Military Review

NATO: each member will go their way

74
At the beginning of May, Mr. Anders Fogh Rasmussen, NATO Secretary General, speaking at a hearing in the European Parliament’s Foreign Policy and Security Committee, made it clear to Europe that talking about strengthening the military capabilities of the European Union would remain “just a shaking out of air” defense. However, as shown by numerous sociological polls, the most important enemy of the EU is “internal” (© Kuprin), hiding behind “tolerance” and “multiculturalism”. NATO is not at war with such enemies; NATO give enemy external. The only trouble is that no one attacks the EU countries participating in the alliance. Therefore, it seems that Mr. Rasmussen is saying what he was ordered to say at the White House.


As transmits correspondent ITAR-TASS Denis Dubrovin, 6 May Rasmussen said that in order to be “an international player, not a fan,” the EU must expand its budget for defense. “We,” he noted, “need better and more fully support our allies in the United States.” That gave the open secret Mr. Rasmussen.

Further, the NATO Secretary General called on the Europeans "not to dwell on budget problems." It is also clear where the wind is blowing from. We need to support the Americans: they also have a crisis, why should Washington alone pay for the general plans of the West?

Rasmussen said: “We are obliged to provide our citizens and taxpayers with the most reliable security that money can buy.”

It’s fair, if only you believe that some “Bolsheviks” are about to invade Mother Europe, starting, say, with a tidbit of the Baltic, which has only three tank.

Rasmussen, reminds correspondent. ITAR-TASS, almost word for word, voiced Washington’s claims on the European allies, from whom he seeks to increase defense spending.

Is it because Washington "sticks" to Europe, that he has the military capabilities (sorry, defense) have become more modest than they were before? US military spending fell by 6%, amounting to 682 billion dollars in the current fiscal year. As M. Shavlokhova and A. Rezchikov ("Sight"), referring to The New York Times, for the war in Libya, the United States supplied ammunition and anti-aircraft missiles, and drones, fighters, refueling planes were sent to assist the allies, and now in Mali they only help UAVs, transport planes and aircraft- refuelers. Experts doubt that in the next two years Britain and France will even take part in one such operation. Today, both countries are trying to preserve the forces of nuclear deterrence, and indeed the armed forces. In the UK, everything is so bad that American politicians are urging London to abandon the means of nuclear deterrence, the maintenance of which is rather expensive.

The threat from Russia today is considered by many to be far-fetched. Why do we need the North Atlantic Alliance? Perhaps the United States - by itself, Western Europe - by itself?

As the unnamed high-ranking American statesman told the newspaper, Washington seeks partnership in the Middle East and Asia, since “Europe’s decision to reduce defense spending means more and more that it cannot take care of itself and therefore cannot be a valuable partner ". Why does America need a “not valuable” partner?

“If NATO does not act outside, it will have absolutely nothing to do,” said James Goldgeier, dean of the International Service School of the American University in Washington. “He can no longer appeal to the threat from Russia, because it is an unreal threat.”

As analysts remind, with the exception of three countries - the UK, Germany and France - no one in NATO fulfills its obligations to keep military budgets at the level of 2% of GDP. Defense spending in the EU averages 1,6% of national GDP, compared with 5% in the United States. In 2011, the EU countries spent about 180 billion euros on defense in total. Five years ago, the amount was over 200 billion euros.

"Reduced" today, all European countries. London, M. Shavlokhova and A. Rezchikov write, supposes to cut military expenditures by 2015 by 8% compared to the current year; Paris only this year plans to reduce the military budget by 3%; crisis Spain has already cut its military budget three times since 2008, it has been cut by a quarter over the past four years, and a plan to reorganize the armed forces by as much as 13 years ahead has been prepared for further cost reductions. In 2010, Italy cut the defense budget by 10%, and this year military spending will be further cut. The Netherlands, by the end of 2015, intends to reduce the military budget by 13% compared to the current one. Yes, and the EU locomotive - Germany - has cut military spending by about 10 billion dollars.

The scientific director of the German-Russian Forum, Alexander Rahr, reminded the newspaper Vzglyad that Mr. Rassmussen had earlier urged EU members to increase their contributions to the NATO budget, but in vain. Against the background of the escalating financial crisis, the Secretary General’s calls for money will not be even more heard.

