North Atlantic Ecological. NATO's new paradigm


The “great and mighty” North Atlantic Alliance is going through almost the worst of times in its stories. NATO is in a state of systemic crisis caused by inconsistent actions of the participants and uncertainty with the development strategy and self-identification in general.


Who is the enemy here


Seven decades ago, at the height of the Cold War, the North Atlantic Alliance was created exclusively to confront the Soviet Union and Moscow-controlled socialist camp in Eastern Europe. Then the meaning of the existence of NATO was unambiguous, no questions about why such an alliance was needed at all could not exist in principle. Both in Brussels, and in Washington, and in Lisbon, and in Ankara with Athens, they were afraid of “communist expansion” like fire and built a system of pan-European defense about a possible conflict with the USSR and its allies.

After the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991 and its allies in Eastern Europe moved away from the socialist path of development, NATO faced the inevitable question of the further meaning of existence. For some period this meaning was found - the fight against terrorism, the benefit of the troops of NATO countries were involved in military operations in Afghanistan, Iraq, and several other states. But wherever NATO troops were present, they showed their complete failure. Estonians, Belgians or Poles are unable to fight terrorists in Afghanistan or Libya without the American army.


Moreover, it was not very clear why this fight against terrorism was necessary beyond the borders of Europe, when in Europe itself the same pan-European government opens the borders for millions of migrants from the countries of the East, among which potential terrorists inevitably turn out to be. It turns out that while European soldiers are dying in faraway Afghanistan, European customs and migration officials are willing to let in the EU countries the citizens of the same Afghanistan, and even Somalia and Mali in addition.

By the way, the NATO bloc was also unable to cope with the solution of the task of protecting the southern borders of the European Union from waves of uncontrolled migration. The alliance was powerless in front of hundreds of thousands of Libyan, Syrian, Iraqi, Afghan refugees and displaced persons. The reasons for this are both the disagreement of the actions of the allies in the bloc, and the general position of the EU leadership, which, in general, did not object to migration.

Russia is not suitable for the role of the enemy


The United States, which is still the core and main player in NATO, is trying, firstly, to maximize self-financing by the European countries of the defense projects of the alliance, and secondly, they are eagerly promoting the idea of ​​a new enemy - Russia. But far from all countries of the alliance agree with this position of Washington.

Well, which Russia is the enemy for Italy or Portugal? And France and Germany have not considered Russia as an enemy for a long time, moreover, they are in favor of expanding cooperation in key areas, understanding that without Russia it is not possible to talk about collective security in Europe.

The exceptions are countries of Eastern Europe, primarily Poland, Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia, as well as partly Scandinavian Norway and Denmark. In Poland and the Baltic republics, Russophobia has been elevated to the rank of state ideology; therefore, these countries are just interested in increasing NATO militancy, insist on the deployment of ever new military contingents, on the construction of military bases. This is understandable, given that the appearance of new military facilities in Poland and the Baltic States inevitably entails financial injections in the form of various subsidies and military assistance.

Thus, in NATO there is a clear separation of interests. There is the United States and Great Britain, for which military cooperation with Poland, Romania and the Baltic countries as a kind of containment belt of Russia is of paramount importance. And there are other NATO countries, primarily France, Germany, Italy, for which Russia is not an enemy, and which themselves have long been talking about the crisis of the North Atlantic Alliance and the need to build a separate pan-European defense system.

Greeks vs Turks: another NATO problem node


Finally, there are two more NATO members who are in very difficult relations with each other and at the same time have special ties with Russia. These are Turkey and Greece.

North Atlantic Ecological. NATO's new paradigm

With the United States, there is great tension in relations with the United States, precisely because of Recep Erdogan’s excessively independent line, the purchase of which the Russian S-400 air defense system became a spit in the face of Donald Trump, who was trying to connect all possible and impossible levers of pressure in order to warn Ankara from this step. The Turks did not obey. This did not lead to any particularly serious consequences for them, which actually means: the Americans gave the back, because the Turks as military-political allies are still very significant for them.

However, in the context of US-Turkish controversy, Washington has linked more and more hopes with Greece. Now the Americans, knowing the difficult Greek-Turkish relations, are deliberately strengthening military cooperation with Greece. Athens themselves are not opposed, but they have a purely applied sense of cooperation with the United States, not connected in any way with Russia.

