Military Review

Where the threat to the world really comes from

83
A comparison of two equally-formatted, official assessments of world politics of the Russian Federation and the United States gives an unequivocal answer to this crucial question.




Coincidentally, these days high-level evaluative judgments were made about the main content of the modern foreign policy of the two leading military-political powers of the world - Russia and the United States. Russian policy was described by General Robert Ashley, head of the intelligence department of the US Department of Defense, in the format of a document presented during hearings in the Senate Armed Services Committee. And, accordingly, the Secretary of the Security Council of the Russian Federation Nikolai Patrushev assessed American policy. These statements are noteworthy, first of all, for their approximate status equivalence, which gives us reason to consider them, approximately to the same extent, on the one hand, expert, and on the other, propaganda artifacts. The last component is always present by default in any official opinion that involves public announcement.

But, since in this case the general formats of these assessments are about the same and there is undoubtedly an objective expert beginning, it is all the more interesting to compare their content. And to see - the policy of which of the two countries is perceived more negatively in the other and, accordingly, from the point of view of vis-a-vis, is more unacceptable and contrary to the generally accepted regulatory framework of international relations.

Let's start with the American general. I want to immediately emphasize. What he recorded in his report, in part of the assessment of Russian foreign policy, practically does not go beyond the framework of these generally binding norms. And it actually looks like expert recognition of the fact that the modern Russian Federation is a completely normal country with completely ordinary, natural geopolitical interests.
Judge for yourself - by quotes from this document RUMO USA:

"Moscow’s strategy is to force the United States and its allies to recognize Russia's security interests, and also recognize its importance as a global player whose interests cannot be ignored without consequences ... Although Russia has repeatedly stressed that it is not interested in the new cold war with the USA, she also made it clear that she would no longer go to reconciliation with the West, making concessions "
. https://www.armed-services.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Ashley_03-06-18.pdf

Already on the basis of this quotation alone, it is possible to make a completely unambiguous conclusion that Russia is seeking absolutely basic things from its foreign policy vis-à-vis. For example, “recognition of Russia's security interests in Russia”. It is absolutely obvious that this is an inalienable right of any sovereign state, absolutely corresponding to the norms of international law. In the same way, Russia has the full right to pursue, as the United States and any other country in the world, so that its interests cannot be ignored without consequences. I would like to emphasize once again that in these American expert level assessments there is not even a hint of the sheer crime and compromising material that the American mass propaganda sews Russia.

There is nothing out of the ordinary that the modern Russia is not ready to go on reconciliation with the West, making new concessions to it. Given the fact that the West used the post-Soviet weakening of Russia to the maximum, up to the organization of a coup in Ukraine and actually moving the control zone of the western military bloc to the outskirts of Moscow, Russia has nowhere to physically retreat. Therefore, it is not surprising that she considers her concession limit fully exhausted.

The United States itself would feel exactly as uncomfortable if Russia deployed troops in Mexico and Cuba (as America did in the Baltic States and Ukraine) and supported, for example, the arrival of power in Texas to local supporters of independence from the United States.

In other words, if we approach the evaluation of the response of the Russian Federation from the point of view of the standards adopted in America for a similar situation, then they are not just adequate, but probably even softer and more restrained than the US would have been in such a case.

The American general in the official document simply cannot speak otherwise, because it will mean his country's written refusal of everything that forms the foundation of relations between states and nations throughout the world. stories. And within the framework of this indestructible standard, he involuntarily forced to conclude that there is nothing particularly unusual in Russian policy and there is nothing out of the ordinary. In the same vein, the rest of the evaluative judgments of the US RUMO report on Russian topics are also maintained:

"Russia views the United States as the main threat to its national security and geopolitical ambitions and is developing its own armed forces to repel all potential threats, as well as to achieve its foreign policy goals."


And still Russia would not consider the USA as such threat! There are plenty of legitimate reasons for this. The United States armed to the teeth, having a military budget 15 times more Russian! From the American point of view, this alone is quite enough to recognize such a country as the number one threat and take all measures to strengthen its defense. That is, the Russian Federation and here operates within the framework of generally accepted, in fact, American logic.

But America, moreover, demonstrates its complete disregard for international law and the legitimate interests of other peoples and states, constantly interfering in their internal affairs, everywhere supporting state coups, insurrections and civil wars. And sometimes even committing military aggression, for example in Syria. without any legal basis.

Dealing with such an extremely dangerous and, in a bad sense, predictable state, any country, including Russia, would do exactly what General Robert Ashley writes about - “developed its armed forces to repel potential threats”. But then what are your complaints about the Russian Federation, gentlemen from Washington, if Russia is doing exactly what you yourself would have done in such a situation?

"The Kremlin’s objectives include influencing the states of the former Soviet Union, preventing further NATO expansion to the east, and ensuring that no major international issues are resolved without Russian participation or at its expense. The Kremlin views powerful strategic nuclear forces as the basis for national security. Desire Moscow to be recognized as a great power requires the presence of modern and well-trained armed forces, and Moscow pays considerable attention and resources to improving military technology. . Nicks and control systems for the Kremlin a task of paramount importance - to modernize the strategic nuclear forces, to maintain nuclear parity with the United States and improve the survivability of nuclear weapons, as well as objects, which could escape the country's leadership, in the case of high-precision weapons or nuclear strike "

Even if you study these American official assessments with the help of a magnifying glass, it is absolutely impossible to find anything supernatural in almost any independent and self-conscious country in the world. The desire of the Russian Federation to influence the states of its closest environment, elementary preventing them from becoming pockets of extreme hostility, against the background of the fact that the United States itself declares practically all regions of the planet its “vital interests”, looks like a menu of a vegetarian planted on a strict diet.

About the rest of the "Moscow tricks", such as "preventing the expansion of NATO to the East", "ensuring that no major international issues are resolved without Russia or at its expense." “The desire to be recognized as a great power,” and so on, is generally ridiculous to speak of as evidence of special ambition and, even more so, the aggressiveness of the Russian Federation. Since all this is a mandatory minimum of foreign policy activity for any self-respecting country. And Ashley’s words that the Russian Federation is seeking to preserve nuclear parity with the United States speak about anything, but not about the desire of Moscow to ensure military superiority over America.

Thus, the overall result of the assessment of Russia's actions in the international arena, sounded from a highly competent and responsible official American source, can be considered a full recognition of the obvious fact that the modern Russian Federation is a quite common large state with such a standard set of geopolitical interests national security. That is, such an international player who does not impose any special and, especially, going beyond the generally accepted, requirements for other world players. And from this follows. that the Russian Federation is quite an adequate partner, with whom the same United States, provided they recognize common to all the rules of the game, may well find a common language and mutually acceptable solutions to controversial issues.

