Liberty of Puerto Rico!

51
Another US ambassador to Ukraine, for some reason in the status of Chargé d'Affaires, William Taylor made a statement about Russia: "The United States will never recognize the occupation of Crimea by Russia." What does this statement by Taylor, and generally such a position of Washington in the Crimea?





Crimea and plans for the occupation of its USA


Washington did not abandon plans to turn Crimea into its military base under the guise of "sovereignty" of Ukraine, as it turned Kosovo into its base, tearing it away from Yugoslavia. Formerly vice president Joe Biden once in America let a tear drop, complained about Russia, saying that a US base in the Crimea would be welcome, but Putin would have prevented it. Appreciate cynicism at the government level in the USA, as well as in Bandera Ukraine, in fact, shedding tears over the American base in Crimea: they will never recognize such a turn of events!

Indeed, the Crimean peninsula dominates the entire Black Sea, and the Crimean mountains are the dominant heights over the entire Black Sea region. That is why the United States has such a military base: so far from its shores and so close to ours, literally hanging over the south of Russia?

All these pompous statements can be answered that Russia will never recognize the claims of the United States and Ukraine, while they deny the democratic rights to the people of Crimea and the people of Donbass, while they grin at the ashes of the burned people in Odessa and the death of the writer Oles Buzina until Buzina is established a monument in Kiev, the mother of Russian cities, and Galician and other Nazis will not be held accountable.

Our Foreign Ministry is not authorized


Of course, US statements on the Crimea are only a hypothetical geopolitical threat, however, such threats should be adequately addressed, also hypothetically and geopolitically. Our Foreign Ministry, of course, is constrained in such statements, but journalism and some of our ambassadors and officials can in fact say their word in response to Taylor, Pompeo, as well as Bolton. President Trump, it must be said, is still showing some restraint.

As a preventive measure, one could respond to the latter. news from America about Trump's desire to buy Greenland. Our political scientists, close to the corridors of the Kremlin, could comment on this news: "Russia will never recognize the US purchase of Greenland and will consider it an illegal occupation." And then rejoice at the cries of the venal “world press”.

An adequate geopolitical response of Russia to the Crimean creeps of the United States would be a hypothetical threat of placing a military base near their territory, for example, in the Caribbean. In addition to the well-known Cuba, in this region there is the state of Puerto Rico, associated with the USA, which still will not achieve the status of 51 US state. Russia may refuse to recognize this association, consider it an act of unlawful annexation, and begin a political and information campaign to grant Puerto Rico independence from the United States. Support the information Puerto Rican liberation movement, if any. Tell me, what are our prospects? And what are the prospects for the United States "by not recognizing the occupation" of Crimea?

Let's go north further


We can go further, relying on the manifesto of the Lube group expressing the opinion of our people: to deny the USA recognition of rights to Alaska, and let this “non-recognition” hang in the air for some time. Finally, Russia may refuse to recognize the entry of Eastern European countries into NATO, since, according to Russia, the West’s promise to not expand NATO to the East was violated. For us, our own opinion on this issue is enough, because the USA and NATO act on the same basis. And after that, let our Eastern European partners think about their real security.

And about the consequences


It is easy to anticipate the cries of reason that such statements from any Russian media and individual officials will aggravate the international situation, that they are baseless and far-fetched. But the international situation is already escalating, and at our borders, maybe it is time to disturb the American borders, even hypothetically?

International impudent people do not understand a polite attitude, they consider this a weakness and an occasion for new fantastic accusations, so they need to be spoken in a language that they understand. Turning to the thought of Vladimir Putin at the Munich Security Conference 2007 of the year about “a comrade of the wolf who eats and does not listen to anyone,” you can supplement it with the Russian proverb: “To live with a wolf - howl like a wolf.”
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

51 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. -1
    22 August 2019 15: 13
    If the Crimea didn’t become Russian in the 2014 year, then by the 2019 it would already be Turkish.
    And the "Ukrainians" would have been slaughtered like sheep.
    1. +10
      22 August 2019 15: 31
      Quote: Valery Valery
      If the Crimea didn’t become Russian in the 2014 year, then by the 2019 it would already be Turkish.
      And the "Ukrainians" would have been slaughtered like sheep.