As Rar recalled, some European politicians believe that what is happening in the Middle East will in no way affect the European Union. “We are seeing a reduction in funding. Do not increase the cost of the army. In Germany, the army is disarming, the Bundeswehr is almost gone, ”the political analyst said.

Sergey Vasilenkov (Pravda.ru) recalls that before speaking on 6 in May, Mr. Rasmussen scared Europe in February at the Munich Security Conference. There he hinted that “Europe’s serious contribution to NATO’s capabilities will underpin the US commitment to NATO.” True, what kind of threat is Europe talking about, the Secretary General did not elaborate.

Indeed, it would be funny if we could add on our own if he had told the Germans about the Russians or the Belarusians preparing the invasion. Once upon a time, the Cold War was beneficial to NATO. Now, even though the White House in the person of Mr. Obama and denies the harsh rhetoric of bygone days, many masters of military budgets greatly miss the bipolar world. If you remember history, the North Atlantic Alliance itself was once created to repel the possible aggression of the Soviet Union. But where is the USSR now? Many years have passed since the dark days of the Bialowieza Agreement. The Soviet Union does not exist, but NATO is still ready to absorb generous percentages of the Euro budget.

S. Vasilenkov recalls that back in 2011, the United States, represented by Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, announced their possible withdrawal from NATO - in the event of a further reduction of the Allied military forces.

Today, the White House is focused on the situation in the Asia-Pacific region. China is very worried about the United States because it spends 7,8% of GDP on its defense.

Therefore, the White House will not allocate the former amount of funds to Europe. Before 2015, Washington intends to withdraw half of the combat groups stationed there from Europe.

Along with this reorientation of the defense policy, the economic crisis in Europe contributes to the weakening of the US-EU allied relations. The latter reduces financial participation in the North Atlantic Alliance also because S. Vasilenkov notes that it is starting to reorient itself toward its own military equipment, independent of NATO.

As for the United States, they are dissatisfied with the growing influence of the European Union in the military sphere. On relations inside NATO in October 2011, then Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said that an understanding of the critical point of defense partnership emerged in both the United States and Europe.

In general, the trend of modern times can be described as follows: European statesmen are extremely reluctant to finance Washington’s aggressive ambitions, which manifest themselves in different parts of the world.

Thus, Secretary General Rasmussen delivers ardent speeches one after another to the glory of NATO, concluding with their constant theses on the necessary support of the USA and, of course, on ensuring European citizens "with the most reliable security you can buy for money", but Europe lost that image of an external enemy , which was once conveniently represented by the communists from the USSR: the latter, it seemed, were about to wrap up footcloths, put on kirzacs, hang on the neck of the PCA or the Kalashnikovs and crush the peace-loving members of NATO into powder. The current European taxpayers, to whom their rulers periodically listen (especially before the elections), are much more concerned about the financial crisis, unemployment and social instability than the military budget interests of Mr. Rasmussen and his bosses from Washington. The last two years ago, they began to draw a bold cross on future NATO programs. Therefore, it is possible that the Libyan operation was the last major military campaign of the North Atlantic Alliance.

Observed and commented on Oleg Chuvakin
- especially for topwar.ru
74 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Denis
    Denis 16 May 2013 07: 23 New
    13
    my dear
    Is it in the language of diplomats in ...?
    Then, at least in different ways, at least in order!
    1. pensioner
      pensioner 16 May 2013 07: 38 New
      +2
      Quote: Denis
      Is it in the language of diplomats in ...?

      There, there. Well, and sooooo there too.
      1. Asgard
        Asgard 16 May 2013 07: 52 New
        +8
        On a simple about the members of Nato))) it is written go tries ...)))
        warriors damn it ...
      2. Vldmr
        Vldmr 17 May 2013 20: 26 New
        0
        Each louse has its own path :))) NATO does not meet its goal. The USSR has long been gone, but NATO remains. She does not already answer her historical mission. There is no external enemy for whom it was created, that’s all the problems, the interests of a handful of NATO bureaucrats who hold on to their feeding trough remain.
    2. Krasnodar
      Krasnodar 16 May 2013 11: 09 New
      +7
      Members go their own way - this means that the pi ... ry, who are more and more there, do not want to join the army. Soon there will be no normal soldiers there. And if you recall the story, then the Roman legions as a whole ended badly ... wink (again ambiguity, so is it))
      1. Denis
        Denis 17 May 2013 09: 35 New
        +1
        Quote: Krasnodar
        Roman legions generally ended badly
        Especially considering the fact that in Roman legions often a mentor steepled a mentee. No, not for the sake of some sort of sekis, so they strengthened the military brotherhood
        Now the geyropa is fastening with might and main
    3. Geisenberg
      Geisenberg 16 May 2013 12: 13 New
      +5
      Quote: Denis
      my dear
      Is it in the language of diplomats in ...?
      Then, at least in different ways, at least in order!