The Greeks are interested in creating the most effective defense system in case of a possible conflict with Turkey. After all, the two "allies" in NATO are actually more likely enemies, not allies. While the problem of Northern Cyprus is smoldering, the Greek-Turkish conflict will not be resolved, and this problem will smolder forever: the Turks will not leave the northern part of the island peacefully.

The Greek leadership sees the deployment of American troops on its territory and the construction of new military bases as new and very effective guarantees against hostile actions on the part of Turkey. The leaders of Cyprus (its Greek part) also believe in the same way.

At the same time, both Greece and Cyprus emphasize special relations with Russia, in particular, not obeying the American demand to ban the entry of Russian ships into Greek and Cypriot ports. Everything is clear here too. The centuries-old history of help from the northern Orthodox neighbor, a common religion, cultural ties and huge communities - Russian in Greece and Cyprus and Greek in Russia, can not be helped.

Flights at Russian borders


Nevertheless, it was recently that NATO launched maximum activity at the Russian borders. Air flights of the Alliance member countries have become regular. Flight destinations are Crimea and the Baltic states. It is here that NATO acts most actively, considering the Ukrainian and Baltic directions as the highest priorities in the context of a possible conflict with Russia.

The reason for the buildup of such activity was the events of 2014 - the coup d'etat in Ukraine, the reunification of Crimea with Russia, the emergence of independent republics in Donetsk and Lugansk and the outbreak of armed conflict in the Donbass. All these events pushed the United States and NATO to intensify on the Russian borders, as they allowed us to consider Russia as a dangerous enemy, supposedly threatening European security.

Interestingly, despite the crisis of the alliance, the United States is diligently trying to attract more and more new countries. Montenegro and Northern Macedonia were admitted to the south towards NATO, the latter even changing its name for this purpose. There are plans to integrate Ukraine and Georgia into NATO.


Finally, Washington and Brussels are actively working with Stockholm and Helsinki, comforting themselves with the hope of bringing Sweden and Finland into the alliance. The latter would allow us to multiply the military power of the North Atlantic Alliance in a very important northern direction. All of Scandinavia would then be part of NATO. And here we can proceed to cover an equally interesting point, which is precisely connected with attempts to drag the Scandinavian countries of Sweden and Finland into the bloc.

Military Ecological Alliance


In search of a new paradigm, NATO can find it in the "military-environmental" direction. Environmental protection, as you know, is becoming an increasingly priority for governments in many European countries. No wonder Greta Tunberg became the symbol of 2019. In Scandinavia, in Germany, environmental movements are very popular. And the European press pays a lot of attention to environmental risks.

For the Scandinavian countries, ecology is generally a very painful topic. In this, Denmark and Norway are united as members of NATO, and neutral Finland with Sweden. And if the alliance is reoriented to the military-environmental direction, then there will be much more reason to involve Finland and Sweden in it. It turns out that these countries are not participating in an aggressive bloc, but in the ecological one, protecting the planet’s nature from certain “evil forces” that threaten the environment.

In this vein, Finland and Sweden joining NATO no longer seems like a fantastic scenario. Meanwhile, it is precisely such a bloc — the Scandinavians, Poles, Romanians and Baltic people, under the control of the United States and Great Britain — that Washington needs. Since they correspond to his plans for building rings of hostile states around Russia with American military bases and contingents stationed on their territory.

France, Germany, Italy, strictly speaking, no longer play a special role: they are interested in Trump and his entourage only as a source of financing rising military spending in Europe, since the United States is constantly trying to shift the main expenses to Berlin to support its military contingents and bases.

Therefore, NATO, no matter how strange it may sound, can turn into a kind of “military Greenpeace”, which will carry out operations against environmental pollution in all parts of the world. Under the protection of the environment, the promotion of our own economic interests and the struggle against real and potential competitors, especially in the field of energy production, are ideal.