      Rather, by the 2019 year, Crimea would become American.
      1. +4
        22 August 2019 16: 11
        Quote: NF68
        Rather, by the 2019 year, Crimea would become American.

        Navryatli, it is much more profitable for the United States to play off the Russian Federation with its neighbors and historical opponents. This is more profitable because, firstly, American soldiers will not die, and secondly, you can benefit from the supply of weapons to the opponents of the Russian Federation, and this, all other things being equal. Moreover, History already has an example of "Crimean Tatar raids" When the then population of Crimea was used for robberies on the territory of Ingushetia. In fact, the same thing happened with organized crime groups / terrorists during the Chechen wars. Of course, in the 21st century it has come to be called "raider seizures" and not "hike / robbery / tribute", but in fact everything is the same. I think today the technologies are quite developed in Africa and Arab countries.
        1. 0
          22 August 2019 16: 17
          Quote: ProkletyiPirat
          Quote: NF68
          Rather, by the 2019 year, Crimea would become American.

          Navryatli, it is much more profitable for the United States to play off the Russian Federation with its neighbors and historical opponents. This is more profitable because, firstly, American soldiers will not die, and secondly, you can benefit from the supply of weapons to the opponents of the Russian Federation, and this, all other things being equal. Moreover, History already has an example of "Crimean Tatar raids" When the then population of Crimea was used for robberies on the territory of Ingushetia. In fact, the same thing happened with organized crime groups / terrorists during the Chechen wars. Of course, in the 21st century it has come to be called "raider seizures" and not "hike / robbery / tribute", but in fact everything is the same. I think today the technologies are quite developed in Africa and Arab countries.


          Before the Crimea joined Russia in the 2014 year, the Americans were not opposed to squeezing Russia out of the Crimea and how to settle there themselves. After the coup in Ukraine, it was quite real. They would have raised high that Russia, as always, is insidious and so on. etc. and under this case, their troops would be deployed in the Crimea to protect Ukraine and Russia could no longer smoke them from there.
          1. 0
            22 August 2019 17: 04
            Yes, you are a direct captain of the obvious, but the United States is much more profitable to fight with someone else's hands than with their own. And if necessary, you can quickly send help to the base of the "ally".
            1. 0
              23 August 2019 16: 09
              Quote: ProkletyiPirat
              Yes, you are a direct captain of the obvious, but the United States is much more profitable to fight with someone else's hands than with their own. And if necessary, you can quickly send help to the base of the "ally".


              If the United States occupied Crimea, they would not have needed a coup in Ukraine. In this case, the United States would take full control of the Black Sea without war.
              1. 0
                23 August 2019 17: 16
                Quote: NF68
                In this case, the United States would take full control of the Black Sea without war.

                and would get a bunch of hemorrhoids from the Russian Federation and the local population, why does the US need it if it is possible to get the same benefits but blaming all the problems on Turkey?
                1. +1
                  24 August 2019 16: 37
                  Quote: ProkletyiPirat
                  Quote: NF68
                  In this case, the United States would take full control of the Black Sea without war.

                  and would get a bunch of hemorrhoids from the Russian Federation and the local population, why does the US need it if it is possible to get the same benefits but blaming all the problems on Turkey?


                  In Afghanistan, the United States received much more hemorrhoids, but still do not leave this country. Turkey has previously occasionally had the audacity to spit on the United States, or at least follow its own interests, which often contradict those of the United States.
                  1. 0
                    24 August 2019 17: 45
                    Quote: NF68
                    In Afghanistan, the United States received much more hemorrhoids, but still do not leave this country.