      Shhhhh .... laughing let's just not pay attention to them ... then they will start to cry and completely fall apart.
  2. aszzz888
    aszzz888 16 May 2013 07: 29 New
    +4
    They will not ask for loot, who will need them later.
    So Rasmussen is being exiled, by luring greens into his contents.
    1. GELEZNII_KAPUT
      GELEZNII_KAPUT 16 May 2013 09: 22 New
      11
      So the fuck was expanding ... the poor have overtaken! belay
  3. pensioner
    pensioner 16 May 2013 07: 30 New
    10
    "Bolsheviks" are about to invade Mother Europe, starting, say, with a tidbit of the Baltic, which has only three tanks.



    Duc we Toko because of the tanks. They themselves have few. Sp..i..dim both three and back ... no one will notice.
    1. Seraph
      Seraph 16 May 2013 08: 25 New
      16
      What for us T-34 without engines? And even piglets are afraid to give their sprats. It’s better not to touch the Baltic states, stink less
      1. Denis
        Denis 17 May 2013 09: 38 New
        +1
        Quote: Seraphim
        What for us T-34 without engines?
        Two Estonian T-55s drive almost themselves, they threaten
    2. Denis
      Denis 21 May 2013 14: 49 New
      +1
      But Peter will never forgive these rat pups.
  4. shinobi
    shinobi 16 May 2013 07: 33 New
    20
    08.08.08 amers drained Sahak, and they couldn’t drain it, they showed Europe what their promise of protection really stands for. If you are valuable from the point of view of the US economy, then yes, if not, then I'm sorry. We are thinking. As they say nothing personal. Just a business.
    1. Dimy4
      Dimy4 16 May 2013 22: 25 New
      +1
      And they basically had no choice either to merge or to butt with us. And this, as you know, is a completely different level.
  5. pensioner
    pensioner 16 May 2013 07: 35 New
    +7
    Mr. Rasmussen scared Europe in February at the Munich Security Conference. There he hinted that "Europe’s serious contribution to NATO’s capabilities will reinforce US commitments to NATO." True, the Secretary General did not specify what kind of threat is being discussed for Europe.

    Thus, Secretary General Rasmussen makes ardent speeches one after another for the glory of NATO, completing them with constant theses on the necessary support for the United States and, of course, on providing European citizens with “the most reliable security that money can buy”


    Conscience go buy yourself for a start. Money will remain - buy dignity. How much money is enough.
  6. JIaIIoTb
    JIaIIoTb 16 May 2013 07: 38 New
    +5
    Everything seems to be correct .... but somehow it reminds me of the rhetoric before the invasion of Iraq.
    No matter how we are again hung noodles on the ears, like we are not up to you with your Syria.
  7. Dima190579
    Dima190579 16 May 2013 07: 45 New
    +3
    They will share military property as after the collapse of the USSR. Oh, the weapons will spread to the hot spots and after many years they will again shoot the movie "The Arms Harrow" bully I wonder who will play a major role in this film.
  8. Vanek
    Vanek 16 May 2013 07: 45 New
    17
    There is no sadder story in the world than a story about ears and spaghetti.
  9. Landwarrior
    Landwarrior 16 May 2013 07: 47 New
    10
    It was thought here ... It would be easier to agree with NATO without the USA, so to speak, "in the neighborhood" wink Or maybe in the future, and take the place of amers lol
    But if the United States leaves and NATO falls apart, then geopolitical games of about the same scale will begin as after the collapse of the Warsaw Treaty. First of all, the mass will come out among the countries of the European Union, since the NATO structure "cements" them a little bit, "extinguishes" the most sharp contradictions. And if there is no "cement" - "old grievances" will emerge, and there ... In general, there will be a lot of prospects with the creation of new blocks ....
    But only the increase in the number of Muslims in Europe in general and in NATO countries in particular does not cause optimism.
    It turned out messy and confused. I don’t know if the main idea was conveyed. Do not judge strictly, it's just a "brainstorm. hi
    1. ale-x
      ale-x 16 May 2013 08: 27 New
      +4
      Done. Nobody, I think, will agree only with them, the majority have nothing but holes in the budget, and those who have money and intentions will stick together.
      1. Roman96
        Roman96 16 May 2013 09: 38 New
        +1
        There will remain a couple of three countries with normal weapons and the rest will slide into the Stone Age.
        1. Egoza
          Egoza 16 May 2013 17: 34 New
          +1
          Quote: Roman96
          Here are a couple of three countries with normal weapons

