poland had even more positive experience against the Red Army in the 20th. And the result? Maybe it's not a war?
              1. P0LYM
                P0LYM 25 July 2017 13: 02
                +3
                again we are in terms ...)) not war ... military operations. well, it’s impossible without them ... experience, as we all know, the son of difficult mistakes ... nowhere without experience ... without “hardening” (excuse me for pathos) fighting ... I understand everything perfectly, it sounds cynical, because people die, but there are no other options to become stronger, unfortunately ... personally, with HUGE respect, I treat our military and wish them many years, good luck and some victories, but in reality the strongest survives in this cynical world ....
              2. zoolu300
                zoolu300 26 July 2017 04: 39
                +2
                That is, the USSR lost the war of 1939-1940 to Finland, but did not win? Something new. And Germany rolled out both France and Small Britain in 1940, because in addition to the experience of the WWI, it applied advanced military ideas that had been tested in Poland and ideology by that time. Poland had positive experience against the country weakened by the Civil War, in the conditions of unlimited material support of the Entente countries, taking advantage of the adventurism of one "great" commander. So definitely a war.
                1. Banker
                  Banker 26 July 2017 05: 37
                  +1
                  Quote: zoolu300
                  That is, the USSR lost the war of 1939-1940 to Finland, but did not win?

                  Yes, he won, no one argues, but at what cost and how the fighting went in the first half. Yes, and it’s hard to call it a victory;
    3. pjastolov
      pjastolov 25 July 2017 08: 08
      +5
      in Baghdad, "we would like Russia to have a significant presence in this country politically and militarily."
      interestingly - why didn’t the mattresses please, militarily enough of them are there? bully
    4. Skif83
      Skif83 25 July 2017 13: 10
      0
      I agree. we don’t need anywhere else an occasion for a hot war with the USA and the West.
  2. Zaurbek
    Zaurbek 25 July 2017 07: 34
    +6
    Why not?! Build a military base with an airfield following the example of Qatar. Provide fuel. This is at least. It can be used as a base UAV (when long-range UAVs will be) and hold the Su-34/30 and A-50/100
  3. Aleksey7777777
    Aleksey7777777 25 July 2017 07: 35
    +3
    According to him, the authorities of the country have a desire to "strengthen cooperation in the field of energy, electricity, oil."
    That's where our Russian presence is being developed. For balance ...
  4. Thomas I do not believe40
    Thomas I do not believe40 25 July 2017 07: 35
    +2
    uh uh stape good we che burst
    1. Govorun
      Govorun 25 July 2017 07: 58
      +1
      Yes, she ... they just hint who the last one is in line with the specialist, otherwise they are already tired of these wretched charlotans ...
  5. rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 25 July 2017 07: 40
    +10
    so that Russia has a significant presence in this country politically and militarily