                    This is not an argument; there is no one on whom to blame the task.
                    Quote: NF68
                    Turkey has previously occasionally had the audacity to spit on the United States, or at least follow its own interests, which often contradict those of the United States.

                    Both the USA and Turkey benefit from the weakening of the Russian Federation, yes, everyone has their own interests, but nevertheless their interests coincide with regard to the Crimea and the sluggish war to the north of it, here is a funny situation, both of them benefit from bases on the territory of Crimea, sluggishness is beneficial " partisan \ terrorist \ revolutionary \ separatist "confrontation north of the Crimea, and at the same time a complete lull east of the Crimea.
                    1. +1
                      25 August 2019 15: 48
                      Quote: ProkletyiPirat
                      This is not an argument; there is no one on whom to blame the task.


                      Do you think that in Ukraine, Americans will find someone to blame?

                      Both the USA and Turkey benefit from the weakening of the Russian Federation, yes, everyone has their own interests, but nevertheless their interests coincide with regard to the Crimea and the sluggish war to the north of it, here is a funny situation, both of them benefit from bases on the territory of Crimea, sluggishness is beneficial " partisan \ terrorist \ revolutionary \ separatist "confrontation north of the Crimea, and at the same time a complete lull east of the Crimea.


                      Turkey, unlike the United States, in the event of a significant deterioration in relations with Russia, there is something to lose. The mere reduction in the number of Russian tourists traveling to Turkey in the summer is already a rather painful phenomenon for the Turkish economy. The same, albeit to a much lesser extent, applies to the supply of fruits and vegetables to Russia.
                      1. 0
                        25 August 2019 16: 14
                        You do not understand the purpose of the actions of the United States, their goal is not "capture \ destruction \ enslavement \ etc." RF as a whole or Crimea specifically, and the withdrawal of the Russian Federation from planetary geopolitics and economicsOf course, if they could destroy the Russian Federation with zero self-harm, they would do it, but such an opportunity is not and is not expected.
                        But for the purpose of withdrawing the Russian Federation from the planetary geopolitics, the United States is creating what the Russian Federation should spend its resources on (time \ money \ nerves \ ...). And then it makes no difference whether we spend resources on the war with Turkey, Ukraine, the "Crimean" republic, or whoever else, moreover, it makes no difference to them whether we spend resources on the war or on economic pressure or on "retaliatory steps" or something else ... The main thing for them is that we spend more resources than they will spend on creating "tension"if you multiply this process by the time, there will be an ever-increasing chasm between the USA and the Russian Federation and ultimately the USA will win de facto. In that("force the enemy to waste resources (time \ money \ people \ ...)") is the principle of "hybrid war".
                      2. 0
                        25 August 2019 16: 29
                        Quote: ProkletyiPirat
                        You do not understand the purpose of the actions of the United States, their goal is not "capture \ destruction \ enslavement \ etc." RF as a whole or Crimea specifically, and the withdrawal of the Russian Federation from planetary geopolitics and economicsOf course, if they could destroy the Russian Federation with zero self-harm, they would do it, but such an opportunity is not and is not expected.
                        But for the purpose of withdrawing the Russian Federation from the planetary geopolitics, the United States is creating what the Russian Federation should spend its resources on (time \ money \ nerves \ ...). And then it makes no difference whether we spend resources on the war with Turkey, Ukraine, the "Crimean" republic, or whoever else, moreover, it makes no difference to them whether we spend resources on the war or on economic pressure or on "retaliatory steps" or something else ... The main thing for them is that we spend more resources than they will spend on creating "tension"if you multiply this process by the time, there will be an ever-increasing chasm between the USA and the Russian Federation and ultimately the USA will win de facto. In that("force the enemy to waste resources (time \ money \ people \ ...)") is the principle of "hybrid war".