          If you mean European countries, what do you think, will they sit still, knowing that the neighbors have practically no army? And where will their "peacefulness and democracy" go?
      2. prophet190
        prophet190 16 May 2013 16: 13 New
        0
        Similarly, generally Europeans are slippery guys, at least their politicians.
    2. Kars
      Kars 16 May 2013 11: 21 New
      +2
      Quote: Landwarrior
      NATO will fall apart - then geopolitical games of about this scale will begin

      NATO will not collapse, but will be divided and transformed into a pan-European collective security system. The EU will have not only a common constitution, but also an army.
      1. Landwarrior
        Landwarrior 16 May 2013 14: 22 New
        +2
        Quote: Kars
        NATO will not collapse, but will be divided and transformed into a pan-European collective security system. The EU will have not only a common constitution, but also an army.

        Even if so, it will be easier for Europe itself. Yes, and Russia, too. But the scope for the geopolitical game will still be great wink
    3. Denis
      Denis 16 May 2013 14: 32 New
      +1
      Quote: Landwarrior
      But the only increase in the number of Muslims in Europe in general
      Pozdnyak, the geyropa has already laid down under them
    4. Mikhail3
      Mikhail3 16 May 2013 21: 50 New
      +1
      Yes, in general, everything was well laid out. The situation that has arisen for all of them is not too ah ... Look, we are pulled literally behind the floor. They even organized a funny performance with North Korea. Oh and rzhaka there was, agree. Korea "menacingly" roared, the SGA "fearfully shrunk." All around are hints, articles of "experts", provocations that turn into a playful nibble ... Like, let's go! Why are you shy! Already attack someone, occupy something, show the yearning world the brutal Russian face!
      Then it will be possible to return with pleasure to a sweet confrontation - Russia growls menacingly, all the others carefully scare and generously pay for weapons. And they still do not fight with each other, bankers do not become impudent, proletarians do not fly to solid drug addicts, etc. etc. Fuck you guys in the bag. You will disentangle yourself.
      To save their economies from systemic degradation, and peoples from universal degeneration, the West presents no other way but wars. Therefore there will be wars. Fighter.
      Just let all this shopper fight with each other! We have nothing to interfere with this, that's enough, we already got fed up with a hangover at someone else's feast. This time we will only end the war. Stop. And do not fight for other people's tsatski themselves.
  10. Alexander Romanov
    Alexander Romanov 16 May 2013 07: 58 New
    11
    Therefore, it seems that Mr. Rasmussen says what he was ordered to say in the White House.
    Well, they didn’t order, but the fact that they wrote a piece of paper there is a fact hi

    Rasmussen said: “We are obliged to provide our citizens and taxpayers with the most reliable security that money can buy.”
    It is clear that they will build concentration camps and prisons, only there each taxpayer will be guaranteed complete security laughing

    because "the decision of Europe to reduce defense spending more and more means that it cannot take care of itself, and therefore cannot be a valuable partner."
    If the partner does not have a gun, then this is no longer a partner, but a six, although Europe is the United States six, even with a gun, even without it.

    As Rahr recalled, some European politicians believe that what is happening in the Middle East will not affect the European Union in any way.
    This is not politics, it's stupid rams !!!

    On relations within NATO in October 2011, then-Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta said that both the United States and Europe had an understanding of the critical point of partnership in the defense sector.
    Those wishing to die for democracy are becoming less and less, because the United States is betting on Islamist scumbags. They stand just nothing and stupid to impossible.

    . Therefore, it is possible that the Libyan operation was the last major military campaign of the North Atlantic Alliance.