Of course, the operations will not be carried out against American or French companies, but against Russian and Chinese interests, since now it is Russia and China that are carefully promoting the role of the main polluters of the environment. Under this ecological slogan, the North Atlantic Alliance will probably act in a new direction for it.
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

36 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Far B 26 December 2019 05: 25 New
    • 4
    • 2
    +2
    Perhaps the Swedes will succeed. Very much Bildt hysteria when he was his minister. Yes, and they had glitches - they would either find a Russian submarine in their waters, or some other evil drums. But the dates are unlikely to be involved - the dates are too pragmatic.
    1. Finches 26 December 2019 05: 33 New
      • 10
      • 1
      +9
      The mention of ecology and Sweden led me to think that young Greta Thunberg should be appointed the head of NATO - this will be a creative, European-tolerant, modern and unexpected move of the Alliance promising great prospects! laughing
      1. Far B 26 December 2019 05: 38 New
        • 5
        • 1
        +4
        Galleys, hang gliders, chariots? Well, cho, creatively so. I support.
      2. Uncle lee 26 December 2019 06: 01 New
        • 4
        • 0
        +4
        “Bolshevik threat”, “Soviet threat”, “Russian threat”, “environmental threat”! Some Western partners are cowardly all these years!
      3. Sergey M. Karasev 1 January 2020 12: 01 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Quote: Finches
        The mention of ecology and Sweden led me to think that young Greta Thunberg should be appointed the head of NATO - this will be a creative, European-tolerant, modern and unexpected move of the Alliance promising great prospects! laughing

        And I won’t be surprised if they do just that.
    2. Siberia 75 26 December 2019 10: 49 New
      • 3
      • 1
      +2
      Therefore, NATO, no matter how strange it may sound, can turn into a kind of “military Greenpeace”, which will carry out operations against environmental pollution in all parts of the world.

      Nowadays, it’s hard to be surprised at anything if an unhealthy girl reports to the heads of state, and they wrinkle and apologize. But NATO is like "Military greenpeace"for me too winked
      1. bessmertniy 26 December 2019 12: 36 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        NATO becomes a cancerous tumor that eats up a sick organism of the West. what It seems that most members of the bloc themselves do not understand why they need it today. they are not eager to invest more than 2% of GDP in military programs. hi
  2. Pessimist22 26 December 2019 05: 47 New
    • 6
    • 0
    +6
    Russia also needs to designate its enemies, the USA, Great Britain, Poland, Courland.
    1. prior 26 December 2019 12: 42 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      Preferably at the legislative level, with the consolidation of the possibility of a preemptive strike with nuclear weapons.
      And let the diapers change more often ....
      1. Crimean partisan 1974 26 December 2019 14: 47 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        And let the diapers change more often ....... with diapers, you also need to be more careful, just like with tampons and pads. in the utilization of asbestos is extremely difficult and not profitable, I hope Gretta in the know how many particles of female comfort merge into the sea
  3. parusnik 26 December 2019 06: 14 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    Therefore, NATO, no matter how strange it may sound, can turn into a kind of “military Greenpeace”, which will carry out operations against environmental pollution in all parts of the world.
    Is it bad with the environment? Then we go to you! Plant trees ... Maybe, maybe, but somehow unconvincing .. At the moment there is another way, proven: NATO can catch terrorists. And we do not have terrorists! And we will get it! Example Syria. There were demons, I do not deny. But they self-destructed (s). In those areas where oil was transferred to the United States, and then evaporated ... in these places ...
  4. andrewkor 26 December 2019 07: 47 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Operation: "Forcing Ecology!": Sounds Strong!
  5. rocket757 26 December 2019 08: 01 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    In search of a new paradigm, NATO can find it

    They will never be our friends NEVER, and the rest, this is just a degree in no way and never.
    1. Robertocalos 26 December 2019 17: 19 New
      • 0
      • 2
      -2
      A very short memory of the Bush Feet and the consolidation of nuclear weapons. But what if Ukraine, Belarus and Kazakhstan bucked and left warheads on their territory?
      1. rocket757 26 December 2019 17: 41 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        Quote: Robertocalos
        A very short memory of Bush Feet

        Did you eat that rubbish? Then, it wasn’t a freebie, a commercial project, as everywhere, as always.
        Quote: Robertocalos
        nuclear weapons consolidation