                        If Russia had split up (in extreme cases, the situation in Russia would have become similar to what has happened in Ukraine in recent years) / into several states, as it was before with the USSR, then the United States would get rid of one of its opponents. This would not be bad for the United States. In addition, Russia is currently one of the most important sources of energy and, not only them, for the EU and China, and if the United States could at least significantly reduce the volume of gas and oil supplied to China and the EU, this would give the United States no small advantages. The interests of the United States in their confrontation with Russia are not limited only to the weakening of Russia.
                      3. 0
                        25 August 2019 16: 36
                        Quote: NF68
                        The interests of the United States in their confrontation with Russia are not limited only to the weakening of Russia.

                        But they are also not in the collapse of the Russian Federation (US interests). because the Russian Federation has WMD / WMD and some radical groups from the destroyed RF (if the USA succeeds in the collapse of the Russian Federation) they can use WMD / WMD against the USA or transfer WMD / WMD to those who use them against the USA or other combinations on this subject.
                      4. 0
                        25 August 2019 16: 56
                        Quote: ProkletyiPirat
                        Quote: NF68
                        The interests of the United States in their confrontation with Russia are not limited only to the weakening of Russia.

                        But they are also not in the collapse of the Russian Federation (US interests). because the Russian Federation has WMD / WMD and some radical groups from the destroyed RF (if the USA succeeds in the collapse of the Russian Federation) they can use WMD / WMD against the USA or transfer WMD / WMD to those who use them against the USA or other combinations on this subject.


                        The United States, in order not to run into a possible response from the Russian Federation, is trying to act by someone else's hands. Where necessary, they themselves will do something pushing Russia and its neighbors to the desired result for the United States. Ideally, for the United States, Russia itself should have come to a point where it would not have time to use or have nuclear weapons in general. Therefore, the United States does not take the confrontation with Russia to the extreme, as a result of which Russia may decide to use weapons of mass destruction against the United States. The collapse of Russia The United States, under favorable conditions for the United States, will definitely be carefully monitored to avoid the danger of weapons of mass destruction in Russia. In the 90s, the United States did something similar and succeeded in doing something, but then they did not succeed in destroying Russia to the end. It seems that the United States has not given up on this even now, even if it does not expect the most favorable result for the United States. The "bad" Putin and his entourage did not go to the arms race, as it was earlier in the years of the existence of the USSR.
    2. 0
      23 August 2019 15: 08
      Only they would cut not kaklov, but ours, Russian people.
  2. +3
    22 August 2019 15: 14
    USA, it's a big crocodile, and its tears are pure digestive juice when it regrets anything.
  3. +12
    22 August 2019 15: 16
    Russia will never recognize US purchases of Greenland and will consider it an illegal occupation

    What for. It’s easier - Russia will never recognize the occupation of the Hawaiian Islands and considers it the legitimate ruler of the king of Hawaii. By the way, at that time, the current US President Bill Clinton was forced to admit at the time that the United States illegally occupied Hawaii. They are, by the way. they also committed genocide there - and this is a crime without statute of limitations. Like this.
    GENEVA, 7 May 2015 / Corr. TASS Konstantin Pribytkov /. Representatives of the indigenous peoples of Alaska and Hawaii have asked the world community to ensure their right to self-determination in connection with the "illegal annexation" and "occupation" of their territories by the United States. In a statement released Thursday in Geneva, they urged UN member states to raise the issue during a May 11 UN Human Rights Council review of the United States' rights and freedoms.

    1. 0
      22 August 2019 17: 21
      the US state of Puerto Rico,
      We can also find the associated state of Haiti and place the RSD there.
      1. +4
        22 August 2019 18: 03
        We can also find the associated state of Haiti.


        Hahahah ... Haiti costs about 50 dollars. You don’t even know what you want ... right?

        9 million unemployed blacks for maintenance, cholera and other beauty. Fail state.

        That will be a holiday in Washington, if you take .... laughing
        1. +6
          23 August 2019 04: 31
          Why take it, if you can promise? Over in Georgia and Ukraine is a great example. The Americans didn’t give anything to Nenko, but they jump and lick for a couple of words, their eyes get out of zeal. Negroes are certainly smarter, of course, but for this, the Foreign Ministry also exists - to work.
      2. -1
        22 August 2019 18: 57
        Quote: Mavrikiy
        We can also find the associated state of Haiti.