    Hi Oleg! Your words to God in the ears. Only now they are fighting with the wrong hands, headed by bad heads dreaming of re-creating their empires hi
    1. ale-x
      ale-x 16 May 2013 08: 29 New
      +2
      "There are less and less people who want to die for democracy, because the United States is betting on the scumbags of the Islamists. They can’t stand anything and are stupid.

      So we changed the "partner" to the "six" .....
    2. Mart
      16 May 2013 09: 00 New
      +3
      Quote: Alexander Romanov
      Hello Oleg! Your words yes to God in the ears.

      Hi Sasha! There and addressed. smile
    3. nickname 1 and 2
      nickname 1 and 2 16 May 2013 10: 38 New
      +3
      Quote: Alexander Romanov
      Only now they are fighting with the wrong hands, headed by bad heads dreaming of re-creating their empires


      and I have the same opinions! Hard to believe! Very sweet speeches, too fast what was so expected, so wanted to be true.
      It does not happen.
      Rather, small internal friction - where it does not happen, is taken for significant problems.
      God grant that this splinter causes gangrene!
      And on the other hand = a holy place doesn’t happen to be empty, what forces will come out, and how they “come around”!
      1. redwar6
        redwar6 16 May 2013 23: 17 New
        0
        Most likely quietly preparing an army, or vice versa, peace, friendship, love, geyropa.
  11. cyclist
    cyclist 16 May 2013 08: 01 New
    +4
    "Reduced" today, all European countries. London, M. Shavlokhova and A. Rezchikov write, supposes to cut military expenditures by 2015 by 8% compared to the current year; Paris only this year plans to reduce the military budget by 3%; crisis Spain has already cut its military budget three times since 2008, it has been cut by a quarter over the past four years, and a plan to reorganize the armed forces by as much as 13 years ahead has been prepared for further cost reductions. In 2010, Italy cut the defense budget by 10%, and this year military spending will be further cut. The Netherlands, by the end of 2015, intends to reduce the military budget by 13% compared to the current one. Yes, and the EU locomotive - Germany - has cut military spending by about 10 billion dollars.

    participation in the adventures of the USA, the EU becomes unprofitable and loses all meaning, and Russia is increasingly striving for mutually beneficial cooperation with Europe and does not threaten it; rather, it takes a wait and see attitude towards the European bloc
  12. arkady149
    arkady149 16 May 2013 08: 23 New
    +7
    Oleg, thanks for the review. Don’t say that Russia and the USSR remain in a ring of hostility, only the situation of Russia is somewhat worse — the former “friends, having ceased to be the fifth column” became strategic rivals, and the inner fifth column did not disappear, and the demilitarization of our NATO partners is no reason to disarm ourselves, that liberalists would not bleat on this subject IMHO.
    1. shark
      shark 16 May 2013 09: 01 New
      +5
      I agree completely. If you want peace, get ready for war!
      1. redwar6
        redwar6 16 May 2013 23: 18 New
        0
        I agree. hi Nowadays, this is very helpful.
  13. timhelmet
    timhelmet 16 May 2013 08: 36 New
    +5
    The Europeans got into a conversation. Not your enemy in the person of the USSR. You don’t have money from the USA. Neither do you crusades east.
    One plus: the influx of Asian migrants. tongue
    1. omsbon
      omsbon 16 May 2013 09: 01 New
      +5
      Quote: timhelmet
      One plus: the influx of Asian migrants.

      The problem is not only Asian, but also African migrants so that the front of hostilities at NATO is planned not external, but internal!
  14. Denis_SF
    Denis_SF 16 May 2013 08: 40 New
    +5
    We, he said, need to better and more fully support our allies in the United States

    The US needs NATO, they have always lived by the principle: “You always need to work together with others. This will allow the adversary to shoot someone other than you.” Europe, then all these democratically-bearing wars why I do not understand? What dividends besides a fucking stream of refugees from everywhere? Take the same Libya, lovers of fast food with their own hands roots (oil) will rake in, and tops of Europe (refugees, migrants, Islamists at hand and other pleasures; well, only Sarkozy has canceled his debt receipt - one plus). Some kind of fool theater ..
    1. pensioner
      pensioner 16 May 2013 08: 52 New
      +2
      Quote: Denis_SF
      Well, only Sarkozy has canceled his debt receipt - one plus)

