Military Review

NATO bombing of Yugoslavia: what norms and laws the North Atlantic Alliance violated

159

One of the main achievements of mankind in the twentieth century, the most powerful proof that it learned the lessons of the Second World War, was the creation of the United Nations. As conceived by its founders, it was this structure that was supposed to put an end to the domination of the “right of the strong” over moral, ethical and legal principles, which is customary for our world. The resolution of the issues of war and peace was to be taken over by the UN Security Council, which was formed by the countries that defeated Nazism and Japanese imperialism.


Alas, as it turned out later, the true guarantor of peace on a planet that did not know large-scale armed conflicts almost until the end of the twentieth century was not the Security Council, but the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. As soon as the USSR fell - and NATO showed itself "in all its glory", proving to the whole world that "international law", which they have always loved and so love to refer to, is in reality nothing more than an empty phrase for it. After the collapse of the USSR, the effectiveness of the UN was called into question.

Started on March 24, 1999, Operation Allied Force did not dock with this very right in any way. Despite all the colossal efforts made by the states of the Alliance, and, first of all, the United States, the UN did not manage to "squeeze" formal approval of this robbery. It is not surprising - after all, being a permanent member of the Security Council as the successor to the USSR, Russia, as well as China, resolutely blocked any inclinations of this kind.

As you know, jurisprudence is an exact science. Therefore, I will try, albeit briefly, to list the specific international legal normative acts grossly violated when NATO unleashed a war against Yugoslavia. First of all, it is such a fundamental document as the UN Charter. On March 24, 1999, its 2 article was violated, which says about the inadmissibility of the use of force or its threat in resolving international conflicts. Also Articles 24, 34, 42 and 48, which stipulate the exclusive right of the UN Security Council to make decisions on the use of force in situations that threaten peace and stability, as well as to determine the specific UN members who may be entrusted with such a mission.

It is also worth mentioning article 53 of the charter, which directly indicates the inadmissibility of arbitrary reprisals by any military-political alliances, organizations and blocs, including NATO, which is specifically mentioned in this document. The most "remarkable" thing is that the North Atlantic Alliance, having launched its aggression against Belgrade, crossed out not only the UN Charter, but also its own! Specifically, his actions contradicted the very first article of the North Atlantic Treaty, where the obligation was written in black and white to strictly follow the above-mentioned UN provisions, without using military force to resolve international disputes. In accordance with Article 5, such force can generally only be used in the event of a direct attack on one of the members of the Alliance. Article 7 recognizes the primacy of the UN Security Council in military matters and in maintaining peace on the planet.

As a matter of fact, in light of the above, the violation of such international legal acts as the 1992 CSCE Helsinki Document, the 1996 OSCE Lisbon Document, and the 1997 Act on Relations with Russia look like particulars. However, one cannot fail to mention that by its actions NATO also violated the most fundamental rules governing the conduct of hostilities at the legal level. We are talking about the Geneva Convention of 1949 and the Additional Protocols signed in 1977. Launching missile and bomb strikes against civilian targets and civilians, as well as destruction aviation The alliance of objects related to cultural heritage put his warrior on the same level as the Nazis.

International, military, humanitarian law - all of them, one might say, were blown to shreds by NATO bombings in 1999. It was from that time that a period began in the world for a very long time when the measure of the security of a state was, in fact, the degree of its loyalty and obedience to NATO, and, first of all, to the United States. The very notions of international security and such guarantees were devalued to the level of empty, meaningless phrases, and the United Nations was turned into a place for settling geopolitical scores and holding meaningless debates.

On the 20th anniversary of the tragic events I am talking about, the North Atlantic Alliance issued a statement in which it called the strikes against Yugoslavia "legitimate and necessary." This operation, which became the first in stories NATO through the collective use of force, finally revealed its aggressive essence to the whole world, but the forces, the instrument of which this bloc has always been and still is, will never recognize anything of the kind. The executioners of Yugoslavia - from rank-and-file pilots of NATO aircraft and crews of rocket launchers, who aimed at Yugoslav hospitals, schools, bridges, wiped out passenger trains and refugee columns, to the top leaders of the Alliance itself and its armies, for the most part, more than happy.

They have made wonderful careers, receiving awards, titles, promotions and other benefits of life for their atrocities. In the West, they are still considered heroes and “fighters for democracy”. Courts and tribunals created by the "international community" spent decades humiliating those who actually became victims of aggression, proving their alleged "guilt" necessary to justify one of the most cynical atrocities of the second half of the XNUMXth century. Will there ever be a trial of his true culprits, who feel great today? The question is still open ...
Author:
Photos used:
Wikipedia / F-15 departure from Aviano airbase
159 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Evil Booth
    Evil Booth 23 December 2020 21: 05
    -11%
    sorties ... using 1000 machines lost 2 destroying 2 of 25 complexes with 125 forces of 500 PRR Harm.
    and flew before 10 ldet bombing Yugoslavia in parts, starting with the richest province.
    and all legal)))
    1. Lexus
      Lexus 24 December 2020 01: 35
      +8
      "The strong is always right." (C) The USSR was gone, but Russia did not survive. The answer is this.
      1. Cottodraton
        Cottodraton 24 December 2020 04: 24
        +7
        At that time Russia itself was balancing on the brink of disintegration, under the strict guidance of one citizen who was in an eternal binge
        1. Lexus
          Lexus 24 December 2020 04: 32
          +3
          Since then, nothing has changed for the better. The eternal binge was replaced by a bunker. hi
          1. fliger85
            fliger85 19 February 2021 21: 22
            0
            Low brain level.
          2. meandr51
            meandr51 6 March 2021 12: 48
            0
            This is tremendous progress. Mainly in your imagination.
        2. Pravodel
          Pravodel 25 December 2020 08: 36
          0
          under the strict guidance of one citizen who is in an eternal binge

          They forgot to add: and his friends liberal ... stov in the government and at the entire top of power in Russia, including the regions.
      2. horror
        horror 24 December 2020 07: 21
        +2
        So look in what position Russia is now, the countries of Eastern Europe, allies in the Warsaw Pact make up the belt of our ardent enemies, and the brothers have already joined them!
        1. meandr51
          meandr51 6 March 2021 12: 50
          0
          Russia is now in a better position than in June 41. She can erase any enemy on the globe in half an hour. The main thing is not to surrender the country without a fight, like the USSR.
    2. tihonmarine
      tihonmarine 24 December 2020 01: 46
      +2
      Quote: Evil Booth

      -5
      sorties ... using 1000 machines lost 2 destroying 2 of 25 complexes with 125 forces of 500 PRR Harm

      And I want to skate: Why did you kill the Serbs!
    3. Cherry Nine
      Cherry Nine 24 December 2020 04: 07
      +2
      Quote: Evil Booth
      10 ldet bombing Yugoslavia in parts, starting with the richest province.

      The most prosperous part of Yugoslavia both now and then, and under Tito, and before WWII was, of course, Slovenia. In the 90s, Slovenia also passed almost without problems.

      Because in Slovenia there were no Serbs or a border with Serbia.
  2. Alien From
    Alien From 23 December 2020 21: 15
    +8
    NATO put on the UN a long time ago.
  3. rocket757
    rocket757 23 December 2020 21: 29
    +5
    Alas, as it turned out later, the true guarantor of peace on a planet that did not know large-scale armed conflicts almost until the end of the twentieth century was not the Security Council, but the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.

    Alas, alas, but this fact takes place, groan and gasp, it makes no sense.
    We need to build a new, reliable cover for the world.
    But, so far, these are only dreams, no prospects are in sight in the foreseeable future.
  4. Avior
    Avior 23 December 2020 22: 00
    +1
    Curious article
    As you know, jurisprudence is an exact science.

    That's for sure. And the question arises in this regard
    On March 24, 1999, its 2 article was violated, which says about the inadmissibility of the use of force or its threat in resolving international conflicts.