And now let us move to another estimated coast, where on the same days a roughly equal format sounded and, we will understand - to the same extent objective, an assessment of the US world role given by the head of the RF Security Council, Army General Nikolai Patrushev.
An assessment that is very different from the American assessment of Russia. recognizing its geopolitical normality, precisely by the fact that it categorically denies such normality for the United States.

"The West is actively using power methods to promote its own interests, trying to devalue the potential of international law and a number of multilateral institutions, is seeking to solve its own problems at the expense of the security of others," Patrushev said at a plenary session of the scientific council under the RF Security Council.
"The intervention of the United States and individual EU countries in the internal affairs of sovereign states, an attempt to redraw the borders, incitement of ethnic and confessional clashes, and the imposition of their values ​​without taking into account national aspects led to the transformation of vast territories of the Middle East, North and Central Africa into chaos, into a nutrient medium for terrorism. "

http://tass.ru/politika/5012199


It is difficult to find in these assessments of a high-level Russian state expert at least one comma, which would not correspond to the real state of affairs, the facts of the global foreign policy of the United States and the entire West governed by them. This is the case. Full disregard for the norms of international law, attempts to empower themselves with exclusive powers to decide the fate of other nations and states, up to the completely manic declaration of their own exclusiveness from the United Nations rostrum - this is quite Hitler's set of delusional ideas on the basis of which Washington is trying to build its relations with the outside world . In which there are no more, perhaps, such abominations and such a measure of cynicism, which have not yet surpassed the United States.

They are to blame for everything, always and in everything except themselves. Syria because it wants to have a legitimate government and a peaceful life. Turkey, because it does not want, in spite of America, to have at its side the “great Kurdistan” which is deadly dangerous for it. Yugoslavia was to blame only for being a Slavic superpower in the Balkans. North Korea is declared “the enemy of all mankind” only because the States urgently needed to infringe on China, in the form of strengthening its own industrial power. But Russia in general should not exist in its current form simply because it has too much natural wealth that the West needs as a passion.

If the same American General Ashley was instructed to make an objective report on the real nature of world politics in his own country, then, being an honest officer, he would have been obliged to shoot himself. Because it is impossible to defend, and even more justify, the global gangster chaos that the United States is doing, while remaining at least minimally a decent person. So thanks to him and that he wrote about Russia.

And for us, a comparison of these two polar assessments is another reason to understand where, in fact, the legs grow from quite possible in the future new world war, “who is xy” in this world and where exactly “the dog rummaged”. American dog, of course.
Author:
83 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Olgovich
    Olgovich 8 March 2018 07: 19
    +11
    Where the threat to the world really comes from
    Rhetorical question..
    Iraq, Bosnia, Kosovo, Libya, Syria, Afghanistan, Ukraine, speak for themselves ......
  2. Tatanka Yotanka
    Tatanka Yotanka 8 March 2018 07: 54
    +4
    the title of the article is somehow - as if the discovery was made
  3. svp67
    svp67 8 March 2018 08: 02
    +3
    Where the threat to the world really comes from

    That's from where
    1. privateer2000
      privateer2000 8 March 2018 12: 29
      +1
      Right KS2000,)
    2. Lycan
      Lycan 8 March 2018 13: 07
      +2
      Suggest urgent removal?
      Everyone has?
      laughing
      1. Navigator Basov
        Navigator Basov 8 March 2018 16: 04
        +2
        Without fail!
  4. sxfRipper
    sxfRipper 8 March 2018 08: 43
    0
    Lord trolls! A big request to you - chew, huh?
    1. V. Salama
      V. Salama 8 March 2018 18: 19
      +1
      What is there to chew? The classics were right in asserting the aggressive essence of imperialism. If this exists, you must learn to live with it. Attempts to destroy the weak will always be, and, first of all, through internal problems that will always be created by the stick and the carrot.
  5. prior
    prior 8 March 2018 08: 46
    +4
    The threat to the world comes from man. Animals and natural disasters are not able to destroy all life on earth, and “homo sapiens” can and is striving hard for this.
    A major potential threat to peace is America. There is no such nationality - American. There are adventurers who have come to the American continent from around the world. These are capable of anything.
    1. Brother Fox
      Brother Fox 8 March 2018 11: 39
      +5
      Quote: prior
      There is no such nationality - American. There are adventurers who have come to the American continent from around the world. These are capable of anything.

      America is a cancerous tumor on the planet.
  6. 23rus
    23rus 8 March 2018 08: 52
    0
    It seems that Shaw Putin decided to make the world bipolar again. Well, let's say there is parity, but what about ideology? Christianity? Social capitalism? Or, then, the king-father?
    1. shinobi
      shinobi 8 March 2018 09: 05
      +5
      And without ideology in any way? Ordinary human values ​​are few?
      1. aznemin
        aznemin 8 March 2018 11: 30
        0
        The set of "human" values ​​developed by the evolution of society within a given country or group of countries is ideology! There is no state without ideology, have not yet come up with))
        1. V. Salama
          V. Salama 8 March 2018 18: 29
          0
          Quote: aznemin
          The set of "human" values ​​developed by the evolution of society within a given country or group of countries is ideology! There is no state without ideology, have not yet come up with))

          And do you need to open a reference book and read what is ideology weak? And there is a state whose state ideology is prohibited by the Constitution. And they came up with such a thing as recognition of the diversity of ideologies. This is not scary or even strange if you do not know what ideology is.
      2. Lycan
        Lycan 8 March 2018 13: 13
        +1
        Here, the Shtatovites have one of the universal values ​​- to decompose the natural way of life of the family, which has proved itself since the creation of species.
        Do we need this?
        Or here "illegal sale of natural wealth / military secrets / organs of people / newborn children of the Motherland "for the opportunity to then live + earn in a foreign land + device своих children to other people's universities.
        All this smells of tangible profits for individuals / groups and in essence - quite value. Who will sort it out - are they human or not, if they pay so much for them that you won’t count?
      3. 82т11
        82т11 8 March 2018 13: 37
        0
        Quote: shinobi
        And without ideology in any way? Ordinary human values ​​are few?