      Is not a fact. The proceedings on this are yet to come. He has accumulated a lot of sins. Started with small ones.
    2. redwar6
      redwar6 16 May 2013 23: 22 New
      0
      “You always need to work together with others. This will allow the adversary to shoot someone other than you.”For me it’s necessary to add: “And then enter the war and quickly finish off the uninhabited, take all the glory for yourself.”
  15. zambo
    zambo 16 May 2013 08: 58 New
    +2
    In any case, Russia is only in the black: the reduction of NATO budgets, and the mutual rat bites of Western allies. All they need to do is drool, which they do very well ...
  16. Reserve buildbat
    Reserve buildbat 16 May 2013 09: 01 New
    +7
    We'll see. It will be nice to see how all these nato members crawl in different directions like rats from a sinking ship. And so already superfluous 20 years to the block wound.
  17. Vrungel78
    Vrungel78 16 May 2013 09: 11 New
    +3
    NATO: each member will go their way
    Each member will remain in his underpants.
    1. Denis
      Denis 16 May 2013 14: 39 New
      +2
      Quote: Vrungel78
      Each member will remain in his underpants.
      Some on a stranger, the one in his underpants, will be asked back
    2. pensioner
      pensioner 16 May 2013 14: 44 New
      0
      Quote: Vrungel78
      Each member will remain in his underpants.

      Hmm ... And if "COUNTRY is a NATO member"? What will remain there? The brain can be broken ...
  18. Stiletto
    Stiletto 16 May 2013 09: 12 New
    +2
    Quote: Asgard
    On a simple about the members of Nato))) it is written go tries ...)))


    This is not politically correct! Well, just - "go on foot erotic journey."
  19. individual
    individual 16 May 2013 09: 13 New
    +1
    A simple alignment of overlords - a vassal is indicated here.
    USA acts, mongrel support. Best of all, they get this support often and bark a lot. And they’re good at “rattling”. First around the world (an example of loans for their elections in the Maghreb countries and the subsequent destruction of the donor). Then whining to Syria in an attempt to establish a government pleasing to them.
    Then they encroached on the holy. The crisis, and it is difficult for them to maintain their aggressive armies, and the Maghreb is already over. So they got accustomed to rattle at the overlord’s war, and just in case, a hot case.
    The US is tired of it and calls have been made to increase budgets for their European independent, sovereign defense. The Euro of NATO is not so used here and confusion and reels have gone.
    The doctrine of the late USSR, and then the Russian leadership on the abolition of NATO, as a military structure, prevails a real chance of success. But not all spears are broken yet. History will tolerate and we will "wait."
  20. Roman96
    Roman96 16 May 2013 09: 42 New
    +2
    Recently I read in the news about nationalism the opposite in France (before immigrants were accepted). Most likely, the rest of NATO members will expect the same thing. Hence the collapse.
  21. Speedy
    Speedy 16 May 2013 10: 03 New
    +8
    The Baltic states ALREADY THREE tanks !!! Join the arms race!
    1. Torang
      Torang 16 May 2013 13: 03 New
      +4
      Now the Dutch will sell the latter and become a rotten shadow of the Baltic tank armada ...
      1. knn54
        knn54 16 May 2013 15: 28 New
        +1
        Torang: Now the Dutch will sell the latter ...
        What is missing on the monument to the "giggling boy"?
    2. Denis
      Denis 16 May 2013 14: 46 New
      +4
      Quote: Sorrow
      The Baltic states ALREADY THREE tanks !!! Join the arms race!
      This peaceful US power, as the three got as it is. Do not build up arms. Only yap
    3. redwar6
      redwar6 16 May 2013 23: 28 New
      0
      I am under the table laughing
      They will catch up with Zimbabwe at such a pace!
      1. Denis
        Denis 17 May 2013 09: 16 New
        +1
        Quote: redwar6
        They will catch up with Zimbabwe at such a pace!
        This is unlikely. The Zimbabwean show-offs are cooler, they can’t be surpassed. One of their space programs is worth it. They wanted the third astronaut after the USSR and the USA to be theirs. They just didn’t give the damned racists who settled in the world community
  22. Landwarrior
    Landwarrior 16 May 2013 10: 28 New
    +4
    Here it was recalled - at one time the Yankees tried to create in Southeast Asia a kind of NATO called SEATO.
    It existed from 1959 to 1977. Then it dissolved itself, because the Yankees left Vietnam.
    So direct historical analogies are drawn lol
  23. individual
    individual 16 May 2013 10: 47 New
    +4
    Quote:
    "NATO: each member will go his own way."