    And given that jurisprudence, as the author claims, is an exact science, the question arises - what international conflict does the author mean? The author is generally aware of what they were talking about? How is there an "international conflict"? Or did he just heap up the numbers of all articles in the hope that the readers would not delve into?
    And then from his reasoning it looks like NATO began to bomb Russia, otherwise how
    of the Act on Relations with Russia of 1997

    ?
    If the author takes up legal reasoning, it makes sense to either adhere to the exact wording or not take it at all: ((
    And as for
    ... Will there ever be a trial of his true culprits?

    So the UN Security Council decided long ago, in the absence of objections from Russia, and to create a tribunal for crimes in the former Yugoslavia, perhaps the question of continuing its work should be raised? Has anyone raised it?
    There is also the International Court of Justice, but it does not consider criminal cases.
    Criminal cases are considered by the ICC, but it was created after these events, unfortunately.
    It is not clear what the author proposes to hold this trial?
    1. pytar
      pytar 23 December 2020 23: 27
      -2
      If the author takes up legal reasoning, it makes sense to either adhere to the exact wording or not take it at all: ((

      The author is clearly very far from the topic on which he undertook to compose. Maybe he has some knowledge, but obviously on the wrong question. bully
    2. Olgovich
      Olgovich 24 December 2020 01: 39
      +8
      Quote: Avior
      And given that jurisprudence, as the author claims, is an exact science, the question arises - what international conflict does the author mean?

      In Russian it is written in the article - what: between NATO countries and Yugoslavia. What's not clear? belay
      Quote: Avior
      Otherwise, from his reasoning it looks like NATO has started bombing Russia, otherwise how sideways
      of the Act on Relations with Russia of 1997

      ?
      If the author takes up legal reasoning, it makes sense to either adhere to the exact wording or not take it at all: ((


      In order not to carry this pretentious accusatory nonsense, it was enough just to read content "The Act on Relations with Russia of 1997.

      Where the first paragraph of the act states that
      Russia and NATO will jointly strengthen the role of the OSCE in pan-European security; refuse to use force except with the sanction of the UN Security Council; will respect the territorial integrity of states and the Helsinki Act.

      This is what was violated and the author is absolutely right
      1. Cherry Nine
        Cherry Nine 24 December 2020 04: 10
        0
        Quote: Olgovich
        the content of the 1997 Russian Relations Act.

        You never know what nonsense Clinton wrote at the time. Do not take all this muculature seriously.

        By the way, he also signed the Budapest memorandum. Did not hear?
        1. Olgovich
          Olgovich 24 December 2020 04: 14
          +1
          Quote: Cherry Nine
          You never know what nonsense Clinton wrote at the time. Do not take all this muculature seriously.

          This is a Treaty with НАТО.
          What .... Clinton? belay lol
          1. Cherry Nine
            Cherry Nine 24 December 2020 04: 19
            +1
            You are right, I was inconsiderate. Yeltsin - Solano.
      2. Avior
        Avior 24 December 2020 08: 18
        -1
        ... On March 24, 1999, its 2 article was violated, which states the inadmissibility of the use of force or its threat in the settlement of international conflicts.

        Are you ok in Russian?
        The author's actions by NATO are already a reaction to the conflict, and not the conflict itself.
        And about the act, there are no paragraphs at all, no, there is a solid text and your quote is not there.
        Is there a decision of some authorized international body that NATO was illegally bombed?
        They did this on the basis of the cessation of ethnic cleansing, no one brought them to justice for this.
        1. Olgovich
          Olgovich 24 December 2020 08: 52
          0
          Quote: Avior
          The author's actions by NATO are already a reaction to the conflict, and not the conflict itself.

          The bombing ... not a conflict? WHAT is it?
          Quote: Avior
          And about the act, there are no paragraphs at all, no, there is a solid text and your quote is not there.

          Wrong, it happens, but why LIE now?
          Here is the OFFICIAL NATO text and it is P1: [quote] refusal to use force or threat of force against each other or against any other state, its sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence in any way contradicting the UN Charter and contained in the Helsinki Final Act of the Declaration of Principles Guiding the Participating States in Mutual Relations; etc. [/ quote]
          And there is EVERYTHING that I and the author pointed out
          Quote: Avior
          They did it on the basis of ending ethnic cleansing, no one brought them to justice for this.

          It's not in Russian ...

          And yes, show such a norm of the MP, which gives the right to KILL foreign citizens
        2. meandr51
          meandr51 6 March 2021 12: 53
          0
          They will also attract. So far there is no one, and there is enough compromising evidence with a margin. There were no ethnic cleansings by the Serbs, they were falsified.
  5. apro
    apro 23 December 2020 22: 06
    +1
    They did not violate anything ... the power is stronger than the law ... if there is no other power.
    1. Dodikson
      Dodikson 23 December 2020 23: 09
      -3
      so the Germans did the right thing to exterminate the Jews? because the law of force is stronger than the law
      1. apro
        apro 23 December 2020 23: 12
        +5
        Quote: Dodikson
        so the Germans did the right thing to exterminate the Jews? because the law of force is stronger than the law

        Did the Jews have their own state? Created to protect their citizens?
        1. Dodikson
          Dodikson 24 December 2020 06: 34
          -2
          You did not write about necessarily having your own state, you wrote that power is higher than law, the Deutsche had power, which means, in your opinion, they did everything right.
          as the Poles and Pribolts did right, betraying and independently destroying the Jews. because the power was on their side.
          1. apro
            apro 24 December 2020 06: 37
            +1
            Quote: Dodikson
            You did not write about necessarily having your own state

            How else to protect your people, how to move your interests?
            What was the Jewish organization like?
            1. Dodikson
              Dodikson 24 December 2020 06: 39
              -2
              and what and how, nobody cares. The Deutsche had strength, so, in your opinion, they did everything right.
              And by the way, the Jews had strength, financial, and for the most part it means more than physical strength.
              1. apro
                apro 24 December 2020 06: 43
                +2
                Quote: Dodikson
                and the Jews, by the way, had strength

                You see, everything is fine. They were worth each other ..
                Quote: Dodikson
                it mostly means more than physical strength.

                1. Dodikson
                  Dodikson 24 December 2020 06: 44
                  -4
                  Well, you see, you yourself admit that you are on Hitler's side and think that he did the right thing by killing Jews.
                  1. apro
                    apro 24 December 2020 06: 51
                    +2
                    Quote: Dodikson
                    Well, you see, you yourself admit that you are on Hitler's side and think that he did the right thing by killing Jews.

                    And this is on what basis such conclusions?
                    1. Dodikson
                      Dodikson 24 December 2020 07: 00
                      -4
                      based on pearl
                      They did not violate anything ... the power is stronger than the law ... if there is no other power.

                      it was not me who said that they did not violate anything because the right of force is stronger than the law.
                      that is, power is above the law
                      1. apro
                        apro 24 December 2020 07: 04
                        0
                        Quote: Dodikson
                        that is, power is above the law

                        So, according to the law, you want to, let's according to the law, what kind of Jews did Hitler kill? And what's not legal ...
                      2. Dodikson
                        Dodikson 24 December 2020 07: 56
                        -3
                        and which Jews did Hitler kill?
                        can you say that there was no Holocaust?
                      3. apro
                        apro 24 December 2020 08: 19
                        +2
                        Quote: Dodikson
                        and which Jews did Hitler kill?
                        can you say that there was no Holocaust?