        What values ​​please specify?))
        European, American, Muslim or Chinese)
        Oh yes, I forgot about India, because there also have their own values)
        1. Hottabych
          Hottabych 9 March 2018 08: 36
          +1
          Do you live in India?
          Or did your mom and dad not teach you any values?
    2. Boris55
      Boris55 8 March 2018 09: 51
      +2
      Quote: 23rus
      What about ideology?

      Any ideologies that are supported by different parties serve to conceal the true intentions of malicious concepts. So the question should not be posed “what is with the ideology”, but “what is the concept” ie First you need to decide "how we will live" - ​​to develop a concept of development or degradation, and only then everything else will follow.
      Quote: shinobi
      And without ideology in any way?

      Not only possible but necessary. There is nothing to hide a benign concept, therefore, it does not need either ideology or a party. She is open to all, her intentions are clear to everyone.
      1. aznemin
        aznemin 8 March 2018 11: 46
        +3
        Sorry, but this is complete nonsense! Apparently you do not fully understand what the term ideology hides in itself!
        1. Boris55
          Boris55 8 March 2018 12: 26
          0
          Quote: aznemin
          Apparently you do not fully understand what the term ideology hides in itself!

          Ideology - a product of ideological power, controlled by conceptual power.
          Ideology - This is the concept of governance, set out in a way that is understandable to the masses of the people so that it does not cause them to be rejected, much less actively targeted against it. The object of influence of ideological power is the whole society, however, with the exception of those who are themselves conceptually powerful, and therefore stand above ideological power. Ideology is needed for conceptual power in order to form a worldview of people in society corresponding to the chosen concept so that people are under its power in changing life circumstances.
          The function of ideological power - to clothe a conceptually beneficial concept in such ideological forms in which it would appear in the opinion of people handsome and therefore acceptable, in which the concept would not cause rejection, and even more so - a targeted active opposition to the introduction of the concept into management practice up to the development and implementation into the life of an alternative concept to her.
          Freedom from ideologies - This is self-deception, but not spontaneous psychological, but purposefully cultivated by conceptual power. An ideology can be understood or not understood, accepted or denied, but members of society always encounter manifestations of one or another ideology, which is the shell of the concept of managing society from the side of conceptual power carriers.
          Ideological power - conceptually powerless, because it only adapts the concept to specific historical circumstances and is not capable of developing a concept.

          The quality of life of society:
          primarily determined by the concept of management - its essence;
          secondly, it is determined by the quality of management within the framework of this concept.
          1. 82т11
            82т11 8 March 2018 13: 42
            0
            What is the difference concept or ideology if there is neither one nor the other (
            1. Boris55
              Boris55 8 March 2018 13: 49
              0
              Quote: 82т11
              What is the difference concept or ideology if there is neither one nor the other (

              If the goals of the current concept are not disclosed to us, then this does not mean that it does not exist. If the EP declares its intentions to build a slaveholding society - then who will vote for it?
              We have many parties and each with its own ideology, which does not go beyond the framework of the concept. Other parties, with an ideology contrary to the current concept, are destroyed in the bud.
          2. Barabashka 68
            Barabashka 68 9 March 2018 03: 58
            0
            Good vinaigrette, from the lumpy? And to trace “concepts” weakly for at least the last couple of thousand years? The concept follows from the worldview, and even it from the conditions of existence. So your "conceptual power" is a fiction. It is not society that adapts to the concept, but the concept under society. Russia is an example to you.
            1. Boris55
              Boris55 9 March 2018 08: 07
              0
              Quote: Barabashka 68
              It is not society that adapts to the concept, but the concept under society.

              A concept is not something in itself. A concept is people who are carriers of it i.e. the same society, or rather its active part, which determines the motion vector of all the others.
              1. Barabashka 68
                Barabashka 68 10 March 2018 04: 53
                0
                "its active part, which determines the motion vector of all the others." - What am I talking about? Not a concept defines, but a society. So the message is incorrect. 10-15% will promote that concept - which the majority will support, otherwise an alternative will appear in the form of other active 10-15%.)
      2. V. Salama
        V. Salama 8 March 2018 19: 18
        +1
        Quote: Boris55

        Any ideologies that are supported by different parties serve to conceal the true intentions of malicious concepts. So the question should not be posed “what is with the ideology”, but “what is the concept” ie First you need to decide "how we will live" - ​​to develop a concept of development or degradation, and only then everything else will follow.

        You, as always, in your role - do not get to the end in your reasoning. Well, if you follow the context, then the meaning is that if you follow the ideology (in your opinion it is now, but only invisible), then this is always bad, because become slaves to the bourgeoisie, the communists, etc. Ideologies hide malicious concepts.
        Therefore, now we live according to the malevolent concept of EP. This is bad and you propose to develop a benevolent concept of the monarchy and live happily ever after. As far as I remember you are her supporter.
        But your logic does not exclude, by analogy with the EP, that having a good-natured concept of a monarchy for everyone, we will really begin to live according to the evil ideology of the monarchy, which will be hidden. Remember your loved ones, "if it is not visible, this does not mean that it is not there." The economic basis will always correspond to the political superstructure. This is the first. Secondly, you are trivially working on the substitution of concepts from different branches of knowledge, since "ideology", "concept" are just terms - words, to denote these concepts. And only this, already a good reason to suspect you of insincerity. In your opinion, ideology is always bad, and a concept can be either bad or good, depending on how we decide to live - good or bad (we want to develop or degrade). And this is enough for the concept, "everything else will follow." Thimbles smoke nervously, however.
        1. Boris55
          Boris55 9 March 2018 07: 57
          0
          Quote: V. Salama
          you propose to develop a benevolent concept of the monarchy and live happily ever after. As far as I remember you are her supporter.

          No, I'm not a supporter of the monarchy.
          Quote: V. Salama
          And this is enough for the concept, "everything else will follow."