    The Americans were joyfully greeted when they virtually invaded Iraq painlessly. Today it is on their support that you act as the "meat" in their "struggle" against the Islamic State. And now you offer Russia to get in there too? We are still watching from the side. And political presence is always welcome.
    1. bouncyhunter
      bouncyhunter 25 July 2017 08: 38
      +2
      Gene, hello! hi I get the impression that such statements by Iraq are part of the mattress plan. That Iran is ready to kiss in the gums, and now they are calling Russia to visit. Suspiciously it ...
      1. rotmistr60
        rotmistr60 25 July 2017 08: 43
        +1
        hello Pasha hi And you know, it is possible, especially considering the accountability of the Iraqi government by the Americans.
        1. bouncyhunter
          bouncyhunter 25 July 2017 08: 50
          +2
          Exactly ! If such thoughts occurred to me, I hope that some “bright head” from the special services thought about this option as well.
      2. Per se.
        Per se. 25 July 2017 10: 24
        +1
        Quote: bouncyhunter
        this is part of the mattress plan
        It may very well be ... When Obama, when he was president, announced that the fight against ISIS should be an international affair, he immediately thought about drawing Russia into the process. We waited until Syria was on the verge of collapse, went to fight ISIS, now only Iraq is not enough for us. Probably, you can send military advisers and individual specialists there, in your interests, but not send any parts of your troops. Honestly, sometimes even the work of our Oboronexport seems to be part of a plan to sabotage the rapid rearmament of the Russian army, loading its capacities under someone else’s uncle, with the dubious benefits of selling the latest weapons to foreign armies.
        1. bouncyhunter
          bouncyhunter 25 July 2017 10: 40
          +2
          In general, I believe that all the actions of the mattresses are directed against Russia. Even if not by themselves, but by the wrong hands - they try to shit in galoshes. It doesn’t always work out, often it’s worse for itself, but with the stubbornness of a ram ram the gates. The very fact of the existence of Russia and Russians is like a thorn in the eye of Matrasia.
          1. Per se.
            Per se. 25 July 2017 14: 06
            +2
            Quote: bouncyhunter
            The very fact of the existence of Russia and Russians is like a thorn in the eye of Matrasia.
            Yes, the West has a necrophilic love for Russia, it doesn’t matter whether the tsar, the communists or the oligarchs are in power; Russia will only be good dead, in extreme cases, almost dead, in a coma. The Soviet Union had its own pole of power, a socialist development system that was not controlled by world ghouls like the Rothschilds and Rockefellers, now we climbed into a strange pole of power, picked up capitalism at a time when a world leader had already taken shape in it, when almost the whole world was near London and Washington, the leaders and masters of the world pole of capitalism. The oligarch brothers are still puffing their cheeks, having a Soviet legacy from a superpower, primarily a nuclear shield, trying to squeeze a share from their masters and save face in front of their people, eating up the Soviet margin of safety. They sell gas, oil, timber, fish, Soviet technologies and scientific achievements, all that they personally didn’t plow for, did not sow, how rich our land is. what was invested in science under the communists, what a freebie for them. Why am I saying this, and the fact that our government will either have to leave the alien pole of power, abandon the rules of the game of others not for the good of Russia invented, or, having squandered the Soviet legacy, go under the West. In the first case, we will force Russia to reckon; in the second, Russia will love necrophilous ghouls. There is only one owner in capitalism, this has been going on for centuries, and only Russia still remains a sufficiently strong and potentially self-sufficient country, therefore for the West we are the very “Carthage” that must be destroyed. They will try to destroy, both by the hands of traitors, and by our new "friends", the Chinese "national communists", who are ripening on our empty borders in the form of an eastern likeness of Hitler Germany, eastern anti-USSR, anti-Russia. Russia can be either great or not at all, we are not given a third, the faster we stop playing other people's games, under the interests of others, the better.
            1. bouncyhunter
              bouncyhunter 25 July 2017 14: 20
              +2
              Good and correct thoughts, expressed in simple and accessible language - I take off my hat! hi This :
              Quote: Per se.
              Russia can be either great or not at all, we are not given a third, the faster we stop playing other people's games, under the interests of others, the better.

              I would generally advise every day to re-read various pseudo-do-it-yourselfers for Russia. And ordinary people do not interfere with this! good Thank you, not only me was pleased from the heart, I'm sure. Yours faithfully hi drinks soldier
      3. Maki Avellevich
        Maki Avellevich 25 July 2017 13: 05
        +1
        Quote: bouncyhunter
        That Iran is ready to kiss in the gums, and now they are calling Russia to visit.

        Tito doesn't remind?

        the same thing but without charm and awkwardly
        1. bouncyhunter
          bouncyhunter 25 July 2017 13: 10
          +1
          Not really, but something in common is certainly visible. An interesting result.
        2. Zaurbek
          Zaurbek 25 July 2017 15: 34
          0
          Therefore, I say, let them build a military base themselves ...
  6. aszzz888
    aszzz888 25 July 2017 07: 55
    +2
    Our interest is that friendly Russia be present in Iraq, thereby creating a balance.