                        For especially gifted .. citizens of what strana.ili Jews have some special status?
                      4. Dodikson
                        Dodikson 24 December 2020 08: 47
                        -2
                        yes any.
                        for example, the shooting of the Jews of the USSR by the Germans, is it a crime or not?
                        after all, in your opinion, this is not a crime, they were stronger, which means they are right.
                        and the invasion of the USSR is also not a crime, they were stronger at that time, which means they were right.
                        then the truth of the USSR became stronger, and therefore more to the right.
                      5. apro
                        apro 24 December 2020 09: 00
                        0
                        Quote: Dodikson
                        yes any

                        And from this it follows that if the Jews are citizens of Germany and being under the laws of this country, and they are subjected to repressive measures and the majority of German citizens agree with this, this is under the law and according to German justice.
                        If we talk about the citizens of the USSR in the confrontation of force with the Nazis, then the majority of the Soviets did not like this, and they defended their citizens of Jewish nationality as equals. with weapons in hand. by force. the Nazis had force and used it. but the Soviets also used force. in a situation where the law was violated by force. and only great force could lead to a balance of interests.
                      6. Dodikson
                        Dodikson 24 December 2020 09: 13
                        -2
                        Soviet citizens did not save the executed Jews, because they did not have the strength to resist this. it (power) came later. but at the time of the executions she was not there.
                        which means that according to your logic, the shootings were correct.
                      7. apro
                        apro 24 December 2020 09: 30
                        0
                        Quote: Dodikson
                        Soviet citizens did not save the executed Jews,

                        This is what poluchaetsya Soviet should put a fighter with a gun for every Jew ???. Nazis in their right to do what they want, but they were forced to answer for their actions by force.
                        Quote: Dodikson
                        but at the time of the executions she was not there

                        Was there an occupation administration in Moscow? Was the USSR army destroyed?
                        Quote: Dodikson
                        which means, according to your logic, the executions were correct

                        According to Soviet logic, force was forced to admit that it was not right, and if there was no force, then everything is correct.
                      8. Dodikson
                        Dodikson 24 December 2020 10: 22
                        -1
                        so if there was no occupation administration in Moscow, then why were the Jews shot? and why was not a man with a gun assigned to every Jew? here the Germans found a man with a gun for every Jew.
                      9. apro
                        apro 24 December 2020 10: 23
                        0
                        Quote: Dodikson
                        why wasn’t a man with a gun assigned to every Jew?

                        Was there a decision by the Soviet government? Do Jews have a special status?
                      10. Dodikson
                        Dodikson 24 December 2020 10: 24
                        -1
                        was it? and if not, why not?
                        that is, you want to say that the Soviet government did not specifically protect the Jews and gave them to death?
                      11. apro
                        apro 24 December 2020 10: 26
                        0
                        Quote: Dodikson
                        You want to say that the Soviet government did not specifically protect the Jews and gave them to death

                        The Soviet government equally protected all citizens of the USSR, regardless of nationality. Or did the Jews want something more?
                      12. Dodikson
                        Dodikson 24 December 2020 10: 26
                        -1
                        so why not protect the Jews?
                      13. apro
                        apro 24 December 2020 10: 28
                        0
                        Quote: Dodikson
                        so why not protect the Jews?

                        Protected equally. As all citizens of the USSR. Or Jews have a special status?
                      14. Dodikson
                        Dodikson 24 December 2020 10: 30
                        -1
                        no, the Jews had no status, no life, no grave, they were simply killed.
                        so why did not the USSR protect those who were killed only for their nationality?
                        so it is necessary to protect those who are killed, and not those who are not touched.
                      15. apro
                        apro 24 December 2020 10: 33
                        +1
                        Quote: Dodikson
                        so why did not the USSR protect those who were killed only for their nationality?

                        He defended equally as well as other citizens of the USSR.
      2. nikvic46
        nikvic46 24 December 2020 10: 11
        0
        Dear Dodik, the war was nationwide. If it were not for the USSR, we would have lost this war. In the Second World War, a completely different civilization fought against the Nazi plague.
      3. Dodikson
        Dodikson 24 December 2020 10: 23
        -1
        do not tell me this.
        here is a dispute with a person who claims that the right to force is higher than the law.
        dispute about this, and the Second World War and the Jews is just one example.
        you can also ask whether the Oghuzians justly took Constantinople or the crusaders Jerusalem.
      4. tihonmarine
        tihonmarine 24 December 2020 11: 54
        -1
        Quote: Dodikson
        here is a dispute with a person who claims that the right to force is higher than the law.
        a dispute about this, and the Second World War and the Jews is just one example

        And Russians, Ukrainians and Belarusians were destroyed many times more because they were Slavs. They were exterminated, as well as Jews for their nationality. And now they are trying to destroy us, but not the Jews.
      5. Dodikson
        Dodikson 24 December 2020 12: 03
        -2
        no need to exaggerate, that our ethnos should have been greatly reduced is a fact, by the way, East Germans are ethnic Slavs, which is why the Saxons then knocked out entire cities like Dresden, completely destroying their civilians.
        but in our country neither Russians nor Belarusians were killed just because they were Russians and Belarusians. but the Jews were killed for this as soon as they were identified.
        By the way, if it comes to that, they killed in fact those Jews who were already becoming like ordinary people, that is, they were socialized, but the God's chosen ones fled from dangerous areas long before the events.
        there is a very interesting story, sad but interesting.
      6. tihonmarine
        tihonmarine 24 December 2020 13: 12
        0
        Quote: Dodikson
        but in our country neither Russians nor Belarusians were killed just because they were Russians and Belarusians. but the Jews were killed for this as soon as they were identified.

        Check out "Mein Kapf", and Rosenberg's installations. Everything is written there.
      7. Dodikson
        Dodikson 24 December 2020 15: 48
        -1
        I read those who created the philosophy of the third Reich, what should I learn new?
      8. tihonmarine
        tihonmarine 24 December 2020 16: 46
        0
        Quote: Dodikson
        I read those who created the philosophy of the third Reich, what should I learn new?

        Hitler told Antonescu "My mission, if I succeed, is to destroy all Slavs. In future Europe, there will be two races, Germanic and Latin."
        Levit I.E. "Romania's entry into the war against the USSR".
        On the eve of the Second World War, Hitler gave instructions to Himmler-Reichsfuehrer SS to exterminate 30 million Soviet citizens.
        A.I.Shneer
        The Peipsi generation is not aware of this.
      9. Cherry Nine
        Cherry Nine 24 December 2020 17: 22
        +3
        Quote: tihonmarine
        Hitler told Antonescu

        Even if he did, he said a lot of things.
        Quote: tihonmarine
        The Peipsi generation is not aware of this.

        1. The number of dead Polish military units in Germany? The number of dead Polish military units in the USSR?
        2. The number of conscripts in the RKKA of the USSR and the RSFSR in the 44th year?
      10. Dodikson
        Dodikson 24 December 2020 22: 53
        -2
        1) he can speak a lot, for the Latinos for him were also Untermens. moreover, some of the Germans were subject to disposal, because they were a mixture, but the same Chechens were of the Aryan type. like the Tibetans.
        2) he did not intend to completely destroy the Slavs. for his goal was to seize the land to the Urals, and the Russians must live OUTSIDE the Urals. that is, he did not plan to go to Siberia, but then how will he destroy the Russians in Siberia? By the way, the Japanese were not going to climb to Siberia either.

        3)
        On the eve of the Second World War, Hitler gave instructions to Himmler-Reichsfuehrer SS to exterminate 30 million Soviet citizens.
        A.I.Shneer
        The Peipsi generation is not aware of this.

        the Peipsi generation knows that the number of Russians alone in the USSR was more than 30 million.
        4) some of those who created Hitler, such as Haushofer, believed that the origin of the Aryans was Siberia and Ariana, and that Germany needed to cooperate with the Russians, but the SS won the battle with the SA, and Haushofer and many others were pushed aside, and the theory that the Aryans gained the upper hand came from Atlantis and that they would be leveled to the Frisian theory, according to which the opponents were henceforth not the British, but the Russians, but the British allies, which is why Hess rushed to the Saxons.
        there is a lot of everything. but not everyone knows peipsi. for them, Reich is politics, although Hitler himself said that whoever sees politics in them does not know a damn about Reich.
  • tihonmarine
    tihonmarine 24 December 2020 01: 52
    0
    Quote: Dodikson
    so the Germans did the right thing to exterminate the Jews? because the law of force is stronger than the law

    And who was the first to declare war on Germany ??
    1. Cherry Nine
      Cherry Nine 24 December 2020 04: 13
      +2
      Quote: tihonmarine
      And who was the first to declare war on Germany?