        A fair wind to you. Just keep in mind that then in Moscow and St. Petersburg there will be entire areas in which white people should not meddle, even the police. And their children will be accepted into institutions ahead of yours, while they will pull the level of education down. Well, as usual, to force white women - such as compensation for years of slavery on plantations, when their great-great-grandmother ... great gentlemen, white gentlemen had when and how they wanted. Haitians are not ordinary Negro oh, sorry, African Americans, let alone Latinos, is something. No wonder this is the poorest state in the world. No wonder Trump named them by name in the list of cesspool states.
  4. -5
    22 August 2019 15: 27
    Victor hi You wrote everything correctly! Only here the Kremlin will never agree to the measures you proposed - it is afraid to offend "partners", it is easier to persecute your people. ...
  5. +2
    22 August 2019 15: 36
    This, of course, is a nuance. But ... Puerto Rico has the status of a "freely affiliated" state to the United States, and not a state freely associated with the United States. Those also exist. What is the difference between them, anyone interested can find the answer on the Internet. However, even in the United States itself, among lawyers and political scientists there are disputes about the status of Puerto Rico. He's kind of vague.)
    1. +7
      22 August 2019 15: 55
      Nifiga like that. Status - unincorporated territory. That is, it is ruled by the United States, not being part of the United States, the effect of the US Constitution is limited there. The same thing used to be called COLONY. There was never any question of any "accession", the territory was occupied after the Spanish-American war.
      1. +2
        22 August 2019 16: 11
        Organized unincorporated territory. But it is officially called the state that freely joined the USA (another option is the community). One does not contradict the other. Actually, its status resembles something between a self-governing colony and a protectorate. There is a parliament and a popularly elected governor. Unlike the states associated with the USA, it is not a member of the UN and does not have such an opportunity. Citizens have American passports, but do not participate in the election of the President and senators. At the same time, a delegate is sent to the House of Representatives with an advisory vote. By the way, there is the National Guard, which is an integral part of the US National Guard.
        1. +2
          22 August 2019 16: 20
          Territory is not a country, so there is no question of self-government; the status of unincorporated territory means. that it is controlled by the USA. A non-voting representative (deliberative is number 8, say, when we ask) from a non-US territory controlled by the US is not self-government. And Puerto Rico did not join, it was joined, it was. True, this is called occupation - no one asked the residents, they want to join? The occupying forces have landed - and all love
          1. +1
            22 August 2019 19: 18
            The Palestinian Authority has self-government, the subjects of the federation and municipalities are also self-governing units. That is, in this sense, there is self-government. Self-government is not independence.
          2. +1
            22 August 2019 20: 37
            You forgot about the referendum. He somehow makes everything legal. Puero Africans held referenda in 1967, 1993, 1998, 2012 and 2017
            1. 0
              23 August 2019 10: 52
              I think just the people understand that without the States he will not be able to live just as well. So if this is occupation, as some say, then it is clearly not a burden to the people living there)))
  6. +1
    22 August 2019 16: 04
    Of course, US statements on Crimea are just a hypothetical geopolitical threat,
    .... Of course, the "Crimean" sanctions are purely hypothetical ... no one adheres to them, does not fulfill them ... American tourists and others from Europe "occupied" the Crimean beaches, as if Western investments poured into Crimea from a cornucopia .. . purely hypothetical ... laughing
    1. -1
      23 August 2019 13: 13
      Yeah! And Russian state corporations bloomed there violently! Sberbank, mobile operators immediately went ...
  7. +7
    22 August 2019 16: 19