          So.
          1. V. Salama
            V. Salama 9 March 2018 18: 54
            0
            Quote: Boris55
            No, I'm not a supporter of the monarchy
            Sorry, that means memory failed.
            Quote: Boris55
            That is how
            But this is not scientific, not logical and, not corny convincing, because it is absolutely unproven. They took the concept of "ideology", gave two definitions of this concept, and they, depending on the goal of the developer of these definitions (models), can be far over a hundred (by the way, according to the results of the analysis of scientific literature, there are scientific definitions of concepts that there is a "model" - 125, and what is “management - 324), and then, without giving a logically related definition of the concept of“ concept ”(as I understand it, there can be a dozen and a half or two, at least, definitions), you begin to contrast” the concept of "ideology" without any justification. At the same time, the definition of the concept of "ideology" that you cite is defined as - "the concept of governance, set out in a way that is understandable to the masses of the people so that it does not cause them to be rejected, let alone actively targeted counteraction to it. "First, it turns out here. that the concept of" concept "is in a logical connection subordination with the concept of "ideology" (such as the concepts of "education" and "education"). Secondly, in other words, the “concept” is an adaptation of the “ideology” for the masses in order not to cause it to be rejected by the masses and even actively oppose it, apparently as a result of the presence of hidden malicious goals in it, other reasons for its rejection are unlikely may be. And you yourself say that “ideology” is bad, but “concept” is good and it will be enough for people to live well, and the rest will follow. The main thing is that the "concept" should be developed correctly, positively, for a good life. In addition, your Tolmud states that Freedom from ideology is self-deception. The conclusion here can only be unambiguous: you came across an Instruction (manual) for adherents of a high level of a religious sect and you, taking it for scientific work, were imbued with its content. Although no, perhaps this is unlikely. Most likely you escaped from this sect with this training manual, unable to reconcile with its logic and the problem of bringing its contents to the consciousness of lower level adherents. But you continue to be pinned not in a childish way, and you are trying to realize your educational need here in VO.
            Do not take my words for an insult, maybe I'm wrong. But I have no other options. You have been rushing with this material for half a year, without bothering to assimilate it in order to digest it for discussion or to clearly convey your idea, or what I really wanted to know there ...
            1. Boris55
              Boris55 9 March 2018 20: 15
              0
              Quote: V. Salama
              But this is not scientific, not logical and, corny not convincing,

              With regards to "science", it involves only three supposedly independent types of power ... Maybe the graphics will be more convincing:
    3. Navigator Basov
      Navigator Basov 8 March 2018 16: 18
      +2
      What does it mean: decided again? Did he decide that before? Yes, and if you look in retrospect, it was Putin who, on the contrary, was proposing a multipolar world and expressed fears about the world order sliding to a bipolar world, in fact, under the short-sighted, to put it mildly, stubbornness of the USA.
      With ideology, everything is dull. She is not and is not expected. The constitution is drawn up and interpreted in such a way that it should not be. Pioneers were replaced by scouts, NVP in schools - religious studies, scientific communism in universities - theology (theology). Around ideological gags in ideological holes.
      1. Boris55
        Boris55 8 March 2018 17: 16
        0
        Quote: Navigator Basov
        With ideology, everything is dull. She is not and is not expected.

        If you don’t know with us: the Communist Party of the Russian Federation has a Marxist ideology, the LDPR has a liberal democratic ideology, the CP has a Social Democratic ideology, etc. Choose what you want. The people voted for the ideology of the bourgeois - United Russia, right now it is being held and at the moment it is essentially state-owned.
        Quote: Navigator Basov
        The constitution is drawn up and interpreted in such a way that it should not be.

        The constitution dictates that there should not be a state ideology, but no one forbade party ideologies, on the contrary, it speaks of their diversity. The Communist Party wins - we will carry out the Marxist ideology.
        1. Navigator Basov
          Navigator Basov 8 March 2018 18: 59
          +2
          If you are not in the know, the CRC and the LDPR do not establish a state ideology, but we are talking about it, otherwise you can get to the personal ideology of every citizen in such a way that it does not do weather at all. This is the first.
          Secondly, in the CIPF program, Marxism-Leninism is mentioned once, and very vaguely.
          Quote: Communist Party Program
          In determining its program goals and objectives, strategies and tactics, our party proceeds from an analysis of socio-political practice, is guided by Marxist-Leninist teachings and creatively develops it, based on the experience and achievements of domestic and world science and culture.
          The fact is that this party is so creatively developing the Marxist-Leninist teaching that it left it further than the capitalist Grudinin himself.
          Quote: Klim Zhukov
          In the 1991 year, as you know, the restoration of the February Provisional Government took place one way or another - we again have capitalism. And when the next election comes, here I will honestly say for myself, I always went to all the elections, without fail. Once upon a time, in 1996, I voted for Gennady Andreyevich Zyuganov and the Communist Party of the Russian Federation. But Gennady Andreyevich Zyuganov publicly merged the won elections, leaving the throne to Boris Nikolayevich Yeltsin, for whom some people voted with his heart ... And the Communist Party, as we recall, won the majority in the State Duma and did not do a damn thing. Generally. After that, it became clear to me (for me personally) that the Communist Party is called the Communist Party of the Russian Federation, and judging by the actions and published printed materials, it is the MPRF - the Menshevik Party of the Russian Federation. Because everything that they say and write, it is possible to change the surname to Chkheidze, Martov, Tsereteli, it will be the same thing - the texts published by the Mensheviks, they are almost no different. These are ordinary Mensheviks, that is, no Communists at all. Therefore, there was no one to vote for me, since then I have voted "against all."
          This is the opinion of a convinced communist who adheres to materialistic views on the historical process, that is, a real Marxist.
          Thirdly, the Liberal Democratic Party is completely openly showing right-nationalist manners, it has never been neither liberal nor democratic. LDPR = Zhirinovsky, he alone defines the whole ideology with his theater of one actor, and, as the party establishes authoritarianism, he everywhere advocates authoritarianism in the state. What is liberal there? In the LDPR program, liberalism is not mentioned at all, democracy is mentioned either as evil (modern Western democracy - and there is no other now - Zhirinovsky stigmatizes at every corner), or is simply misinterpreted, as corny as the opposition of the ruling party. Their program is also not difficult to find and read in order to draw conclusions about the liberalism and democracy of the views of its leader, and the ideologists that follow only from them.
          There’s no point in discussing the rest. We have the Communists of Russia party, which is really similar to the Communist Party, but its influence is negligible in all respects. The remaining political forces are, to one degree or another, all capitalist, including the exponential nomination of the capitalist from the Communist Party, which is not even a member of it.
          1. Boris55
            Boris55 9 March 2018 08: 03
            0
            Quote: Navigator Basov
            If you are not in the know, CRC and LDPR do not establish a state ideology