    ... there is no limit to the joy of the mericatos ... laughing
  7. Boris Tomarov_2
    Boris Tomarov_2 25 July 2017 07: 56
    +1
    Another minus one point to the Americans, if Iraq asks for a military presence.
  8. Govorun
    Govorun 25 July 2017 07: 56
    +1
    In Iraq, expressed the desire to see the military presence of the Russian Federation
    And so ... tired of the "light" of democracy ???
  9. zivXP
    zivXP 25 July 2017 08: 05
    +1
    Now that we are done with ISIS [a terrorist organization banned in the Russian Federation], Iraq needs investment in energy and trade.

    Americans then, do not invest?
  10. iliitchitch
    iliitchitch 25 July 2017 08: 10
    0
    "This also applies to scientific cooperation, scholarships, university training .."
    The mighty scient. the potential of Iraq is known to all. Also with a diploma of the Baghdad plumbing graduates are everywhere waiting. I would say right away - take freeloaders, pay them a stip, you don’t get used to it, and I won’t yell at you. Good type of gesheft.
  11. vinni puk
    vinni puk 25 July 2017 08: 27
    0
    first send to Allah! And not that they, from the presence of the Russians, will plague your beautiful country with diarrhea.
  12. BARKHAN
    BARKHAN 25 July 2017 08: 37
    +2
    I’ll say briefly: I’m against it. Nefig is doing there. Let the Yankees drive there. I can only remember one thing ... 2004 was written off 9,5 billion dollars of debt to Russia, 2008 was written off 12,9 billion ... Not bad, right? effective foreign policy. Maybe there is nothing to take from them? Yes, even with sand for this amount ... not to mention oil and gas ...
  13. Nehist
    Nehist 25 July 2017 08: 39
    +1
    It was already !!! Based on Decree of the Council of Ministers of the USSR No. 1088 of September 25, 1958, Soviet military advisers and specialists were sent to Baghdad, weapons began to arrive for which Iraqis paid in net currency. Before 1980, the outbreak of war with Iran, the country was sent from the Soviet Union directed: missile (Osa-1, Osa-2), torpedo and patrol boats, fighters (MiG-21, MiG-23, MiG-25), fighter-bombers (Su-7, Su-20, Su-22) and bombers (Tu-16, Tu-22), transport aircraft (An-12, An-24, An-26) and helicopters (Mi-25, Mi-6), infantry fighting vehicles, armored personnel carriers, tanks (T -62, T-72), anti-aircraft installations, guns and guns, engineering equipment, stationary and portable anti-aircraft missile systems (S-75, S-125), multiple-launch rocket systems, tactical and tactical missiles, etc. from 1970 to 1990, 2,5 thousand units of artillery systems of various calibers were delivered to Iraq; 5 thousand units of armored vehicles (T-55 and T-62 tanks), 300 MiG-21, MiG-23 and MiG-25 combat aircraft; 300 combat helicopters Mi-24; 6 strategic bombers Tu-22; 20 coast guard boats and tens of thousands of small arms, air defense systems, ammunition and military equipment [760]. All this equipment was helped by a large detachment of Soviet military specialists. According to the information of the former senior engineer of the authorized State Unitary Institution of the State Committee for State Concerns (1973-1977), retired colonel I. Litovkin, almost 1990 thousand 8 Soviet military specialists visited the country before the beginning of 200, more than 6 thousand Iraqi were trained at universities of the USSR Ministry of Defense military personnel from all types of armed forces [761]. In 1979-1982 The main military adviser in Iraq was General A. Mokrous, authorized by the State Institution of State Control of the GKES - 1st-Class Captain G. Kharitonov, Colonel I. Litovkin. Since the beginning of the war in 1980, B. Chubar, G. Popov, and V. Baloyan have worked as commissioners in Baghdad.
    Remind me how it all ended? So what for us this IRAQ !!!!
    1. nizhegorodec
      nizhegorodec 25 July 2017 08: 53
      +1
      Quote: Nehist
      So what for us this IRAQ !!