    there is a state associated with the United States of Puerto Rico, which still can not achieve the status of 51 US states. Russia may refuse to recognize this association, consider it an act of unlawful annexation, and begin a political and information campaign to grant Puerto Rico independence from the United States.
    Kamenev in his repertoire - exactly according to Heine.
    For the information of the author. In the last referendum "for granting Puerto Rico independence from the United States," as many as 4% of the population voted, and in the last elections to the local Senate, the Puerto Rican Independence Party won 2,4% of the vote.
    Therefore, any state that, on Kamenev's advice, decides to "start a political and information campaign for Puerto Rico's independence from the United States" will look "ambiguous."
    It is easy to anticipate the cries of reason that such statements from any Russian media and individual officials will aggravate the international situation.
    Such statements will be accepted ... That's for sure. Yes, maybe the author is better to write for KVN?
  8. +1
    22 August 2019 17: 10
    William Taylor made a statement about Russia: "The US will never recognize the occupation of Crimea by Russia"
    But Russia does not care about the opinion of the United States. And let the US wipe off with its mattress flag.
  9. +2
    22 August 2019 17: 16
    Russia will never recognize the claims of the United States and Ukraine, while they deny the democratic rights to the people of Crimea and the people of Donbass, while they grin at the ashes of burned people in Odessa and the death of writer Oles Buzina, until Buzina a monument is erected in Kiev, mother of Russian cities, and Galician and other Nazis will not be held accountable.
    This is how they will erect a monument to Buzina, they will admit, they will even sign papers on the rights, but we admit the claims? ... "No, she died so she died!"
  10. +4
    22 August 2019 18: 41
    Liberty of Puerto Rico? Aptop asked Puertas, do they need it?
    Puertas are eligible for free entry to the United States and work. So those who want to work hard come to America and get much more for the same job than if they find it (unemployment in PR is much more than in the continental states). At the same time, Puertas are almost the most decent of the Latinos (less often highlighted in the criminal chronicle).
    Was the author there? I have been 2 times in the capital of San Juan. In the rich and touristy areas where I walked with my wife and young daughter, the full feeling of an expensive area of ​​America, transferred to the Caribbean. The same cars, the same police, the same establishments, and in the establishments everyone speaks English, albeit with a peculiar accent (however, I don’t blame them ;-). Not the best areas that we passed by taxi, they still look better than good areas (I mean, good for locals, not "all inclusive" hotels for tourists) of other Caribbean and Latin American countries. I have not seen slums, in contrast to Mexico, or barbed wire over fences, as in Jamaica. Well, there are not the best areas in which decent white people should not meddle, there are all over America.
    Now, pay attention, the main thing. Puerta is exempted from federal taxes, while using all federal benefits (Social Security, Medicare, Section 8, and what else). America for free provides them with international relations and defense (by the way, many Puertas voluntarily serve in the armed forces).
    In PR there is a small, but noisy minority, seeking independence. Several times they have been gathering votes to initiate a referendum on the status of PR.
    Bottom line: out of 3 proposed options (leave it as it is, enter the United States as a state, gain full independence) regularly and by a large margin won "leave it as it is." Independence, just as regularly, ranked last.
    1. +5
      23 August 2019 07: 53
      From all that has been said, the conclusion is that Puerto Ricans do not vote for joining the United States, but for American free gingerbread. Just like Spain's graters for Gibraltar, there would be no British "buns", no one on this Gibraltar would scratch for the Crown. Colonies, but bought in the bud, just not enough for the natives and want even more.
  11. +3
    22 August 2019 20: 30
    William Taylor made a statement about Russia: "The US will never recognize the occupation of Crimea by Russia."