            And it is right. What ideology (party) the people chose in the elections - that ideology will be carried out. They do not refuse sincere convictions that their ideology is right when they come to power - it is simply put into practice.
            No need to deprive people of the right to choose which way we all go. I hope that supporters of the constitutional consolidation of ideology as a state understand whose particular ideology will be legalized and that after that all other ideologies (parties) will be prosecuted as not legal. hi
  7. askme
    askme 8 March 2018 09: 23
    +6
    This is all for shallow people analysis.
    The real threat to peace is not in any particular country now. Only very limited people do not understand this now. The real threat lies in the supranational shoble of trolls who troll the whole world, humanizing it with constant poisoning. Very, very many participants in the discussions and authors here are also a threat to the world precisely with their charge of hatred. It’s one thing when you defend your right and the right of fellow citizens to live, to respect your human rights, protect your life and the lives of others, and it’s quite another thing when you simply love to poison, molest, hate, troll with hatred, in a word. When you're just busy hating. In life. That is, you yourself are no longer people. Because a normal person is not motivated by hatred. If in life you are already motivated with hatred with ears, you are a threat to peace. Whatever country you live in. At least in Russia, at least in the USA.
    1. To be or not to be
      To be or not to be 8 March 2018 11: 23
      +3
      "" "Lenin V. I. Speech at a rally at the Polytechnical Museum on August 23, 1918 - Complete Works. Vol. 37, pp. 65-67. (Vol. 28, pp. 61 - 63.)

      V.I. Lenin reveals the social-class causes of the First World War. “... Capitalism,” he says, “concentrated the wealth of the earth in the hands of individual states, divided the earth to the last piece; further division, further enrichment can go already at the expense of others, one state at the expense of another. This issue can only be resolved by force - and therefore war between world predators has become inevitable ”(p. 66)." "
      Here is a selection of VI Lenin on issues of war. Reasons and class nature of wars. Historical conditions of their occurrence
      http://leninism.su/books/4326-voennye-voprosy-v-t
      rudakh-vi-lenina.html? showall = & start = 1
      Back to the classics .. hi
    2. seal78
      seal78 8 March 2018 14: 03
      0
      I think so too. This supranational shobla - the so-called "300 families." They can live both in the USA and anywhere on the planet. I think that Russian (and not only) special services know who it is and where they are. In this regard, I do not understand why not begin the gradual shooting of this shobla, terrorizing the planet.
      1. askme
        askme 9 March 2018 09: 20
        +1
        And the matter is not only in 300 families, but also in those who are completely absorbed in hatred. It's not about rich people. And the poor can be trolls like that. A good example is the Bolsheviks (unlike the communists after the Second World War, who, on the whole, abandoned the idea of ​​world revolution, became a responsible force as a whole compared to their predecessors). Hence, such friendship goes wild between the Bolsheviks and the same Rothschilds, who actively participated in the economic process of the 20s-30s in the USSR. So it is mankind, hatred. It is those who are obsessed with hatred as an idea - fanatics of all stripes - they are the ones who suffer from the idea of ​​being chosen, exclusive, because of which they are ready to kill "lower" creatures, "subhuman", "imbeciles", etc. The carriers of such ideas themselves are inhumane. Zealots of all stripes - they are now the menace to peace. So the point is not in wealth, not in nationality and not in state affiliation. When the media and mass culture propagate the rejection of moral principles, or vice versa, when mass culture forces, instills "morality" with methods of violence, defaming people when, for example, men and women, white and black, rich and poor, are all poisoned, these are all actions of the enemies of mankind.
  8. siberalt
    siberalt 8 March 2018 09: 49
    +1
    Quote: Tatanka Yotanka
    the title of the article is somehow - as if the discovery was made

    Well, now for schoolchildren not to study the Pythagorean theorems and the laws of Newton since they have long been discovered?belay
    1. Tatanka Yotanka
      Tatanka Yotanka 8 March 2018 17: 07
      +3
      Quote: siberalt
      Well, now for schoolchildren not to study the Pythagorean theorems and the laws of Newton since they have long been discovered?

      These laws are unshakable
      Their evidence is forever
      What an apple in Newton’s head,
      What a half-naked ancient Greek
      American problem
      -In the brains of torment, smart souls
      Does it compare with the theorem?
      Obama, Reagan, Clinton, Bush fellow
  9. Anyone
    Anyone 8 March 2018 10: 14
    0
    Quote: shinobi
    And without ideology in any way? Ordinary human values ​​are few?

    Ideas rule the world.
  10. lady.endzhi
    lady.endzhi 8 March 2018 11: 28
    0
    A great fact-based article, not an alleged shy whine of the Western press.
  11. akudr48
    akudr48 8 March 2018 11: 52
    +3
    The threat to the world comes from Russia if it is weak, because there are a lot of predators around who are ready to tear our country apart, and you can't redo these wolves with sobs about insults.

    A strong Russia - like the USSR in its heyday - is stability and peace, we won’t give an inch to the enemy. Modern Russia gives and is ready to give a lot to its sworn "partners".

    But a strong Russia is a state that is fair to its people, it is an honest government, a people’s government, a changeable government, a government controlled by the people, a government responsible to the people.

    Now Russia is not such a state and the authorities are doing what they want, to the detriment of the Russian people, weakening Russia to the utmost.
    Therefore, modern Russia is a weak country, so because of its weakness neighbors are excited, even as insignificant as former brothers in the USSR.

    Russia-worthy power and all to the polls!
  12. A. Privalov
    A. Privalov 8 March 2018 12: 25
    0
    Many today's sidellers on the military establishment may not know that "Outgoing from somewhere, a threat to the world" is the same mock-hearted cliche 60's - 70's, as well as those invented in the depths of the Soviet agitprop "all peaceful humanity", "all people of good will "and many others like them. And the phrase "The intervention of the United States and individual EU countries in the internal affairs of sovereign states, an attempt to redraw the borders, incitement of ethnic and confessional clashes, and the imposition of their values ​​without taking into account national aspects led to the transformation of vast territories of the Middle East, North and Central Africa into chaos, into a nutrient medium for terrorism. " - actually sounds like this: "USSR intervention in the internal affairs of sovereign states, an attempt to redraw the borders, inciting ethnic and confessional clashes, and imposing their values ​​without taking national aspects into account led to the transformation of vast territories of the Middle East, North and Central Africa into zones of chaos, into a breeding ground for terrorism. "Who yesterday digged a hole at the bottom of the boat, it should not be surprising that today it is full of water and is about to sink. For it was the Soviet Union that, for almost 40 years, created, fed, watered, armed, maintained at high political level and cherished all, without exception, the terrorists in these parts. hi
    1. stalkerwalker
      stalkerwalker 8 March 2018 12: 33
      +3
      Quote: A. Privalov
      Many today's inmates in HE may not know