    Achievement of NATO science: "their" members "already go."
  24. Prapor Afonya
    Prapor Afonya 16 May 2013 11: 01 New
    +2
    Yeah, Europe was blown away, for her it will end badly, and after it with America laughing
  25. seller trucks
    seller trucks 16 May 2013 11: 32 New
    +5
    What a bummer about Ukrainian European integrators and NATO accession, the EU did not take, if the Alliance for their own money, and take de pennies?
    1. Denis
      Denis 16 May 2013 14: 52 New
      +1
      Quote: seller trucks
      take pennies?
      In the one that rhyme
      There they take how many people on the tracks ...
    2. Seraph
      Seraph 16 May 2013 17: 16 New
      +1
      Georgia, by the way, has the same "bummer-s." Everything from them is sharpened for alliance and partnership with grantors, and they will be sent in the near future. They will cook in GUAM and steam wine, lard and rusty trunks to each other
  26. Eugen
    Eugen 16 May 2013 11: 43 New
    +4
    The only normal decision that the countries of Europe can take is to pursue an independent policy for each, sending the EU and NATO to hell. One should think about one’s people (good, the problems of internal darkness), and not about the welfare of the United States, as the owner of NATO and the ephemeral "world community."
  27. sichevik
    sichevik 16 May 2013 11: 46 New
    +3
    I understand so, if you want in kind give payment. That is, now to join, you need to have more money. Otherwise, you have nothing to do in the alliance.
    No one there will not help you with money. The ball is over.
    1. seller trucks
      seller trucks 16 May 2013 12: 41 New
      +2
      I am tormented by vague ones that the states will not stop at nothing in their struggle for their hegemony and that the “Arab spring” would be conceived, but no, they stumbled over Syria. This suggests that on the Syrian issue, the GDP policy of 100% is correct. An interesting thing will happen when Israel is left face to face with the Arabs, they will sweep them to a single hairdryer
  28. Larus
    Larus 16 May 2013 12: 35 New
    +2
    The West will soon finally decay, parasitic for another 20 years at the expense of the former socialist countries and still fall apart as such into several estates.
    And the triebaltics have not three tanks, but fewer)))
    1. prophet190
      prophet190 16 May 2013 16: 38 New
      +1
      Your thoughts can have very real ground. So in American films of the early 90s about the mafia very little fun of small sponsorship of the police. Everything was shown as if we were decommissioned. I don’t know if it’s a joke, but as they say there is no smoke without fire. So then there was a risk of crisis. They just delayed the inevitable. As they say, the euphoria of the 90s ended, the hangover began.
  29. kind
    kind 16 May 2013 12: 40 New
    +2
    It is time to re-create the USSR, otherwise it is alarming for them there in NATO. They can’t understand what the Russians are up to again !!! laughing
  30. Restor
    Restor 16 May 2013 12: 59 New
    +3
    Membership members are finally beginning to realize that NATO is a vestigial relic of the past, devouring a bunch of dough without much sense.
    If Amer wants to fight, they will collect any coalition of sixes for cannon fodder, including and in Europe.
    Although ... you can wish Rasmussen success in divorcing European suckers. Saw dough they have is such that any Serdyukoff can envy.
  31. Grigorich 1962
    Grigorich 1962 16 May 2013 13: 18 New
    +2
    Nato .... rudiment ... but still unfortunately an effective tool in the hands of American and British politicians. The fact that the members of NATO are quietly reducing their military budget is good .... the flag is in their hands .... but I want to say something else ..... The Russian leadership considers it necessary that any Western proposals beneficial to them be predicted with a counter proposal to eliminate NATO as we did with the Warsaw Treaty. Hothet Obama disarm ... Syrian issues to solve? and we - NATO is not yet disbanded ?? ..... aah ... well, when it starts ... then we will listen to your suggestions. I believe that the time of concessions to the West has long passed ... it's time to dictate our conditions !!!
    1. redwar6
      redwar6 16 May 2013 23: 34 New
      0
      I completely agree, your words would be .. As they say)
  32. Naval
    Naval 16 May 2013 13: 34 New
    +5
    No, this is not pi ... q NATO, the real pi ... q will come after Georgia and Ukraine enter there. This is our secret weapon that NATO does not even suspect. laughing
  33. Black
    Black 16 May 2013 13: 57 New
    +1
    Therefore, it is possible that the Libyan operation was the last major military campaign of the North Atlantic Alliance.