      I agree, but Iraq at least paid for weapons with currency, and not with bananas and debts written off, like some of our "friends"
  14. Alexey-74
    Alexey-74 25 July 2017 08: 40
    0
    It is time to create a military base in Iraq.
  15. samarin1969
    samarin1969 25 July 2017 08: 51
    +2
    Despite the plans of Iran and the Shiite leader Al-Maliki, the United States (Israel) will not allow the creation of another Shiite state. ... I would say bluntly "give weapons for free and bad loans."
    First, let it achieve 100% withdrawal from Iraq of American military, oil TNCs and the introduction of the IRGC units. Well then, you can "subscribe" to the anti-Kurdish project .... As long as the United States controls the Iraqi army and economy, the maximum that Russia can sell is a prepaid weapon (!).
  16. P0LYM
    P0LYM 25 July 2017 09: 09
    +2
    Quote: Banker
    Is China an example to you? The most powerful state, but it’s not fighting anywhere.

    By the way, I think that everything goes to the fact that soon China will start to fight. So much so that everyone flinches ... We, in relation to China, also do not need to relax at all. I think, while there is for them, and for us, such an existential enemy as the United States, we can live more or less calmly, but after the states are torn ... look at both ...
    1. Banker
      Banker 25 July 2017 09: 54
      +1
      Quote: P0LYM
      but after the states are torn

      and they will tear? About China
      Quote: P0LYM
      In relation to China, we also do not need to relax at all.
      I completely agree.
      1. P0LYM
        P0LYM 25 July 2017 13: 29
        +1
        and they will tear?

        Of course ... if you look back at the whole of human history, you can see that not a single empire could exist for a long time, and America will not succeed ... not even looking at their "exclusivity" ... and this is already happening ... now What determines the position of the dollar as a world reserve currency, which ensures the economic dominance of the United States? I think I won’t discover America, each of the forum participants knows - correctly, military power. everyone thinks that the usa is the most powerful military power in the world ... as long as this is so ... more precisely, as long as everyone believes that it is, the usa will be in chocolate, but as soon as the most doubts arise ... honestly, I would not want to live at that moment in the United States ...
        By the way, a completely obvious conclusion can be drawn from this, the United States, in principle, cannot avoid a world war, and they will certainly start it ... this is a fact, they simply have no choice ... it’s called on us to think like hobbits ... and then they clearly know that you have freedom only if you are alpha))) (nowadays fashionable word)
        1. Banker
          Banker 26 July 2017 05: 38
          +1
          Quote: P0LYM
          Of course ... if you look back at the whole of human history, you can see that not a single empire has been able to exist for a long time, and America will not succeed ... not even looking at their "exclusivity".