      Poland, September 1, 39th year. What is the question?
      1. tihonmarine
        tihonmarine 24 December 2020 11: 07
        -1
        Quote: Cherry Nine
        Poland, September 1, 39th year. What is the question?

        No, the first time in 1933, then in 1938. And not Poland or the Czech Republic. The first time Germany could not answer, the Weimer Republic brought agriculture to the limit, two-thirds went through imports, and the second time in 1938, read it, you will find, announced Chaim V. The Germans answered.
        1. Cherry Nine
          Cherry Nine 24 December 2020 11: 28
          +1
          Weizmann declares war on Germany? Wake up. Weizmann in the 30s is engaged in aliyah in accordance with the Haavar agreement. Until the 38th year, the main enemy of the Jews was, of course, Britain, and not Germany. In 38th, Britain's position on anti-Semitism did not change, but Germany pushed forward and pulled ahead.
          1. tihonmarine
            tihonmarine 24 December 2020 11: 42
            -1
            Quote: Cherry Nine
            Weizmann declares war on Germany? Wake up.

            Just before the Evian conference. And you know this very well, but you cannot talk about it. And what I wrote is a lot.
            1. Cherry Nine
              Cherry Nine 24 December 2020 12: 20
              +1
              Quote: tihonmarine
              And what I wrote is a lot.

              I mean, the Mossad will get you? My condolences to your loved ones.
              1. tihonmarine
                tihonmarine 24 December 2020 13: 14
                -1
                Quote: Cherry Nine
                I mean, the Mossad will get you? My condolences to your loved ones.

                No, just where about you, you write something wrong, any comment is deleted, and do not write "comment deleted". Although the Mossad is navryatli, and the Ozetites can.
                1. Cherry Nine
                  Cherry Nine 24 December 2020 13: 16
                  +1
                  Quote: tihonmarine
                  Although the Mossad is navryatli, and the Ozetites can.

                  How.
                  Fearfully.
                  Live.
                  1. tihonmarine
                    tihonmarine 25 December 2020 00: 13
                    -1
                    Quote: Cherry Nine
                    How.
                    Fearfully.
                    Live

                    So we live, then Trotsky, then Sverdlov, then Sobelson. Of course scary.
    2. Dodikson
      Dodikson 24 December 2020 06: 36
      -4
      and what has the war to do with it? the passenger said that the only correct thing is when you have the power and you can mess with you as you want, want to kill? kill. want to rape? rape.
      you have strength, you can do anything.
      that's the philosophy of that citizen.
      1. apro
        apro 24 December 2020 06: 58
        +1
        Quote: Dodikson
        passenger said

        Of the thieves? As by law or by concepts? the question is solved?
        1. Dodikson
          Dodikson 24 December 2020 06: 59
          -3
          according to - I did not raise the question that it is correct what the stronger said.
          and this is neither by concepts nor by law, but by lawlessness.
          1. apro
            apro 24 December 2020 07: 05
            +1
            Quote: Dodikson
            but in lawlessness

            Was that the limit?
            1. Dodikson
              Dodikson 24 December 2020 07: 54
              -3
              was when the law was above the force.
  • Cherry Nine
    Cherry Nine 24 December 2020 04: 11
    +1
    Quote: Dodikson
    so the Germans did the right thing to exterminate the Jews? because the law of force is stronger than the law

    Some strange question. What does the right of force have to do with it? Ethnic cleansing in the Reich was carried out in accordance with the legislation in force at that time.
    1. Dodikson
      Dodikson 24 December 2020 07: 55
      -3
      and outside the Reich?
      1. Cherry Nine
        Cherry Nine 24 December 2020 09: 14
        0
        What does "outside the Reich" mean? If you are talking about Germany's allies - then, in accordance with the legislation of these countries, you wanted to do it, you didn’t want to do it, if you mean the Reichsomissariats - then this is not a bit "outside the Reich".
        1. Dodikson
          Dodikson 24 December 2020 09: 21
          -2
          no, I for example about the territory of the USSR.
          1. Cherry Nine
            Cherry Nine 24 December 2020 09: 26
            +1
            Quote: Dodikson
            about the territory of the USSR.

            About the Reichskommissariat? Because the German administration was established there and the corresponding regulations were in force.

            What are you trying to prove? That killing Jews is bad? Nobody seems to argue with this. What to kill Jews unlawfully? It is not difficult to write any laws; if you want, it will be legal.
            1. Dodikson
              Dodikson 24 December 2020 10: 26
              -1
              But did the population of those district commissariats agree that this is now territory subject to the German administration?
              and I argued a man who argued that the right of force is higher than the law of the law and this is correct.
              1. Cherry Nine
                Cherry Nine 24 December 2020 10: 33
                0
                Quote: Dodikson
                But did the population of those district commissariats agree that this is now territory subject to the German administration?

                What's the difference? Did someone ask them?
                Quote: Dodikson
                that the right of force is higher than the right of the law and rightly so

                The law of law is a special case of the law of force. The law exists as long as it regulates the actions of a certain apparatus of violence. When the apparatus of violence does not exist, and the law tries to exist as if by itself, we get "international law" about which there are so many songs, or the laws of the Feld State, which are not even of interest to those who write them.
                1. Dodikson
                  Dodikson 24 December 2020 10: 38
                  -1
                  so you started about the fact that the main thing is power, and justice and law are secondary.

                  but nevertheless we are weaker now than the states, that is, strength is on their side, but we have something to answer, and nevertheless, we are at the same time stronger than many other countries, but we do not use force like the West.
                  so what is the strength? if strength is in strength, then we get weak, since we do not use force? if justice is power, then why even we have a lot of people who believe that who is stronger is right?
                  1. Cherry Nine
                    Cherry Nine 24 December 2020 10: 44
                    +1
                    Quote: Dodikson
                    At the same time, we are stronger than many other countries, but we do not use force like the West.

                    Seriously?
                    Quote: Dodikson
                    if strength is in strength, then we get weak, since we do not use force?

                    What kind of dregs have you lit? Any decision has its own balance of pros and cons, and not "in general", but specifically for the person who made this decision. The answer "why the US did not attack Russia" and "why Russia did not attack Tajikistan" is the same: and what for?.
                    Quote: Dodikson
                    who is stronger is right ?

                    Who is stronger and stronger. And everyone always considers himself to be right.
                  2. Dodikson
                    Dodikson 24 December 2020 10: 48
                    -1
                    Are we stronger than Finland? Yes or no ?
                    are we stronger than Sweden? Yes or no ?
                    Are we stronger than Argentina? Yes or no ?
                    Are we stronger than Vietnam? Yes or no ?
                    should I bring other countries that seem to be weaker than us in terms of strength?
                    by the way in Tajikistan there are our bases if that. as in Kyrgyzstan.
                  3. Cherry Nine
                    Cherry Nine 24 December 2020 10: 54
                    +1
                    1. It's hard to say. These are tough guys, at one time this issue was clarified. In a few years, if the Finns really buy a new air force on a turnkey basis, (which was recently reported), the answer will be "no" without options.
                    2. No. On their territory, they will certainly bury any outfit of forces that you can bring there.
                    3. Similarly.
                    4. Similarly.

                    Quote: Dodikson
                    should I bring other countries that seem to be weaker than us in terms of strength?