      Sideltsev call those who were serving a sentence within the limits allotted by the FSIN .... laughing But you can be forgiven - you are the main ideologist-whistleblower .... lol
      Quote: A. Privalov
      that "Outgoing from somewhere a threat to the world" is the same mock-up cliche of 60's - 70's, as well as those invented in the depths of the Soviet agitprop "all peace-loving humanity", "all people of goodwill" and many others like them
      1. A. Privalov
        A. Privalov 8 March 2018 12: 53
        0
        Quote: stalkerwalker
        Quote: A. Privalov
        Many today's inmates in HE may not know

        Sideltsev call those who were serving a sentence within the limits allotted by the FSIN .... laughing But you can be forgiven - you are the main ideologist-whistleblower .... lol
        Quote: A. Privalov
        that "Outgoing from somewhere a threat to the world" is the same mock-up cliche of 60's - 70's, as well as those invented in the depths of the Soviet agitprop "all peace-loving humanity", "all people of goodwill" and many others like them

        Are you closer to those who "sit" and serve their sentences? And to me these, which "sit" and communicate in the forums. hi
        On the topic do not want to speak? belay
        1. stalkerwalker
          stalkerwalker 8 March 2018 13: 01
          +1
          Quote: A. Privalov
          On the topic do not want to speak?

          In your key "International Panorama"? I leave this good deed at your discretion. I looked at the booth with that name at the naval department in the school. And the military officers who came to the department from the warships explained the details in detail.
          Quote: A. Privalov
          Are you closer to those who are serving their sentences? And to me these who sit and chat on the forums

          Here's how to communicate with you? Well, at every opportunity you are trying to humiliate the interlocutor. "Professor" is a real angel in comparison with you. Dismiss ... Make an ulcer yourself.
          hi
          1. A. Privalov
            A. Privalov 8 March 2018 13: 17
            +1
            Quote: stalkerwalker

            Here's how to communicate with you? Well, at every opportunity you are trying to humiliate the interlocutor. "Professor" is a real angel in comparison with you. Dismiss ... Make an ulcer yourself.
            hi

            It’s easy to communicate with me. Discuss articles, not me. That's all. Try to start with the fact that I’m not the “main ideological exposer”, maybe it will work out? I was not going to humiliate you, not at all. If you understood it like that, please excuse me! I wish you hello. hi
            1. stalkerwalker
              stalkerwalker 8 March 2018 13: 19
              0
              Quote: A. Privalov
              I was not going to humiliate you, not at all. If you understood it like that, please excuse me!

              Privalov .... I see - you are a cultured person .... But. So heavy in communication ...
              Quote: A. Privalov
              Wish you hello

              Mutually!
              hi
              1. A. Privalov
                A. Privalov 8 March 2018 13: 28
                +1
                Quote: stalkerwalker
                But. So heavy in communication ...

                Very flattered by your rating! But, without jokes, I don’t remember when I had the honor of talking with you and why did I annoy you so much ... request
                1. stalkerwalker
                  stalkerwalker 8 March 2018 13: 29
                  +1
                  Quote: A. Privalov
                  But, without jokes, I don’t remember when I had the honor of talking with you and why did I annoy you so much ...

                  "Who will remember the old ..."
                  1. A. Privalov
                    A. Privalov 8 March 2018 13: 36
                    0
                    Quote: stalkerwalker
                    Quote: A. Privalov
                    But, without jokes, I don’t remember when I had the honor of talking with you and why did I annoy you so much ...

                    "Who will remember the old ..."

                    And that's right ...
    2. 82т11
      82т11 8 March 2018 13: 53
      +1
      The Soviet Union on a global scale acted as a nurse of the forest))
      Now the slave trade has blossomed in Libya, had the USSR been alive, then there would have been our advisers and agents of influence who would have prepared the communist revolution.
    3. Lopatov
      Lopatov 8 March 2018 17: 38
      +2
      Quote: A. Privalov
      Intervention of the USSR in the internal affairs of sovereign states

      The Soviet Union is no longer 27 years.
      However, as I see it, you still use it to justify the US ... Conveniently. But it's funny ...

      Well, about the "threat to peace" ... Any modern conflict situation, any unrest, any blood ... Everywhere the dirty feet of the United States.
      Not to consider this country a threat to peace is at least strange.
      1. A. Privalov
        A. Privalov 8 March 2018 17: 52
        +1
        Quote: Spade
        Quote: A. Privalov
        Intervention of the USSR in the internal affairs of sovereign states

        The Soviet Union is no longer 27 years.
        However, as I see it, you still use it to justify the US ... Conveniently. But it's funny ...
        Well, about the "threat to peace" ... Any modern conflict situation, any unrest, any blood ... Everywhere the dirty feet of the United States.
        Not to consider this country a threat to peace is at least strange.

        You are right ... 27 years is not a short time. The USSR rested in a Bose, but its business concerning terrorists lives on. Alas.. hi
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov 8 March 2018 18: 03
          +4
          Quote: A. Privalov
          You are right ... 27 years is not a short time. The USSR rested in a Bose, but its business concerning terrorists lives on.

          Means meeting mrs. McCain with future ISIS leaders is also the USSR to blame?
          Was it the USSR that made the US support the revolt of the Muslim Brotherhood in Syria? Just don’t say that they are not terrorists, otherwise you will have to recognize as non-terrorists their branch in the Gaza Strip called Hamas.
          Is this the Soviet Union that forced the United States to make seedlings of terrorism from Iraq and Libya?
          Did the USSR make Afghanistan the largest illegal producer of opiates?
          Was it the USSR that created the "Balkan route" for their export to Europe with a powerful transshipment point called Kosovo?
          1. A. Privalov
            A. Privalov 8 March 2018 19: 16
            0
            "It was the USSR that made the US support the Muslim Brotherhood rebellion in Syria? Just don’t say that they are not terrorists, otherwise you will have to recognize their separation in the Gaza Strip called Hamas as not terrorists."
            Of course the terrorists! Yes, what! Do you know who supports them?
            Do you know these gentlemen?
            1. Lopatov
              Lopatov 8 March 2018 19: 25
              +2
              Quote: A. Privalov
              Was it the USSR that made the US support the revolt of the Muslim Brotherhood in Syria?