        But this is a difficult question and there were more than one interested parties, who took upon themselves the whole burden of responsibility and debt!
        So do not fit the halo over foreign "partners", there the HORNs are tightly rooted and the gray rushing so that normal already turns.
        1. Robertocalos 26 December 2019 18: 21 New
          • 0
          • 3
          -3
          If you remember, it was not only about debts, but also about property and debt of the Union. The balance was very positive. I didn’t eat ham, I don’t like it, but I had a chance to try the NATO dry packs, since it was related to the distribution system at the institute. The first time, by the way, I tried nut paste and instant mashed potatoes. I do not draw nimbuses, there is no need. But the memory is good and the analyst is not the worst.
          1. rocket757 27 December 2019 08: 01 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Quote: Robertocalos
            I do not draw nimbuses, there is no need. But the memory is good and the analyst is not the worst.

            Combine the debit with credit if you are also familiar with accounting wisdom.
  6. knn54 26 December 2019 08: 21 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Russia (unlike the USSR) simply does not take the initiative to support neutrality by Sweden itself. And a holy place does not exist.
    For the enemy can be a neighbor, but the neighbor should not be an enemy.
  7. BAI
    BAI 26 December 2019 08: 58 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Russia is not suitable for the role of the enemy

    Why? We read the military doctrine of Russia:
    12. Main external military hazards:

    a) building the power potential of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and endowing it with global functions that are implemented in violation of international law, bringing the military infrastructure of NATO member countries closer to the borders of the Russian Federation, including by further expanding the bloc;
  8. Mainbeam 26 December 2019 09: 04 New
    • 2
    • 1
    +1
    Therefore, NATO, no matter how strange it may sound, can turn into a kind of “military Greenpeace”, which will carry out operations against environmental pollution in all parts of the world.

    Interesting fairy tale

    Meanwhile, just such a block ... under the control of the USA and Great Britain, Washington needs

    is it Washington or is it still under the control of the USA and Great Britain? Okay, this is so, the nit-picking on the text. But the formulation of the question "USA and Great Britain" is interesting - the British do not shine anywhere.
  9. Maks1995 26 December 2019 09: 32 New
    • 0
    • 2
    -2
    And at ura-smi, Nato is about to attack Russia again.

    And here "The North Atlantic Alliance is going through perhaps the worst times in its history. NATO is in a state of systemic crisis, ..."

    It can be seen that there are enough grandmas only with a bang;
  10. 1536 26 December 2019 10: 04 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    More than NATO soldiers, no one in Europe pollutes the environment and the information space, and if anything, then this environment will have to be seriously protected from NATO soldiers who are crap and crap.
    In Russia there is a good-for-good "environmentally friendly weapon" that does not leave even sand after use, not to mention NATO soldiers. This weapon is called CBT "Pinocchio", sometimes called the "Sun".
  11. Mikhail3 26 December 2019 10: 24 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Luxurious idea, by the way! Allows you to very powerfully pump the image of the United States, completely rotten recently. Literally everything falls here. US not joining any climate agreement? Will join! Along the way, redistribution of property will occur within the country (always a tidbit) from those who are “enemies of the environment”, that is, they are not able to get billions from the government to cut filters for the urgent construction of those who have it.
    And in the world what beauty will come! Know to declare the next country an "enemy of ecology" and destroy its production potential! American heroes are fighting for the ecology of the planet, destroying the "non-ecological" industry, simultaneously killing the "extra" people in this non-ecological Asia, for example, who crap and fart, damaging the atmosphere!
    Billions of stupid, thanks to education systems and massive psycho-processing, people supporting the "holy campaign for a clean future" around the planet! Huge fifth columns in all countries, ready for the services and betrayal of the holy one - the future of the Earth! But in the capitalist world now nothing sacred is completely gone, people cannot even unite around any topic. And people are in dire need of holy concepts and unification not for meanness and robbery.
    A very, very dangerous topic.
  12. Kibl 26 December 2019 10: 42 New
    • 0
    • 1
    -1
    Don’t dare touch Greta, she’s all of ours! We need to appoint Gretushka as the head of the planetary government and then the planet will receive the final caput. And there is no need for thermonuclear war. She herself will do everything with her arms and cranial bone!
    1. Crimean partisan 1974 26 December 2019 14: 57 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      Do not dare to touch Greta, ..... and who is this girl, and where does she live, and what if she doesn’t smoke, and suddenly she doesn’t drink, and we will take such faces and run into Greta, to GRETA-DAAAAAA
  13. Seld 26 December 2019 11: 09 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    It remains to determine the price of the issue of Greenpeace ....
    It's all about bablosy (in other words, resources).
    Obviously, nobody wants to spend much now, without having the prospect of receiving "dividends" from contributions to the alliance.
    In fact, why the hell do you pour yards from your budget without getting a dime with a cash back? The times when this was done in a common pot of all kinds of “natas” under the auspices of “God Save Europe” have passed irrevocably!
    Not, of course, Shtaaaaaa now, "some" are still making their own cus on this "Gesheft", but it will only take so long. For “nothing lasts forever under the moon” and “soon your curls will become pretty and you will just be beaten” (not literally, figuratively). No idea can exist forever, incl. and nata. Need update ...
    On the other hand, such a "fundamentally existential" question arises: "is it possible in essence a world order (from the point of view of philosophy, humanity, economy, politics, geopolitics, geography" yesterday, today, tomorrow ") WITHOUT ALLIANCES and" common boilers with budgets "?
    I am inclined to believe something like this: "Nata will disappear (if it has not already disappeared (!!!!!), in practice), it will be obligatory and pretty soon, but in its place will appear something else, in essence and principles - similar" (witnesses of this very transformation Nata we are today, IMHO). And it will also exist for the time being.
    “Se la vie,” as they say in Honduras.
    It's all about sex ... Oh, that is, in the loot.
    Be healthy!
    1. Mikhail3 27 December 2019 09: 26 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: seld
      But is it possible in essence a world order (from the point of view of philosophy, humanity, economics, politics, geopolitics, geography "yesterday, today, tomorrow") WITHOUT ALLIANCE and "common boilers with budgets"?