                    Quote: Dodikson
                    The answer "why the US did not attack Russia" and "why Russia did not attack Tajikistan" is the same: what for?
                  4. Dodikson
                    Dodikson 24 December 2020 10: 56
                    -1
                    we are stronger than any country on the list. and even stronger than one and a half hundred countries.
                    but nevertheless we will not gut it, although according to your logic, using the right of the strong, we have every right to do so.
                    so by the way, the states do, they go first with soft power, that is, with economic power, if it doesn’t work out with diplomatic power, if there’s a bummer, then the military is used.
                    but if you haven't noticed for a long time, we have a completely different policy. and this is a policy of cooperation, that is, the priority of law and law, not force.
                  5. Cherry Nine
                    Cherry Nine 24 December 2020 11: 00
                    +1
                    Quote: Dodikson
                    but if you haven't noticed for a long time, we have a completely different policy. and this is a policy of cooperation, that is, the priority of law and law, not force.

                    Didn't notice at all.
                    Quote: Dodikson
                    we are stronger than any country on the list. and even stronger than one and a half hundred countries.

                    You have too much conceit.
                    Quote: Dodikson
                    Although, according to your logic, using the right of the strong, we have all the rights to this.

                    And also - big problems with reading. I have already written three times that any decision, including a military one, has a price.
                  6. Dodikson
                    Dodikson 24 December 2020 11: 04
                    -1
                    Didn't notice at all.

                    You are probably kept in a punishment cell that you are not aware of all the news for 10 years probably
                    You have too much conceit.

                    no, I'm a realist, all of the above armies will be quickly defeated in the current conditions.
                    and I follow the defense industry of other countries, and I know what the Swedes and Finns and the rest are armed with. and I also know that they are not going to rearm under any key.
                    And also - big problems with reading. I have already written three times that any decision, including a military one, has a price.

                    You yourself would first think about what you write.
                    since any decision, if in the end it is a subordinate territory, the profit will exceed the price.
                    even in the situation with Mongolia with which you can't take it, it will be true.
                  7. Cherry Nine
                    Cherry Nine 24 December 2020 11: 32
                    +1
                    Quote: Dodikson
                    You are not aware of all the news for 10 years probably

                    True? Actually, more or less in the know.
                    Quote: Dodikson
                    and I follow the defense industry of other countries, and I know what the Swedes and Finns and the rest are armed with. and I also know that they are not going to rearm under any key.

                    I see you follow it somehow in your own way.
                    Quote: Dodikson
                    since any decision, if in the end it is a subordinate territory, the profit will exceed the price.

                    Well, if Finland for Russia still beats it off (although how it can be beaten back, it will probably take away junk in other countries, but in Russia - why is it?), Then Russia for Finland is definitely at a loss.
                  8. Dodikson
                    Dodikson 24 December 2020 12: 06
                    -1
                    Mmyaya, you on the move do not understand anything at all.
                    For you, a Finnish woman is just junk, and that there is one milk blotter that will pay for the whole war, not to mention Finnish paper, chemical industry and communications.
                    the same crap with Sweden. a very industrialized country.
                    but for you along the way Sweden is just junk in the closets of the Swedes.
                    and you do not follow anything. otherwise, they would have been aware of our downed planes, and about the bases of our Ilah by Israel, and about a bunch of other reasons, after which the ban on Turkish tomatoes became a meme that justifies any non-response to aggression.
                  9. Cherry Nine
                    Cherry Nine 24 December 2020 12: 23
                    +1
                    Quote: Dodikson
                    and that there is one dairy product that will pay for the whole war, not to mention the Finnish paper, chemical industry and communications.

                    They plundered the USSR, they found it, and Finland will be plundered, it's not a long matter.
                    Quote: Dodikson
                    the same crap with Sweden

                    The same crap.
                    Quote: Dodikson
                    otherwise, they would have been aware of our downed planes, and about the bases of our Ilah by Israel, and about a bunch of other reasons, after which the ban on Turkish tomatoes became a meme that justifies any non-response to aggression.

                    Actually, in the know. Especially about "setting up Eli by Israel", it is certainly an enchanting story. Bibi could be prosecuted only for this farce, even if there were no other questions for him.
  • meandr51
    meandr51 6 March 2021 12: 54
    0
    Well, then Hitler did not violate anything either.
  • Keyser soze
    Keyser soze 23 December 2020 22: 16
    +1
    Oon, shmoone, full of stupidity. One war is always just for the winner and unfair for the loser. And in the last 20 years, nothing has changed in this regard.
    1. kot423
      kot423 23 December 2020 22: 32
      -1
      Quote: Keyser Soze
      Oon, shmoone, full of stupidity.

      Nu-nu. Don't forget this mantra
      Quote: Keyser Soze
      One war is always just for the winner and unfair for the loser.

      repeat when they bring democracy to your house, while knocking you on the head, rape and then killing (so as not to let slip) your wife and constantly getting drunk on your door.
      PS Everything that I wrote above is real cases that can be easily found in the public domain. And these are not only mattresses, but also the rest included in nature.
      1. Keyser soze
        Keyser soze 24 December 2020 00: 53
        -8
        repeat when democracy is brought to your house,


        But this has already happened to us ... September 7, 1944. They came, brought communism, hid 100 in the camps and shot half of the country, sawed off half of the country ...

        1. Olgovich
          Olgovich 24 December 2020 01: 48
          +3
          Quote: Keyser Soze
          But this has already happened to us ... September 7, 1944. They came, brought communism, hid 100 in the camps and shot half of them.
          ..

          The communists in Bulgaria had enough of their own, to them and claims.
          Quote: Keyser Soze
          half of the country sawed off ...

          What to do-for an alliance with Satan-Hitler you have to pay.

          And they paid very little ...
        2. tihonmarine
          tihonmarine 24 December 2020 01: 55
          0
          Quote: Keyser Soze
          00 were hidden in the camps and half were shot ..., half of the country was sawed off ...

          For what ?
        3. tralflot1832
          tralflot1832 24 December 2020 09: 37
          0
          In general, I did not understand which side Bulgaria was on June 22, 1941. If you lost, then see your comments above. And take your comments more seriously! I will always wonder where politicians come from: the whole world is in dust, but we are the authorities, and the people who chose them, they don't give a damn about them, is always ready to sit down at the negotiating table with you drinks !
      2. Cherry Nine
        Cherry Nine 24 December 2020 04: 20
        +1
        Quote: kot423
        PS Everything that I wrote above is real cases that can be easily found in the public domain. And these are not only mattresses, but also the rest included in nature.

        American pilots were drunk under Serbian doors? Is it like Mikhalkov's in the movie?
    2. Cherry Nine
      Cherry Nine 24 December 2020 04: 22
      +4
      Quote: Keyser Soze
      One war is always just for the winner and unfair for the loser.

      )))
      What's funny is that the Serbian brothers themselves have long passed Milosevic to The Hague, since 2012 they have been joining the EU, since 2014 they have been joining NATO. So, mostly Russian patriots are registered as defeated in the NATO-Serbia conflict.
      1. Keyser soze
        Keyser soze 24 December 2020 11: 47
        0
        What's funny is that the Serbian brothers themselves have long passed Milosevic to The Hague, since 2012 they have been joining the EU, since 2014 they have been joining NATO.


        And for sure ... Serbs come to us several times a year to train with the aggressors laughing They have attached a flag next to the Americans and are sitting there.

        Platinum Lion 18 exercise, Novo Selo training ground, Bulgaria.
  • sharp-lad
    sharp-lad 23 December 2020 22: 24
    +4
    NATO is the national American terrorist organization!
    1. apro
      apro 23 December 2020 22: 35
      0
      Quote: sharp-lad
      NATO is the national American terrorist organization!

      And the Warsaw Pact ... whose and what organization ???
      1. sharp-lad
        sharp-lad 23 December 2020 22: 44
        +3
        Warsaw Pact - Union of Soviet Socialist States, bred by the actions of Western predators, jointly defend their freedom and their path to perfection!
        1. apro
          apro 23 December 2020 22: 46
          +1
          And why was it destroyed?
          1. sharp-lad
            sharp-lad 23 December 2020 22: 50
            0
            Unfortunately, the greed and stupidity of people knows no bounds. In other words, an endangered species.
            1. apro
              apro 23 December 2020 22: 53
              +4
              Then why blame the amers for anything? They have their right ...
              Quote: sharp-lad
              In other words, an endangered species.

