Military Review

Mediterranean squadron will not remain without shore

47

At the bilateral talks with the Lebanese leadership, the possibility of entering the ships of the Russian Navy to the port of Beirut was discussed. About this with reference to an unnamed diplomatic source told Interfax-AVN. At the same time, the logistics support point of the Navy in the Syrian port of Tartus remains at the disposal of Russia.


“On the possible business visits of Russian ships to the Lebanese Beirut there is an agreement of the two parties. For the recent service of the Baltic ships in this port has already been paid. The visit was made possible due to earlier agreements reached by our ships of Beirut starting this year, ”the agency's interlocutor informed last week. The issue of payment is resolved. “Pilot services, berth rental, the cost of electricity, fresh water and food are paid separately,” the diplomat explained. At the same time, he stressed that it is not a question of abandoning the PTEC in Tartus or searching in the Mediterranean for new bases. “Tartus remains in the same status as the home base of Russian warships. We will be able to continue its full-fledged operation after the normalization of the situation in this country, ”the official said.

Earlier, a military diplomatic source told Interfax-AVN that naval ships due to the escalation of the conflict in Syria instead of the Syrian port of Tartus will have to replenish supplies in the port of Beirut. “The sharp escalation of the armed conflict in Syria and the speculation around the visit by Russian warships of Tartus force us to look for safer ports for their business visits. It is determined that one of these is located in the Lebanese Beirut. The corresponding work is already underway, ”said the agency interlocutor.

At the exercises that the naval forces conducted in January of this year in the Mediterranean, our ships went to Greece, Malta and Tartus to bunker. So, it’s clear that the Mediterranean squadron, which is supposed to appear in these waters on a permanent basis in 2015, will not remain without a coast.
Author:
Originator:
http://nvo.ng.ru/
47 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. klimpopov
    klimpopov 29 August 2013 09: 43 New
    +9
    The sharp escalation of the armed conflict in Syria and speculation around the visit by Russian warships of Tartus force us to look for safer ports for their business calls. It is determined that one of these is in Lebanese Beirut. We are already working on the corresponding work, ”the source said.

    They are not allowed into our ports, we are also forced to look for others.
    Cram into the Mediterranean Sea the most, so that it is crowded.
    And in the Persian Gulf, a couple of AUGs of America are drowned for pro forma.
    Ah dreams ...
    1. Alexander Romanov
      Alexander Romanov 29 August 2013 09: 59 New
      +4
      force us to look for safer ports for their business calls.
      More secure what After a strike on Syria, a Hasbola will freak at Israel.
      1. Vlad 1965
        Vlad 1965 29 August 2013 10: 09 New
        -2
        Dolbanet, rightly so.
        The whole of Bl.Vostok, which has been feverish for a decade from the presence of artificially grown ulcers.
        There is no way to live in peace, so Israel stares at a war like a cockroach when attacked by dichlorvos, what kind of ideology?
        ? There was someone to take an example7
        1. GELEZNII_KAPUT
          GELEZNII_KAPUT 29 August 2013 10: 30 New
          +1
          It seems to me that in the light of the statements that have been made so far, Egypt can fuck up Israel if it engages in the Syrian conflict, at the same time it fights off protest moods, with such an attractive idea for Muslims to destroy Israel! smile
      2. bulvas
        bulvas 30 August 2013 10: 15 New
        +1
        Quote: Alexander Romanov
        , Hasbola fucking in Israel.

        and Israel will have a legitimate reason to clean out hezbola and all the bearded that will be near
    2. DEfindER
      DEfindER 29 August 2013 11: 25 New
      +1
      Quote: klimpopov
      And in the Persian Gulf, a couple of AUGs of America are drowned for pro forma.
      Ah dreams ...

      Drowning is not a problem, the problem is different, the amers will immediately use nuclear weapons against us .. as was the case with Japan after the pearl harbor .. Still, Stalin asked during the Korean War whether we could sink the Amer aircraft carriers, the designer said that it’s elementary, but Minister of Defense Vasilevsky and Beria said that it is absolutely impossible to do this because amers will immediately strike a nuclear strike at Moscow. Actually after this, Soviet air defense began to develop ..
    3. INVESTOR
      INVESTOR 29 August 2013 12: 42 New
      +1
      Interestingly, mattresses would make a similar decision for their fleet ????
  2. domokl
    domokl 29 August 2013 09: 43 New
    0
    Money solves everything. Strategists from Washington broke. And our fellows. You need to solve problems quickly and with as much headache as possible for a potential enemy laughing
  3. Alexey M
    Alexey M 29 August 2013 09: 43 New
    0
    It’s time for the base on the Mediterranean Sea to make the crisis in Europe the time. Yes, you can even land on the base even for the former socialist camp. I think the Hungarians and the Bulgarians would not refuse, but the Greeks would not mind renting a place.
    1. ale-x
      ale-x 29 August 2013 11: 30 New
      +1
      Have mercy. What are the Hungarians, which are the Bulgarians? They are from the USSR that "were friends reluctantly." And now they need to “shake themselves” hard to understand the situation. Their governments are not "about us" now dreaming.
      Sincerely.
    2. zart_arn
      zart_arn 29 August 2013 12: 15 New
      +4
      Learn the geography, Hungarians with Bulgarians on the Mediterranean, the Polish city of Budapest, damn it! laughing
  4. buzuke
    buzuke 29 August 2013 09: 43 New
    +2
    speculations around visiting Russian Tartus warships are forcing us to look for safer ports for their business calls