              Once again, it was the Soviet Union that made it support the Muslim Brotherhood riot in Syria?
              Just try to answer the question.
              1. A. Privalov
                A. Privalov 8 March 2018 19: 37
                +1
                There was essentially no “riot”. The Muslim brothers won the election in a completely democratic way. Obama has done a lot of troubles with his stupidity. For eight years of his reign, he did much harm to Israel. However, Al Sisi "brothers" crumbled into cabbage and maintains quite decent relations with Israel.
                Unfortunately, the Russian Federation continues to support Hamas terrorists ...
                1. Lopatov
                  Lopatov 8 March 2018 20: 04
                  +5
                  Quote: A. Privalov
                  The Muslim brothers won the election in a completely democratic way.

                  Uh ... what ???? "The elections won democratically ???"
                  Do not you think that lying on the blue eye about the events that occurred only 7 years ago is somewhat presumptuous?

                  Quote: A. Privalov
                  Unfortunately, the Russian Federation continues to support Hamas terrorists ...

                  I generally discuss this topic with the inhabitants of Israel ... unpleasant. To put it mildly.

                  Tantrums about handshakes during meetings between Russian diplomats and one of the parties to the conflict, accusations of "support" ...
                  And while complete silence about the direct financing of Hamas by the Qatar authorities. By the way, the same US ally as Israel ...

                  It looks very bad from the side ...
                  1. A. Privalov
                    A. Privalov 8 March 2018 21: 11
                    0
                    Quote: Spade
                    Quote: A. Privalov
                    The Muslim brothers won the election in a completely democratic way.

                    Uh ... what ???? "The elections won democratically ???"
                    Do not you think that lying on the blue eye about the events that occurred only 7 years ago is somewhat presumptuous?

                    Quote: A. Privalov
                    Unfortunately, the Russian Federation continues to support Hamas terrorists ...

                    I generally discuss this topic with the inhabitants of Israel ... unpleasant. To put it mildly.

                    Tantrums about handshakes during meetings between Russian diplomats and one of the parties to the conflict, accusations of "support" ...
                    And while complete silence about the direct financing of Hamas by the Qatar authorities. By the way, the same US ally as Israel ...

                    It looks very bad from the side ...

                    Unpleasant - do not discuss. It was you who turned to me, not I to you.
                    The presidential election took place in Egypt in 2012 in May (23 of May and 24 of May - 1 tour, 16 of June and 17 of June - 2 tour). Muhammad Mursi became president.
                    Muhammad Mursi was the chairman of the Freedom and Justice Party, which was formed by the international Muslim Brotherhood organization. In 2012, Mursi won the second round of the presidential election. The first democratically elected head of state in Egyptian history, he ruled the country a little over a year before his overthrow as a result of the military coup of 3 on July 2013. After being removed from power, he was arrested by the new authorities, which brought him a series of charges and initiated a harsh repressive campaign against the Muslim Brotherhood, soon declared a terrorist organization.

                    For sim, let me take my leave. hi
                    PS Admire the historical selection of photographs. The song, in my opinion, is out of place there. Do not listen.
                  2. Hottabych
                    Hottabych 9 March 2018 08: 53
                    +1
                    Quote: Spade
                    Uh ... what ???? "The elections won democratically ???"

                    Dear Lopatov, do not argue with Comrade Privalov lol ... He writes with one hand, crosses out with the other! He began to talk about Syria, and when he realized that he had given a swoop, he got out - indicating Egypt.
        2. The comment was deleted.
    4. V. Salama
      V. Salama 8 March 2018 20: 03
      0
      Quote: A. Privalov
      Many of today's high-ranking Wanderers may not know that the “Outgoing Threat to the World from Somewhere” is the same mossy cliché of the 60s - 70s, ...

      Who yesterday dug a hole in the bottom of the boat should not be surprised that today it is full of water and is about to drown. For it was the Soviet Union that, for nearly 40 years, created, fed, watered, armed, supported at a high political level and cherished all, without exception, terrorists in these parts. hi

      I have this "mossy cliche" in the paper version somewhere gathering dust, two editions. I find nothing reprehensible there. But to argue with you can only be extremely abstract or extremely specific, but here it is unlikely to succeed. Not that format. You expressed your position on the basis of your national interests. From your position, Assad is evil, then you can not bother with an analogy for the USSR, they would have sculpted right away in the Russian Federation - the evil empire in its purest form. So you won’t surprise anyone, the same Americans constantly broadcast this to us and Europe does not lag behind.
      By the way, what is terrorism, there are about 200 definitions. So who has been feeding anyone there for 40 years and who has been digging holes in the bottom of the boat there not only yesterday, but also the day before yesterday, it will take a long time to figure it out. You can say a lot of things, but you cannot prove a lie, a lie can only be refuted. I’m not going to refute you for the reason indicated above, and it’s simply not interesting to refute the utter and to prove the obvious one hundred times.
    5. Barabashka 68
      Barabashka 68 9 March 2018 04: 15
      +1
      Oh.) Maybe remind me who cut the borders there a hundred years ago? And what is the destabilizing factor in the Middle East today? My dear, you should know the story in your position. Not knowing her darling will make you again "scapegoats" like 80 years ago.
    6. emwave
      emwave 9 March 2018 14: 53
      0
      Yeah ... And the States didn’t arm anyone? White and fluffy?
  13. 82т11
    82т11 8 March 2018 13: 45
    0
    Also, the author discovered me America)
    To answer on the threat to the world, it’s enough to remember who has recently started wars, such as for the sake of democracy)
  14. nickgv
    nickgv 8 March 2018 14: 15
    +2
    At every intersection, it must be trumpeted that the United States, with its paradigm on world leadership, is directly guilty of organizing, and often directly participating in dozens, if not hundreds of world conflicts. The provocation of the conflict is only the final stage, and preparation, pumping up finances and weapons, sponsoring the participants - all this refers to the organization, the severity of which is no less than the conflict itself. Hence, the damage done to the world community amounts to tens and hundreds of millions of victims and trillions of US debt served by the entire population of the planet.
  15. Armat
    Armat 8 March 2018 16: 07
    +1
    Russia threatens itself. Insatiable officials are thieves and miserable stupid people.
    1. yuriyselivanov
      8 March 2018 17: 39
      +1
      Flag like German. Not too early forgot how this "stupid people" of your "supermen" buried in the ground?
    2. K.A.S.
      K.A.S. 8 March 2018 17: 44
      +3
      I am always surprised when they speak for the people! Are you broadcasting from Germany? Then worry about the German people stupid and without initiative. These people Merkel turns as he wants as soon as 20 years! Making Muslims of the Germans, and forcing the Germans to work so that the Muslim immigrants live with dignity!
      And about the officials! The officials are the same everywhere. And for officials to work, they need to be forced !!
      With this stupid Russian people "the whole world" can not cope! And still on the land of this stupid people there are no soldiers of another state!