              No ... these will live long ...
              1. sharp-lad
                sharp-lad 23 December 2020 23: 06
                -1
                Then why blame the amers for anything? They have their right ...
                And in my own way, though in their image and likeness, so to speak, I adopt experience.
                No ... these will live long ...
                No, too actively engaged in self-destruction. hi
                1. apro
                  apro 23 December 2020 23: 09
                  +3
                  Quote: sharp-lad
                  And in mine, though in their image and likeness, so to speak, I am adopting experience

                  Is there strength ???
                  Quote: sharp-lad
                  No, too actively engaged in self-destruction.

                  They destroy just strangers ..
                  1. sharp-lad
                    sharp-lad 23 December 2020 23: 22
                    -1
                    Is there strength ???
                    Well, I don't have nuclear weapons, but sometimes a vigorous humor wakes up.
                    They destroy just strangers ..
                    Recently, more and more of themselves (I'm not just about Americans, but about all the greedy and stupid), the task of the smart ones is to step aside and, without interfering, do not let themselves be ruined.
                    1. apro
                      apro 23 December 2020 23: 29
                      +1
                      Quote: sharp-lad
                      Recently, more and more ourselves (I'm not only about Americans, but about all greedy and stupid)

                      The fodder base is cleaned up, they don't need so much ...
                  2. sharp-lad
                    sharp-lad 23 December 2020 23: 29
                    0
                    I like your avatar.
                    R.S. Without hints and conjectures, like it. hi
          2. tihonmarine
            tihonmarine 24 December 2020 02: 03
            -1
            Quote: apro
            And why was it destroyed?

            Ask the 5th column.
        2. Cherry Nine
          Cherry Nine 24 December 2020 04: 25
          +3
          Quote: sharp-lad
          The Union of Soviet Socialist States, dreamed of by the actions of Western predators, jointly defend their freedom and their path to perfection!

          As far as I remember, the OVD is remembered in military history as a military alliance that never once opposed an external enemy, but twice (1956 and 1968) attacked itself.
      2. Revolver
        Revolver 23 December 2020 23: 49
        -6
        Quote: apro
        Quote: sharp-lad
        NATO is the national American terrorist organization!

        And the Warsaw Pact ... whose and what organization ???

        Incidentally, Hungary in 1956 and Czechoslovakia in 1968 were horrified by what other right, if not by the right of force?
        1. apro
          apro 23 December 2020 23: 52
          +3
          Quote: Nagan
          Incidentally, Hungary in 1956 and Czechoslovakia in 1968 were horrified by what other right, if not by the right of force?

          They defended, but did not nightmare. Provided assistance to local communists in the fight against internal and external troublemakers.
        2. 72jora72
          72jora72 24 December 2020 03: 38
          0
          By the way, Hungary in 1956 and Czechoslovakia in 1968 were horrified by what other right
          You probably didn't know, but in Hungary it was suppressed fascist putsch, there such scum climbed out ...
          1. Cherry Nine
            Cherry Nine 24 December 2020 04: 33
            +1
            Quote: 72jora72
            there such scum climbed out ...

            I absolutely agree with you, the same scum. The same Imre Nagy, a Comintern functionary since 29, and a great friend of the NKVD. But, unfortunately, this level of filth was not enough for the Soviet regime, they were scum, but Hungarian scum. To be a patriot of your country is unacceptable for a communist.

            The same mistake, but already fatal, was made by the Soviet government with Jaruzelski.
            Quote: 72jora72
            the fascist putsch was suppressed

            The military leader of the fascists was Bela Kirai, the Righteous One of the World according to Yad Vashem, the national hero of modern Hungary.
    2. tihonmarine
      tihonmarine 24 December 2020 01: 56
      0
      Quote: sharp-lad
      NATO is the national American terrorist organization!

      International.
  • pytar
    pytar 23 December 2020 23: 21
    -4
    NATO stopped the bloodshed in Bolivia Yugoslavia. And the Russian Federation did not test much. Otherwise, the "Yugoslavian" would have continued to cut themselves up to this day! During their existence, the USSR and the OVD also carried out military operations, helped "their" people around the world. And China participated in conflicts of various intensities, including against the USSR and its allies.
    Conclusion? Everyone is guided by their own changing interests! When it is profitable for them "the law is protected", and when not - they break it! hi
    In short: the post is pathetic - meaningless. No.
    1. tihonmarine
      tihonmarine 24 December 2020 01: 57
      +1
      Quote: pytar

      -1
      NATO stopped bloodshed in Byelorussian Yugoslavia.

      Is that accurate, or your opinion?
      1. pytar
        pytar 24 December 2020 13: 03
        +2
        In fact, the war ended after NATO's intervention. My opinion coincides with the facts. I do not say this is good or bad, but there is such a fact.
        1. tihonmarine
          tihonmarine 24 December 2020 13: 19
          -1
          Quote: pytar
          In fact, the war ended after NATO's intervention.

          I remember it was when the United States was bombing Belgrade.
          1. pytar
            pytar 24 December 2020 15: 26
            +1
            I remember it was when the United States was bombing Belgrade.

            Aha! Exactly when Thunderstorms were bombed! Ops. typo .. Belgrade, Belgrade ...
            The facts are eloquent:
            In the First Yugoslav War / 90-91 / more than 97 thousand were killed. civilians. Most of them / 75% / are Bosnians and Croats. Then NATO did not intervene directly.
            In the Second War of the South / Kosovo - 98-99 / 13 thousand died. civilians, of which / 97-98% / Albanians. NATO intervened, otherwise the figure would have become like that of the first war in the south.
            1. tihonmarine
              tihonmarine 24 December 2020 16: 30
              -1
              Quote: pytar
              In the Second War of the South / Kosovo - 98-99 / 13 thousand died. civilians, of which / 97-98% / Albanians.

              I have data on how many civilians have been killed by Kosovars. Among them - 2 thousand 197 Serbs, another 150 Roma (Orthodox Gypsies), 95 Boshniaks (Muslim Slavs), 78 Ashkali (Muslim Gypsies), 75 Montenegrins, 38 Egyptians (Balkan Gypsy people), 46 representatives of other nationalities who live in Kosovo and Metohija and about two thousand Kosovar Albanians who were killed by members of the so-called Kosovo Liberation Army because they were not like-minded and did not approve of their actions.
              But there were also losses of combatants and non-combatants on both sides.
              1. pytar
                pytar 24 December 2020 16: 35
                +2
                I am ready to accept your data without objection! Is 4 - 500 round? Yes? By the way, almost 5 thousand Kosovo + 000 thousand Serbian. there were refugees. Compare with those 800 thousand. only killed in the 100st war, when NATO did nothing! The conclusion about NATO ending the massacre in the 97nd war is obvious! hi
            2. tihonmarine
              tihonmarine 24 December 2020 16: 32
              -1
              Quote: pytar
              Aha! Exactly when Thunderstorms were bombed! Ops. typo .. Belgrade, Belgrade ...

              I am a Slav, I am a Russian, a guran - and I hate it when the Slavs sing NATO songs.
              1. pytar
                pytar 24 December 2020 17: 56
                +1
                Everyone has the right to ethnic and religious self-determination. Almost half of the world's Slavs are members of NATO. I do not count Croats, Bosnians, Slovenes, Poles, Czechs, etc. less Slavs than Serbs, Russians or Ukrainians for example! You do not have a monopoly over the Slavs, it's time to understand this fact! A demonstrative rejection of a different opinion is your personal problem.
                1. tihonmarine
                  tihonmarine 24 December 2020 19: 28
                  -1
                  Quote: pytar
                  Almost half of the world's Slavs are members of NATO. I do not count Croats, Bosnians, Slovenes, Poles, Czechs, etc. less Slavs than Serbs, Russians or Ukrainians for example!