      Of course. You just have to achieve the "Balkanization" of the world. So that in the world there is a war of everyone with everyone, and your country retains a great military and production potential. Then you can rob the whole world alone, without any alliances and alliances.
  14. Host Tavern 26 December 2019 12: 22 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    "Military Greenpeace" - a cheap cover stop
  15. Seld 26 December 2019 12: 32 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Quote: Mikhail3
    Luxurious idea, by the way! Allows you to very powerfully pump the image of the United States, completely rotten recently. Literally everything falls here. US not joining any climate agreement? Will join! Along the way, redistribution of property will occur within the country (always a tidbit) from those who are “enemies of the environment”, that is, they are not able to get billions from the government to cut filters for the urgent construction of those who have it.
    And in the world what beauty will come! Know to declare the next country an "enemy of ecology" and destroy its production potential! American heroes are fighting for the ecology of the planet, destroying the "non-ecological" industry, simultaneously killing the "extra" people in this non-ecological Asia, for example, who crap and fart, damaging the atmosphere!
    Billions of stupid, thanks to education systems and massive psycho-processing, people supporting the "holy campaign for a clean future" around the planet! Huge fifth columns in all countries, ready for the services and betrayal of the holy one - the future of the Earth! But in the capitalist world now nothing sacred is completely gone, people cannot even unite around any topic. And people are in dire need of holy concepts and unification not for meanness and robbery.
    A very, very dangerous topic.


    "Know declare the next country" an enemy of the environment "and destroy its productive potential!" - just one small question, we can say from the physics of the simple, simple, let me:
    As you know, to do some work and get an “energy-result”, you also need to expend energy. For "nishto nibirёtsya from nowhere." The law of conservation ....
    And what if the amount of energy for this very thing “Know declare the next country an“ enemy of ecology ”and destroy it will be greater than the received“ energy-result ”?
    I hope the hint is clear?
    Let me explain, to fight "with iron, with business and with people" was profitable "yesterday".
    “Hope” - few people can afford it from wide legs, for see the cost of a liter of fuel at gas stations / world exchanges.
    And it turns out simple and intuitive "Pupkin's Arithmetic with Pictures"; he who lived and studied in the USSR must remember this textbook.
    1. Mikhail3 27 December 2019 09: 29 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: seld
      And what if the amount of energy for this very thing “Know declare the next country an“ enemy of ecology ”and destroy it will be greater than the received“ energy-result ”?
      I hope the hint is clear?