          those. Chinese principle: "If you sit by the river for a long time, then someday you will see how the corpse of your enemy will swim on it"))))
    2. Kasym
      Kasym 25 July 2017 10: 27
      +2
      He (Beijing) is likely to provoke. Apparently, the United States does not see any other method to restrain development, except to incite wars on the borders of a "competitor". But China has another weak point - the lack of resources for the economy and transportation routes. But pinching these supplies or transportation routes is pushing Beijing into the arms of the EAEU. There are both resources and alternative ways.
      GDP will not just give the highest award to Russia. Surely, a long-term cooperation program is being built with the PRC. And China needs Russia. hi
      1. Sergej1972
        Sergej1972 25 July 2017 13: 18
        0
        Apparently, the PRC has just enough resources. Geologically, the country is not yet sufficiently explored. We are accustomed to consider ourselves a unique country in terms of natural resources. But, unfortunately, the PRC and Brazil, apparently, are quite comparable in terms of natural resources with the Russian Federation. And they will have lower production costs.
        1. Kasym
          Kasym 25 July 2017 23: 42
          +2
          Whatever it was, but so far it has to be imported. Togo gas 160 billion cubic meters. - Germany at the beginning of the decade consumed half as much.
          The well-being of the Chinese has grown compared to a couple of decades ago. Eat more steel; for example, they “felt” the meat - but this resource is limited for them. They themselves claim that their land is "polluted" and "depleted" - our food comes from them like a premium. More expensive, but guaranteed natural food; therefore, they buy well (pasta, pastry, etc.). One more example. The first immigrants from Europe to Asia (Hong Kong, Macau, etc .; 17th century) after some time began to suffer from stomach diseases - it turned out that the Chinese have not consumed water for a long time (they consume it in the form of tea), the water there has long been spoiled . And the settlers drank this water and some died after a couple of years.
          I’m not going to refute your statement, and even agree about the natural resources. China is surrounded from the west (from south to north) by mountains - and these are exposed strata of the earth. layers. Tibet, Int. Mongolia, XUAR can bring many more surprises. But that’s interesting. I read the work of an economist related to energy. So, based on the number of urban residents and total energy consumption, he comes to the conclusion that the Chinese are 800 mil., But not 1,3 billion .. Maybe the Chinese deliberately frighten enemies with their number, so they "bend"? hi
          Half of Kazakhstan's uranium is bought by China (at least at the beginning of the decade).
  17. Suhov
    Suhov 25 July 2017 11: 05
    0
    Iraq needs investment in energy and trade.

    So after all:
    No money!
    But you hold on!
    Good luck to you!
    And all in chorus:
    "Have a good mood...." wassat
  18. Banker
    Banker 25 July 2017 11: 37
    +1
    Quote: P0LYM
    in fact, China is quite an aggressive state,
    well this is your opinion
    Quote: P0LYM
    and now it is confidently gaining strength and weight ... and neighbors and Americans are beginning to take it seriously and we should not relax.
    I agree with that
    Quote: P0LYM
    so an example about peace-loving china is past the cash register.
    will be past the cash register when he starts a war, at least local in foreign territory
    Quote: P0LYM
    ps you can still read about the Sino-Vietnamese war (which was already mentioned above) in 1979 ... I also
    China of 1979 and the current one, as they say in Odessa, two big differences, both in strength and in foreign policy, that’s all I wanted to say about present-day China.
    1. padded jacket
      padded jacket 25 July 2017 11: 45
      +1
      It is necessary to develop economic political and, of course, military cooperation both with Iraq and necessarily with Iran, and create a "Shiite belt" of friendly states that can resist the United States coalition from Saudi Arabia - Israel - Qatar - various terrorist gangs - UAE - Kuwait - Bahrain, and so on. similar "underexposed" modes.
      Troops, however, to introduce this unnecessary can be limited to advisers.
    2. Sergej1972
      Sergej1972 25 July 2017 13: 56
      +1
      From the middle, or maybe from the beginning of the 60s and up to the turn of the 70s and 80s, they had constant shyness in both domestic and foreign policy. They like to blame Khrushchev for aggravating Soviet-Chinese relations. But they forget that they were the worst under Brezhnev. Just in Brezhnev’s time, our propaganda liked to exaggerate in relation to the PRC policy. Although, I must say, in many ways she was right.
      The most interesting thing is that, criticizing Khrushchev’s course regarding the cult of Stalin’s personality, the Chinese themselves retroactively sharply criticized Stalin’s policies regarding the Comintern’s interference in the CCP’s affairs, about the policies of the USSR in Xinjiang, etc.
    3. P0LYM
      P0LYM 25 July 2017 13: 57
      +1
      Cheslov, here I see that pure trolling, but I can not answer)))
      well this is your opinion

      and yours? Is a state that arranges military provocations on its borders and actively participates in local military conflicts peaceful enough for you? Can you still google on the topic "conflicts in which China participated"
      will be past the cash register when he starts a war, at least local in foreign territory

      I think not to wait long
      China of 1979 and the current one, as they say in Odessa, two big differences, both in strength and in foreign policy, that’s all I wanted to say about present-day China.