    Early we began to "bury" the troubled West. They created NATO - really to fight the communist USSR, the USSR does not, there is no VD, and NATO is only growing. It is unlikely that serious analysts see a threat from Russia, military companies are now nothing more than a very big business. What, in Brussels, began to listen to the commandments? The golden calf rules and will rule.
    I think all the same for Syria - still ahead, Iran, and so China and I are generally a bone in the throat.
    So, do not flatter yourself.
  34. Slevinst
    Slevinst 16 May 2013 15: 06 New
    +8
    smile and wave, smile and wave
  35. sasha.28blaga
    sasha.28blaga 16 May 2013 15: 11 New
    +1
    Americans and Europeans are not fools, they will not destroy what they themselves have built for their own good, and as time shows, this is really good for them. Most likely, if this is not another duck, there will be some kind of reorganization. Europeans also highly appreciate the geographic location of the “elder brother” and the “old prostitute” in the NATO bloc which gives them a great advantage over other countries. This is no likely direct threat today, and another world war may erupt tomorrow, the makings of which are already visible today.
  36. smershspy
    smershspy 16 May 2013 15: 51 New
    +4
    Quote: sasha.28blaga
    Americans and Europeans are not fools, they will not destroy what they themselves have built for their own good, and as time shows, this is really good for them. Most likely, if this is not another duck, there will be some kind of reorganization. Europeans also highly appreciate the geographic location of the “elder brother” and the “old prostitute” in the NATO bloc which gives them a great advantage over other countries. This is no likely direct threat today, and another world war may erupt tomorrow, the makings of which are already visible today.


    I agree! A war is approaching, which will break out so unexpectedly that sometimes it seems to me that it has already begun! I have the honor!
  37. penguin
    penguin 16 May 2013 16: 15 New
    +1
    here it is like grandmas ended and friendship too. And muslims do not sleep - they multiply day and night. Soon these same members will begin to cut in broad daylight. And as already-Russia help !!!!!!
  38. Seraph
    Seraph 16 May 2013 17: 25 New
    0
    No matter how the Thirty Years War broke out in Europe, with the new rift, Muslim infidels, under which the analysis of old grievances and the construction of borders immediately begin. Current European liberalism is an extreme form of what Mussolini and Hitler gave rise to at one time. So the technology is run in
  39. APASUS
    APASUS 16 May 2013 21: 27 New
    0
    I don’t see the country that could threaten the united Europe in the military sense!
    Rather, countries need to increase funding for domestic issues.
    EUROPE WILL BE RIPPED FROM INSIDE, and this is probably the main threat! Attempts to have fighters for freedom of Syria or Libya as friends will lead to a logical conclusion. You cannot teach all the legitimacy by acting with illegal methods!
  40. Captain45
    Captain45 16 May 2013 21: 47 New
    +1
    “NATO: each member will go his own way”, holding onto a partner’s member. Damn, some kind of polynomial turns out.
  41. Dimy4
    Dimy4 16 May 2013 22: 35 New
    -1
    NATO, in my opinion, is no longer able to fulfill the function for which it was created. And the reason is not that there is no longer the Soviet Union, but because Europe has lost its spirit, that is, what moves a person to act. It can be perfectly armed, crammed with modern technology, but as practice shows, it can only fight with someone who can not fight back for any reason, whether technological or moral. And the conclusion in the article is correct - NATO is doomed to collapse. From myself I repeat, because they do not have a unifying idea.
  42. Containers
    Containers 16 May 2013 22: 59 New
    -1
    Each member will go his own way, but in the end everyone will come to .....
  43. Marconi41
    Marconi41 17 May 2013 04: 35 New
    0
    Indeed, NATO has already “swallowed” quite a bit. Remember, at least a Turkish phantom shot down by the Syrians! Little did the Turks get then "for money"!
  44. DmitryMSK
    DmitryMSK 17 May 2013 07: 20 New
    +1
    So slurp his Mr. in full, may their armies survive. what is ours in the early 90s, because they dug this hole for us. Now let it disentangle yourself! After all, not every army participating in the Nata can get out of such an asshole. At risk are Greece, Spain, the Baltic states and some others. soldier

    In general, I hope you understand my idea))