      And without hints, do not you intensify your talk?) The declaration of war "yesterday" is really funny. Yes, the war has risen in price. But in this configuration, there are many ways in which direct military intervention is simply beyond competition. And if you think about it, then the myth that hostilities are “out of date” will begin to dissipate. Try it ...
  16. g1washntwn 26 December 2019 13: 09 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    An “ecological NATO” protecting mother nature with depleted uranium shells - it will be something. And here we think that it is the Americans who are busy with their "environmentally friendly" nuclear bombs?
  17. Pavel57 26 December 2019 13: 14 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    If there was no NATO, then it had to be invented.
  18. faterdom 26 December 2019 14: 18 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    The “great and mighty” North Atlantic Alliance is going through almost the worst of times in its history.

    I think no. And I really hope to survive to wars between members of the alliance. We have already lived to the economic level, to the "hot" ones not as far as it seems.
  19. Robertocalos 26 December 2019 18: 27 New
    • 0
    • 1
    -1
    NATO has a serious crisis of self-identification - it is not clear against whom to be friends. The states do not unequivocally answer this question, and especially do not ask any neophytes. I remember how Putin said that he was ready to consider the possibility of joining there. But any military alliance is a tactic, not a strategy at all.
  20. Seld 27 December 2019 11: 57 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: Mikhail3
    Quote: seld
    And what if the amount of energy for this very thing “Know declare the next country an“ enemy of ecology ”and destroy it will be greater than the received“ energy-result ”?
    I hope the hint is clear?

    And without hints, do not you intensify your talk?) The declaration of war "yesterday" is really funny. Yes, the war has risen in price. But in this configuration, there are many ways in which direct military intervention is simply beyond competition. And if you think about it, then the myth that hostilities are “out of date” will begin to dissipate. Try it ...


    And what is there to try?
    We estimate "on the knee", based on the school course of the NVP:
    1. Any military operations by, say, “one” regiment (well, there, soldiers, officers, equipment) against a similar “regiment” of an adversary entail at least:
    - mobilization of the rear services, such as fuel and transport for soldiers, maintenance of personnel (or do you think the soldiers do not need to sleep, wash, wash, wipe and pizza?)
    - mobilization of medical services;
    - mobilization of the MTO (banal "bullets" ride, maintenance for the tanks);
    - restrictions on civil movements (at least “traffic jams”).
    and not only!!!!
    And all this is NOT free, i.e. NOT for nothing ... But quite the contrary ...
    Did you hear this expression: "After the declaration of war, the real war is fought .... ACCOUNTANT ..."?
    If we add “natural selection and loss” of personnel during the military clashes to all of the above (and even simple exercises do not pass without losses !!!!, such losses are always laid down in advance in planning), followed by a plus (i.e., minus) Since the factor is the probable complete or partial unsuitability of the occupied territory for its "hilling up" (see the DPR / LPR territories in clash areas), the "clean exhaust" can greatly disappoint the winner.
    If clashes are conducted by opposing forces of relatively equal strength, then see also the banality in the part “who suffers heavy losses: advancing or defending”.
    - that is, we add to the "credit" the cost of training one soldier times the number of blind men.
    Also, google at your leisure the essence of the reasons for the vigorous NOT bombardment of the territory of the USSR by amers in the period 1945 - 1950.
    The statistics (open !!!) are interesting and bewitching, but obviously there are also closed data, when they are “carcasses of light” at all) and the calculation of the loss of amers during the Korean and Vietnamese wars. The last showdown was in 2002.
    And even in the palm of your hand you can read the achievements of amers during local wars. By the way, profitable for s. But see the reason ..., which in the case of the confrontation with the Russian Federation or China .... is absent, which turns any open and large-scale clashes with these states into a "broth from under the eggs .... of the ancient mammoth."
  21. Mavrikiy 27 December 2019 12: 14 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Swedes, perhaps, will not work. They know how good and most importantly it is beneficial to be neutral. PMV, WWII experience, son of difficult mistakes. They enriched themselves and rose in neutrality. And glitches, as they demonstrate them to the whole world, we say you and against these. That's why they are glitches in order to catch the little devils and not to catch, but the noise of cries ..... repeat