      Bravo, masterpiece !!!)))) is no longer an open trolling ... Russia, too, as it were, is not at all the same as in 1979 ... can you find it? It turns out that Russia generally did not take part in any wars ... never at all.
      1. Banker
        Banker 26 July 2017 05: 42
        +1
        Quote: P0LYM
        State organizing military provocations on its borders

        why did you decide that it was a provocation? In the newspapers read about the Chinese military? Take the same Damansky, you know the history of the conflict, from the beginning, and not from the place they shot our outfit? You will study more carefully, at the same time you will understand where this proposal for the "1001 Chinese warning" came from. If you can’t, I’ll tell you, but now there’s no time, I’m late for work hi
  19. Nehist
    Nehist 25 July 2017 11: 55
    0
    Banker,
    Avgan))))
  20. A. Privalov
    A. Privalov 25 July 2017 13: 20
    +1
    Is Syria a little and still need to enter Iraq? Livia, too, is asking. In Yemen, there is also a civil war, an epidemic of cholera and half a million sick ... No, I understand, fraternal assistance and all that stuff, not counting the strengthening of our own borders five thousand kilometers from home. But still! Is Russia a generous soul, or in order to force Trump in borscht to go and do anything?
    1. padded jacket
      padded jacket 25 July 2017 14: 03
      0
      Quote: A. Privalov
      Is Syria really small and still need to enter Iraq?

      Do not "enter" is not necessary but to stop the terrorists sponsored by the United States Israel Saudi Arabia Qatar, etc. it’s necessary, and for this it is necessary to arm Iraq Hezbollah and create a “Shiite belt” which will protect our borders as well.
      1. A. Privalov
        A. Privalov 25 July 2017 14: 44
        +1
        Well, yes ... These will protect, how can ... laughing
        1. padded jacket
          padded jacket 25 July 2017 14: 50
          0
          Quote: A. Privalov
          Well, yes ... These will protect, how ... laughing

          Well, yes, they will protect our borders from a possible attack by terrorists or Israel, and the monarchies of the PP that are clearly not friendly to us.
          1. A. Privalov
            A. Privalov 25 July 2017 15: 12
            +1
            Neither Israel nor the PZ monarchies, as you know, do not encroach on the borders of Russia, and the terrorists, as you yourself could already see, are striking civilians in places where no Hezbollah will help. So, Vatnik, do not make my sneakers laugh. I understand that such a nickname you are supposed to somehow play, but not to the same extent.
            1. padded jacket
              padded jacket 25 July 2017 15: 53
              0
              Quote: A. Privalov
              Neither Israel, nor the monarchy of the PZ, as you know, are not encroaching on the borders of Russia, and terrorists, as you yourself could already see, are striking at the civilian population

              This is so far the lesser is Israel and the PZ monarchies are the faithful satellites of the United States and if the United States gives you the order, you will undoubtedly strike at our country as well as the terrorists prepared by you ..
              Quote: A. Privalov
              So, Padded jacket, do not make laugh my slippers. I understand that such a nickname you are supposed to somehow win back, but not to the same extent.

              Why do you not like my nickname, but a Jew?
              In quilted jackets, our people won the Second World War and built the superpower of the USSR.
              1. A. Privalov
                A. Privalov 25 July 2017 16: 28
                +2
                The war is long over, Vatnik. Superpower of the USSR - rested in the Bose. If I were even a Turk, or a Chukchi — both are very respected people of mine, I would also like a padded jacket, as a type of working clothes. By the way, to your Russianness, this has nothing to do. Greeks and Japanese can be Vatniki as well, as well as Russians, very respected nations. Vatnik, this is no longer clothes, but a state of mind, or, even if you want, a diagnosis. Behind this, let me leave. Accept, etc. hi
                1. padded jacket
                  padded jacket 25 July 2017 16: 36
                  +1
                  Quote: A. Privalov
                  I would also adore a padded jacket, as a type of work clothes.