                  Less is not, all are the same, only now you have to fight among themselves, that's for sure.
                  1. pytar
                    pytar 24 December 2020 20: 02
                    +1
                    ... only now you have to fight among themselves, that's for sure.

                    Where is it? By the way, in history they constantly fought "among themselves". But for the first time they entered a period when they would not have to fight on a big scale. Here and there there will probably be some minor showdowns, but nothing large-scale will be.
                    1. tihonmarine
                      tihonmarine 25 December 2020 00: 06
                      -1
                      Quote: pytar
                      Where is it? By the way, in history they constantly fought "among themselves". But for the first time they entered a period when they would not have to fight on a big scale.

                      It was Hitler who was a gentle man, and did not force you to fight the USSR, and NATO, headed by the states, will make you, like darlings, fight with Russia. Once we entered NATO, then in the Russian proverb "Once you call yourself a load, then climb into the back." By the way, do you have a military rank?
                      1. pytar
                        pytar 25 December 2020 00: 49
                        +1
                        It was Hitler who was a gentle man, and did not make you fight the USSR ...

                        Precisely to call Hitler "soft man" ?! fool The beast on whose conscience millions of tortured and killed! He did not force, but Tsar Boris answered him - "Do you want the entire Bulgarian army to go over to the side of the Russians under the regimental music?" laughing
                        and NATO, led by the states, will make you, like darlings, fight Russia.

                        Ha, ha, ha! Vlad, they made fun! Khoroshenko fool you from the TV! laughing good Why would NATO members attack their cronies, the Russian oligarchs? Both those and those settled so well! What is the point of burning the whole planet and your dear ones into a thermonuclear flame? fool
                      2. tihonmarine
                        tihonmarine 25 December 2020 08: 57
                        -1
                        Quote: pytar
                        Ha, ha, ha! Vlad, they made fun! Khoroshenko fool you from the TV!

                        Excuse me, but I live in another European state, not in Russia, and our TV set is not a fool. So I asked if you have a military rank. If there is, then you "under the hood" will go along with the NATO armies to Russia, and you will not be asked, and there is no such Tsar Boris who will tell you "Do you want the entire Bulgarian army to go over to the side of the Russians under the regimental music?" Hitler could not do this, and in the states you will all stand at attention and go to fight. Then you will remember your "Ha, ha, ha Vlad!" And you won't go, but run shouting "Long live Western democracy and world order."
                        Time has passed, there was friendship, but now the "world order" is above all (we experienced this firsthand from 1941 to May 9, 1945.)
                      3. pytar
                        pytar 25 December 2020 12: 48
                        +1
                        Sorry, but I live in another European country, not in Russia ...

                        I do not know in what state you live, but you write as from a parallel universe. Nothing to do with the real thing.
                      4. tihonmarine
                        tihonmarine 25 December 2020 14: 09
                        -1
                        Quote: pytar
                        I do not know in what state you live, but you write as from a parallel universe. Nothing to do with the real thing.

                        We have one universe, only our paths have parted, you are on one side of the trenches, we are on the other. And you have to live with this, the Russian army defends Russia, and the NATO army defends NATO.
                      5. pytar
                        pytar 25 December 2020 17: 13
                        0
                        We have one universe, only our paths have parted, you are on one side of the trenches, we are on the other.

                        Well, you were the first to go somewhere in the wrong place ... Still go around the circle. request
                        And you have to live with it, Russian army protects Russia, and the NATO army protectt NATO.

                        Keyword "protects"! I'm glad you came to the conclusion that no one is not going to attack! good
                      6. tihonmarine
                        tihonmarine 25 December 2020 18: 55
                        -1
                        Quote: pytar
                        I'm glad you came to the conclusion that no one is going to attack anyone!

                        I'm not sure about that. Nobody will certainly attack you, so why did you join NATO? So you want to attack someone, in collaboration with your comrades.
                      7. pytar
                        pytar 25 December 2020 19: 16
                        0
                        So you want to attack someone, in collaboration with your comrades.

                        From your XNUMXD universe, this is how it looks ...
                        Nobody will certainly attack you, so why did you join NATO?
                        Until the 90s, membership in the Department of Internal Affairs guaranteed our territorial integrity and security. After the collapse of the ego, there was a threat of conflict with Turkey. The Kosovo scenario for Bulgaria was quite realistic. All our neighbors were already in NATO or were going to become members of the Union. There was no alternative. Bulgaria joined NATO 14 years after the collapse of the ATS. Membership gave us a respite, a calm period in which we were able to restore the economy and streamline our affairs.
  • The comment was deleted.
    1. pytar
      pytar 24 December 2020 13: 09
      0
      I hope that the same fate will befall you, the Turks will digest you (we will even support them, in exchange for the straits ...)

      One hopes that the year will be good, plant a garden, trees bloom, people will not get sick! Another hopes that the neighbor's house will burn down and that he will break his legs! People are different, but the ships will reward everyone for an hour according to their merits! yes
  • tatra
    tatra 23 December 2020 23: 26
    +1
    The enemies of the communists in the West, in Europe, on the territory of the USSR, declared the Bolshevik-Communists criminals before the Soviet people, and the USSR as the world "Evil Empire". At the same time, the Soviet government did not unleash a single war, and the enemies of the Soviet government unleashed the Civil after the October Revolution, and attacked the Soviet people in 1941, fought wars on the territory of the USSR in the 30s, and in the 50s, and after seizure of the republics of the USSR, they began to unleash wars against each other. And the external enemies of Soviet power for 103 years after the October Revolution unleashed dozens of wars in the world.
    1. Cherry Nine
      Cherry Nine 24 December 2020 04: 38
      +2
      Quote: tatra
      At the same time, the Soviet government did not unleash a single war.

      SHSHTO?
      Quote: tatra
      enemies of the Soviet government and unleashed the Civil after the October Revolution

      How interesting. How did it happen that the enemies of the Soviet regime, controlling the Constituent Assembly, the Provisional Government and the army, unleashed a civil war? Who, ask, did they fight with?
      Quote: tatra
      And the external enemies of Soviet power for 103 years after the October Revolution unleashed dozens of wars in the world.

      When they talk about the peace-loving communists, I like most of all to remember the relationship between the Chinese, Vietnamese and Cambodian comrades. Just butter to the heart.

      The only thing that is good and absolutely correct in the communists is the attitude towards other communists.
      1. apro
        apro 24 December 2020 04: 41
        +1
        Quote: Cherry Nine
        Quote: tatra
        At the same time, the Soviet government did not unleash a single war.

        SHSHTO?

        Prizes for the studio ... and for more details ...
        1. Cherry Nine
          Cherry Nine 24 December 2020 04: 43
          0
          What is more detailed? Can you list all the fornication that the Soviet government got into?
          1. apro
            apro 24 December 2020 04: 49
            +1
            Quote: Cherry Nine
            What is more detailed? Can you list all the fornication that the Soviet government got into?

            Especially the ones she untied ...
            1. Cherry Nine
              Cherry Nine 24 December 2020 05: 20
              0
              It's quite tedious, to be honest.

              In order not to be distracted by common places. Please tell us how it happened that a few hours after the signing of the second act of surrender of Germany (in Karlshorst), the USSR attacked Denmark? Fought little or what?
              1. apro
                apro 24 December 2020 05: 45
                0
                Quote: Cherry Nine
                To be honest, it's pretty boring

                Well then, rest ...
              2. tihonmarine
                tihonmarine 24 December 2020 13: 23
                0
                Quote: Cherry Nine
                It's quite tedious, to be honest.

                Go to Ukrainian sites, they will understand you. It's good to celebrate Catholic Christmas.
                1. Cherry Nine
                  Cherry Nine 24 December 2020 13: 37
                  0
                  Quote: tihonmarine
                  It's good to celebrate Catholic Christmas.