      It is interesting to know who put the pluses for you?
  16. A.
    A. 8 March 2018 18: 28
    +1
    Quote: A. Privalov
    Quote: Spade
    Quote: A. Privalov
    Intervention of the USSR in the internal affairs of sovereign states

    The Soviet Union is no longer 27 years.
    However, as I see it, you still use it to justify the US ... Conveniently. But it's funny ...
    Well, about the "threat to peace" ... Any modern conflict situation, any unrest, any blood ... Everywhere the dirty feet of the United States.
    Not to consider this country a threat to peace is at least strange.

    You are right ... 27 years is not a short time. The USSR rested in a Bose, but its business concerning terrorists lives on. Alas.. hi

    What does this skin do in
  17. Thomas the Unbelieving
    Thomas the Unbelieving 8 March 2018 18: 47
    0
    The article is not bad, but it, like many comments, does not reveal the essence of the problem. Here is what Vidal Gore, the grandson of a senator from Oklahoma, writes in his book published with us in 2003 and available on the internet. The book is called "Why They Hate Us." It’s not at all a sin to read it completely. But here’s an excerpt: “this is the text of pre-Sam’s time:“ Restriction of personal freedom, the right to freedom of expression, including freedom of the press, the right to organize meetings and form associations, as well as violation of the secrecy of postal, telegraph and telephone communications and searches in homes, receipt of warrants the confiscation of property, as well as the restriction of property, are permitted outside the limits prescribed by law. "Familiar tone. Clinton? Bush? Ashcroft? No. This is a quote from a speech made by Hitler in 1933 in which he called for the adoption of the Law on the establishment of" emergency powers "for "Defending the people and the state" after the disaster with the fire of the Reichstag, which the Nazis secretly set on fire. "
    Actually, this is not about some kind of "geopolitical interests", but about the inevitable clash with fascism. And for this, by the way, we really need the ideology of peace and the brotherhood of people and peoples. And forget about Marxism. Because we must now read Lenin and Stalin. Stalin in volume 16 has an assessment of Churchill's speech in Fulton, where he clearly speaks of Anglo-Saxon fascism.
    1. Doliva63
      Doliva63 8 March 2018 22: 35
      +3
      Quote: Thomas the Unbeliever
      And forget about Marxism. Because we must now read Lenin and Stalin.

      Like, you don’t have to spend time on the multiplication table, start right away with higher mathematics right away? laughing
  18. gladcu2
    gladcu2 8 March 2018 19: 19
    0
    The one who is least guilty is always to blame.

    From this we conclude. Rights are not given, rights are taken.
    And a little easier. Your duties protect your rights.

    And from here, something complicated .....

    Normally, citizens ’obligations guaranteeing citizens’ rights should be recorded in the constitution. So that the constitution is not a hoax.
    1. Hottabych
      Hottabych 9 March 2018 09: 02
      0
      Quote: gladcu2
      The one who is least guilty is always to blame.

      It’s good to watch it from the side, for example, from Canada, right? winked
  19. stinger33
    stinger33 8 March 2018 19: 45
    0
    350 years ago we fought with them))
  20. Yak28
    Yak28 8 March 2018 20: 36
    0
    After the Soviet Union committed suicide, the United States turned out to be free, they became the only superpower and, as a strong man, do what they want, where they want, and who they want. I think this is a completely normal human reaction, and in the place of the USA, the USSR did would trample the former American allies into the mud. The threat to peace began to come from the USA through the fault of the USSR.
  21. Doliva63
    Doliva63 8 March 2018 22: 53
    +3
    Thus, the threat to peace does not come from the state itself, whatever it is called, but from the social relations that this state "protects." Specifically - capitalism. He is also in the Russian Federation, but weak. And at his expense others want to make money - the law of the jungle, nothing can be done. And they will not let me become strong. For having become strong, Russian capitalism will want to profit from them - all the same law of the jungle. And so the world wars begin, like the PMV. If there is anything left of the Russian Federation, I hope to wait until the Reds come and we will again begin to build a state where the means of production will be social and from which there will certainly not be a threat to peace drinks
  22. Bobxnumx
    Bobxnumx 9 March 2018 04: 34
    0
    Leaky U.S. umbrella!
  23. 23rus
    23rus 9 March 2018 11: 15
    +1
    Quote: Doliva63
    we will again begin to build a state where the means of production will be social and from which there will certainly not be a threat to peace

    Judging by the closure of crazy banks and the "voluntary" surrender of the Magnitsky to Galitsky, something like this has already begun ...
  24. nikvic46
    nikvic46 9 March 2018 12: 14
    0
    Quote: Yak28
    After the Soviet Union committed suicide, the United States turned out to be free, they became the only superpower and, as a strong man, do what they want, where they want, and who they want. I think this is a completely normal human reaction, and in the place of the USA, the USSR did would trample the former American allies into the mud. The threat to peace began to come from the USA through the fault of the USSR.

    "After the Soviet Union committed suicide," the Soviet Union was destroyed first by Gorbachev, then Yeltsin. And in order to get the brains of the people with a market economy, Gaidar invited the Peace Corps (a CIA branch).
  25. nikvic46
    nikvic46 9 March 2018 12: 17
    0
    In the capitalist, the threat will always come from a strong power.
  26. Earnest
    Earnest 9 March 2018 23: 11
    +2
    Quote: A. Privalov
    ... You are right ... 27 years is not a short time. The USSR rested in a Bose, but its business concerning terrorists lives on. Alas.. hi

    And let me remind you of the story, so that your goodwill dunk in a puddle ... You can show a lot of posts like yours about the USSR at some IDF forum of veterans about Israel, so that a Russian reminds you, for example, that the IDF created 100% nasty creatures, killers and terrorists? How are people from Irgun there, are they still alive, or is everyone already in hell? Well, let’s answer me honestly, and call upon all other decent Jews to joyfully give me my post?
    Or, condemning the bastards from Arab terrorists with a repentant look, would you recall each time that the Jewish radical killed Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, eh?
    After all, there are many such examples of lies, dirt and lawlessness in the history of any country, and yours is no exception. USSR no. But neither you, no one else will ever create such a great country of truly equal opportunities without terrible upheavals.
  27. A.
    A. 12 March 2018 21: 21
    0
    Quote: Armat
    Russia threatens itself. Insatiable officials are thieves and miserable stupid people.

    It’s not for you, monkey, to judge our people.