                  It is not given to you lol
                  Quote: A. Privalov
                  A padded jacket, this is no longer clothes, but a state of mind, or, even if you want, a diagnosis

                  The diagnosis you can make yourself a "doctor" you are ours laughing
                  Yes, I’m a quilted jacket and I’m proud of at least not one of some emigre Jews who, after chasing the “long shekel”, went to another country and now they constantly “whine” that no one understands them and everyone offends and generally everyone in the world is anti-Semitic lol
                  I am a quilted jacket.

                  I am a quilted jacket. I was brought up on purely Russian values ​​- love for the family, love for the Russian state and its history.

                  I am a quilted jacket. I am pleased that Crimea became part of Russia, and I sympathize with the Donbass militia, for which my friends are fighting. And yes, I really think that in Ukraine liberal fascism, funded by the State Department, came to power.

                  I am a quilted jacket, which, because of its near-by, “messed up with the Kremlin” mind, does not see the regular Russian army in the Donbass.

                  I am a quilted jacket. I believe that my country should be strong and ready to defend itself.

                  I am a quilted jacket. I am ready to tolerate the absence of parmesan, gorgonzola and Norwegian sterlet in grocery stores.

                  I am a quilted jacket that considers the Soviet Union not a bloody communist regime, but a truly heroic trace in our history, as, in fact, the Russian empire. After all, the one who does not know how to see the good in his past has no future.

                  I am a quilted jacket. I believe that the current President of my country really contributes to the revival of its greatness.

                  I am a quilted jacket. I am not ashamed to be proud that, despite the sanctions, my Homeland is once again becoming great.

                  I am a quilted jacket. At every mention of the Sochi Olympics, the Russian Formula 1 Grand Prix stage and the 2018 World Cup, I don’t want to turn my nose and say how much money was stolen and how much more will be stolen. I just know that I will be pleased to look at the end result.

                  I am a quilted jacket. I do not consider my country to be ideal, but I do not want to change its structure by a bloody coup, as in Ukraine, which Navalny associates are so calling for.

                  I am a quilted jacket. I am a “victim of Kremlin propaganda with brainwashed”

                  I am a quilted jacket. I really consider Navalny, Nemtsov and others to be traitors to the motherland. After all, the one who constantly scolds all the undertakings of his country is clearly not its patriot.

                  I am a quilted jacket, and I see nothing wrong with the fact that people go to church. I’m so cottony that I think that dancing in the temple is wrong, just like praying in a club.

                  I’m a quilted jacket, which, in view of its narrow-mindedness, really believes that everyone took up arms against Russia not because we are wrong, but because we are doing everything right.

                  I am a quilted jacket. I sincerely do not understand how you can go out on a peace march with the flags of the Right Sector, zig and scream fascist chants.

                  I am a quilted jacket. I do not see enemies among people in Europe and the United States, but I think that we should not be equal to their values.

                  I am a quilted jacket. I believe that the legalization of same-sex relationships has no place in my ideal Russia.

                  I am a quilted jacket. I am a real, full-fledged, “paid” by the Kremlin quilted jacket that wants a peaceful, happy future for myself, my family, my children and my descendants.

                  I am a quilted jacket, my parents are quilted, my grandparents are quilted, and my children and grandchildren are also quilted.

                  I’m such a cotton padded jacket that I think that sooner or later everyone will have to make a choice. I made my choice. I am for a strong Russia. For the Russia that I'm proud of right now.
                  Quote: A. Privalov
                  For sim, let me take my leave.

                  Go-go, otherwise the matzo will cool. I let you lol
  21. seregatara1969
    seregatara1969 25 July 2017 20: 06
    0
    and it all started with friendly Afghanistan - now everyone needs Russians
  22. Yeti
    Yeti 25 July 2017 21: 24
    0
    Everything has its time. First finish off the bandits in Syria. Build all threads. And there it will be seen. And what has the whole Isis beaten in Iraq? A military presence is necessary to protect Russian interests. From the citizens of America and to.