                  Thank you.
                  1. tihonmarine
                    tihonmarine 24 December 2020 14: 12
                    0
                    Quote: Cherry Nine
                    Thank you.

                    Well, you see, we have found a consensus, I have been raising my glass since yesterday evening.
    2. Evgeny Goncharov (smoogg)
      Evgeny Goncharov (smoogg) 24 December 2020 07: 34
      0
      I took a screenshot, stylistically - the standard.
    3. tihonmarine
      tihonmarine 24 December 2020 13: 20
      0
      Quote: tatra
      And the external enemies of Soviet power for 103 years after the October Revolution unleashed dozens of wars in the world.

      And now they continue to untie.
  • Basarev
    Basarev 24 December 2020 00: 06
    +1
    It's simple. By that time, there was an unspoken consensus in the West: the United States, as the leader of a unipolar world, can do anything. The superpower status removed the state from under international law, elevated it above it. That is why both Germany and Japan fought for superpower. It was for this that the Second World War was actually unleashed. The superpower differs from other countries in that it has overcome all restrictions and the only restraining factor is only its own peacefulness, or rather, in whose side the scales are tilted - the party of war or peace. It is now fashionable to scold the States, but the superpower of the USSR could also technically bomb anyone. But, firstly, the United States interfered, and secondly, it did not fit into Soviet policy. I suspect that if the USSR had won the Cold War, it would also have staged a magnificent celebration of the victory over the United States, the overthrow of the last obstacle. And he would also start bombing all those who disagree. There is no difference. A superpower cannot have any other foreign policy than hegemonism. If the superpower does not lord, rewarding and condemning only along the line of the party and at its own discretion, it will cease to be taken seriously. So the behavior of the States is completely natural. They could not help but bomb Yugoslavia. After the collapse of the USSR, it was extremely important for them to stop the fit of peacefulness, for which they needed to model the country more threateningly, away from themselves personally and closer to their NATO friends. Yugoslavia was perfect for this role. As they say, beat strangers so that your own people are afraid.
    1. tihonmarine
      tihonmarine 24 December 2020 01: 59
      -1
      Quote: Basarev
      Yugoslavia was perfect for this role. As they say, beat strangers so that your own people are afraid.

      Everything is something like this.
  • iouris
    iouris 24 December 2020 01: 03
    +4
    There is no USSR - there are no norms and laws. Don't get it yet? Well, then wait: they will fly to you.
  • Cherry Nine
    Cherry Nine 24 December 2020 05: 07
    +3
    How cute.
    One of the main achievements of mankind in the twentieth century, the most powerful proof that it learned the lessons of the Second World War, was the creation of the United Nations.


    The UN was created by people who hated America and hated freedom. Hull. Stettinius, Byrnes, Roosevelt. Many countries have committed heinous crimes in the twentieth century, and the UN is undoubtedly one of the main crimes of the US authorities. First of all, against their own people, although people all over the world became victims of the UN.
    According to the idea of ​​its founders, it was this structure that was supposed to put an end to the domination of the “right of the strong” over moral, ethical and legal principles, habitual for our world.

    As conceived by its founders, listed above, the UN was supposed to become something like the current EU, in which national governments are subordinate to not elected bureaucrats, in the person of these very founders. The post of UN Secretary General was personally designated by Roosevelt.
    the true guarantor of peace on a planet that did not know large-scale armed conflicts almost until the end of the twentieth century was not the Security Council, but the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.

    This is enchantingly funny, given the fact that immediately after WWII the USSR, with the hands of his red friends, began to cut one of the winners, so to speak, - China. In the course of the process, about 5 million Chinese were doubled.

    The next victim of international peacefulness was Korea, where - another joke - somehow the position of the USSR and the position of the UN Security Council did not coincide.
    having proved to the whole world that "international law", which they have always loved and still love to refer to, is in reality nothing more than an empty phrase for him.

    Yes.
    After the collapse of the USSR, the effectiveness of the UN was called into question.

    The UN has never been effective. The UN, in its sane part, was nothing more than a dispute settlement mechanism, an alternative to proxy war. When the disputing parties had a desire, they used it; when they did not have it, they fought.
    after all, being a permanent member of the Security Council as the successor to the USSR, Russia, as well as China, resolutely blocked any inclinations of this kind.

    Which is a reminder that in 92 the UN needed to be dispersed, and the diplomatic recognition of the PRC, which Nixon paid for Johnson's Vietnam adventure, should be revised. Unfortunately, Clinton hated America almost as much as Roosevelt, a common trait among Democrats.
    Therefore, I will try, albeit briefly, to list specific international legal regulations

    Waste paper.
    The infliction of missile and bomb strikes on civilian targets and the civilian population, as well as the destruction of objects related to cultural heritage by the Alliance's aircraft, put its warrior on the same level as the Nazis.

    Yes, yes, yes, it's as much as necessary. The warriors of the alliance, much later than Yugoslavia, could also completely erase cities with artillery from the face of the earth, like the Red Army in East Prussia, this is generally not interesting to anyone.
    International, military, humanitarian law - all of them, one might say, were blown to shreds by NATO bombings in 1999.

    There and the road. Hypocrisy is always disgusting, however, even cruel, it is always good.

    But, alas, this is an exaggeration. The hypocrisy has not gone anywhere, it is necessary - it is remembered, it is not necessary - it is forgotten.
    the measure of the security of a state was, in fact, the degree of its loyalty and obedience to NATO, and, first of all, to the United States.

    If only so! The example of at least Georgia has shown that this does not guarantee anything to anyone. The Americans are just trying to be a master for the world, but they are not too eager to fit in, and if they fit in, then more often where they only make things worse.
    Will there ever be a trial of his true culprits, who feel great today? The question is still open ...

    What does "open" mean? The ICTY is doing great. Those responsible for all the problems of Yugoslavia in the 90s have long been identified, these are the Serbian authorities, only the details are being specified.
    1. tihonmarine
      tihonmarine 24 December 2020 13: 26
      0
      Quote: Cherry Nine
      Those responsible for all the problems of Yugoslavia in the 90s have long been identified, these are the Serbian authorities, only the details are being specified.
      The Special Court for Kosovo, part of the UN International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia in The Hague, has arrested the former president of the partially recognized state of Kosovo, Hashim Thaci.

      Further comments are unnecessary.
      1. Cherry Nine
        Cherry Nine 24 December 2020 13: 38
        +1
        Quote: tihonmarine
        arrested the former president of the partially recognized state of Kosovo, Hashim Thaci.

        )))
        Whether the Serbs are good or bad, but they can also fly in for the drug trade, yes.
  • tralflot1832
    tralflot1832 24 December 2020 09: 44
    0
    Guys, maybe enough to fight from the sofas! New Year is on the nose! Let's remember that 19 years of rats brought us, except for covid For a year we all got older, and someone approached the grave! drinks
    1. tihonmarine
      tihonmarine 24 December 2020 13: 30
      +1
      Quote: tralflot1832
      New Year on the nose!

      Today is Catholic Christmas, as Zadornov said, "It is a holy cause for an Orthodox person to drink to a Catholic Christmas!"
  • nikvic46
    nikvic46 24 December 2020 10: 22
    +1
    When Primakov interrupted his flight to America. Our people supported him, but this act did not suit everyone. Strong countries write laws for the weak; they themselves do not follow them. Unhappy Yugoslavia. Not only was it torn to pieces, but also bombed.
    1. iouris
      iouris 24 December 2020 13: 18
      0
      To tear apart, it took a bomb. This is just for clarity.
  • Mmm.
    Mmm. 25 December 2020 10: 04
    0
    Very good article, thanks to Alexander Kharaluzhny
  • ArtA777
    ArtA777 25 February 2021 19: 30
    0
    here Russia once again abandoned its allies