    He is right. There was no occupation!
    1. +2
      23 August 2019 07: 57
      Western politicians always adhere to the rule "Never say no definitively and always leave room for maneuver." Verbiage is considered a political norm with them, you can always turn back and excuse yourself, like "you misunderstood us."
  12. +4
    22 August 2019 20: 33
    Why adversaries base in the Crimea. This is a ready-made trap for the fleet, which will be covered there with missiles from the mainland in the very first minutes of the conflict (by the way, this also applies to our fleet). Have you seen the American Navy in Tallinn? And there is also a good port. Keep the main forces of the fleet 300 km from enemy territory in the 21st century, when there are tactical missiles - crap.
    1. +3
      23 August 2019 00: 48
      It's right. The only one who makes sense to keep a fleet in Crimea is the Russian Federation. And Ukraine for its mighty fleet will have enough one berth anywhere for "Sagaidachny", and several boat stations for everything else.
  13. 0
    22 August 2019 21: 13
    I liked the article. A positive article. It’s expensive to read the coming dream.
  14. +1
    22 August 2019 22: 34
    Well, the armada in the photo, eh, we would have such (((
    1. 0
      23 August 2019 00: 42
      Quote: NordOst16
      Well, the armada in the photo, eh, we would have such (((

      How many aircraft carriers could you buy for the $ 6 Syrian debts that were written off? And the escort from the frigates to the billions that swelled into Syria after being written off? And also Cuba and Venezuela, and what other underdeveloped countries are there - recipients of fraternal assistance. By the way, SAMs were sold to Turks and Persians for cash or on credit? Turkey clearly wants to pay with tomatoes and apricot, and Iran will soon have nothing. And if instead of the ayatollah they put a shah or at least a responsible secular republic, then there is no reason - the ayatollahs on behalf of Allah promised, you will receive from him.
      1. 0
        24 August 2019 22: 47
        You are talking about those 6 Syrian debts that would have been returned to us after the victory of the IS over the government army ... WHO?
        It is on these 6 billion that they would build 0 (zero integers, zero tenths) aircraft carriers)))
        Who told you that the money was gone forever? Russia bought Syria for them))) Now Russia controls what it wants there - the construction sector, agriculture, bases, airfields, and while the war is on - Assad and the Syrians will not get away from us - for only 6 billion)))))) ) Trump for Greenland offers more))))))))))))))))))))))))))
        1. 0
          25 August 2019 23: 31
          No, I’m talking about those $ 6 of mostly still Soviet-era loans that were forgiven even by Assad’s dad, Hafezu. Then no one heard about the IG, and did not even assume that SUCH could appear. Since then, a couple more billion BEFORE IS have been swelled into Syria, and Putin alone knows how much after.
          1. 0
            26 August 2019 22: 01
            “Putin alone knows how much” is of course a lot, but still how much? And yet, this is the same 6 billion you are writing about. Are there any interesting infographics about what Russia has won economically? for example, from the gas pipeline from Qatar that has not yet been built through Syria? Or how much oil Russia sold after the elimination of direct oil supplies from IS? Or from the fact that ships refuel in Tartus?
            And about Assad’s dad, you correctly noticed that, you invested money back then, and without any thought that they would return ... And they shot only now ... And even so successfully.
  15. 0
    23 August 2019 12: 29
    In addition to the article, let our Foreign Ministry even remember the United States joining Texas!
  16. 0
    23 August 2019 13: 45
    Quote: NF68
    Quote: Valery Valery
    If the Crimea didn’t become Russian in the 2014 year, then by the 2019 it would already be Turkish.
    And the "Ukrainians" would have been slaughtered like sheep.


    Rather, by the 2019 year, Crimea would become American.

    One would not hurt the other.
    Well, they would have cut it in the presence of the Americans. And just.
  17. 0
    24 August 2019 00: 16
    Why didn’t the author propose declaring war on the USA? And they declared that they won on the same day))) At the same time, you can take an example from Amin and call yourself lords of animals on earth and fish in the sea))))
  18. +1
    24 August 2019 22: 37
    "The United States will never recognize the occupation of Crimea by Russia," Ukrainians startled, they shout about the occupation, but the United States does not see and will not recognize it)))))))))))))))))) That's right - no occupation no. We support the Chargé d'Affaires William Taylor in his hard work)))))))).
  19. 0
    25 August 2019 19: 09
    ...something like this:

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"