    what the hell speculation? all the speculators in the garden! but to think about security - that's right, we must strengthen the presence of special forces at the base
  5. Vlad 1965
    Vlad 1965 29 August 2013 09: 44 New
    +3
    For me, Russia, it is vitally necessary to have both a squadron in Sedizemiz, and basing posts.
    Better not one.
    And here I recall CYPRUS, okay there the West warmed up our nouveau riche, robbing dough, but the politicians didn’t have enough mind, since CYPRUS got into the pit, just buy it, with all the consequences, England, robbing for more than a century, it has a base that prevents, prevented Russia, to have a base there, in exchange for help?
    In the world now everything is so that the one who pays dances the "girl"
    1. Papakiko
      Papakiko 29 August 2013 10: 12 New
      +2
      Quote: Vlad 1965
      In the world now everything is so that the one who pays dances the "girl"

      Min Herz forget the more important argument, who is stronger and more prepared who determines the price, girl, time, etc. Even if shaved people pay Cyprus for utility bills and services, and no land for renting land, they will not be asked from Cyprus.
  6. Pit
    Pit 29 August 2013 09: 44 New
    +5
    Tartus remains in its former status - the home base of Russian warships. We will be able to continue its full operation after the normalization of the situation in this country

    Somehow it looks like the fact that our ships will not go to Tartus any time with all those who stick out ...
    1. AK-47
      AK-47 29 August 2013 11: 15 New
      +1
      Tartus remains in its former status - the home base of Russian warships. We will be able to continue its full operation after the normalization of the situation in this country

      The author did not confuse anything.
      ... the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Syrian Arab Republic, Walid Al-Muallim. ... recalled that “back in the days of the USSR, an agreement was signed between Syria and the USSR to provide preferences to those ships that call at the Syrian port and this related to the provision of repair services for these ships. And this does not apply to their deployment.

      ... since then the contract has not been revised.
      1. Pit
        Pit 29 August 2013 11: 45 New
        +2
        Quote: AK-47
        since then the contract has not been revised.

        I would very much hope that it will be so. But at the moment, doubts creep in somehow that they will do everything not to fall face down in the mud and not to lose their poses. The loss of Syria, and hence Tartus will be for us not only a kick in the ass, but also a fall in the face in de ..mo.
  7. The comment was deleted.
  8. Vtel
    Vtel 29 August 2013 09: 47 New
    -1
    At bilateral negotiations with the Lebanese leadership, the possibility of calling the ships of the Russian Navy in the port of Beirut was discussed.

    Urgent to place our squadron in the port of Beirut - Syria is not far away. And underwater hunters run, let the Yankees get nervous.
    1. common man
      common man 29 August 2013 10: 10 New
      +3
      Guys, have we already declared war on America?
      Quote: Vtel
      Urgent to place our squadron in the port of Beirut - Syria is not far away. And underwater hunters run, let the Yankees get nervous.

      You wouldn’t get so excited. It is necessary to help Syria, no one argues. But like this, "... attack the American fleet with our Navy ...". Bust already.
      1. Vtel
        Vtel 29 August 2013 11: 21 New
        0
        No one spoke about the attack, but the presence and assistance in tracking targets will not hurt.
  9. Hudo
    Hudo 29 August 2013 09: 47 New
    +4
    Navy ships due to the escalation of the conflict in Syria instead of the Syrian port of Tartus will have to replenish stocks in the port of Beirut. “The sharp escalation of the armed conflict in Syria and the speculations surrounding the visit by Russian warships of Tartus force us to look for safer ports for their business calls.

    And really! Nonsense that the lap belt cannot be tightened, the most important thing is that the trouser belt is left out. Where the Navy’s ships have a place right now is in Tartus.
    1. Kavtorang
      Kavtorang 29 August 2013 09: 57 New
      +5
      Sorry, Dear, talk nonsense:
      Quote: Hudo
      Where the Navy’s ships have a place right now is in Tartus.

      This is the place where forgive the pun, they now do not have a place. It would be nice to read about the status and location of 720 PMTO. This is part of the Syrian naval base and will be punched for sure, but for a couple of broken-down floating peers, they will apologize. Like, it happened - equipment malfunctions.
      1. Hudo
        Hudo 29 August 2013 10: 12 New
        +1
        Quote: Kavtorang
        This is the place where forgive the pun, they now do not have a place.


        The Navy is a MILITARY Navy, an instrument of politics, and not tsatski like Sevres porcelain which must be wrapped in matting and sprinkled with shavings.
        Sincerely.
        1. Kavtorang
          Kavtorang 29 August 2013 10: 25 New
          +1
          Well, about politics yesterday, the discussion was: “Moscow” to Venezuela, “Varangian” to Australia. Our TOF BOD - according to the plan in Adena. Here and all politics and all tool.
          Your proposal: Breastfeel in defense of fraternal Syria - no, thank you. No one is hindering you, and the crews of the ships - have pity. After the death of Kursk, didn’t anything happen in the world? Why is something happening now if by chance a floating workshop or BDK goes to the bottom? There are a couple of countries that have been on their knives for about fifty years, right up to the torpedoing of warships and uniform naval battles by boat forces - nothing happens, only the corpses are considered.
          Regards, mutually.
          1. Hudo
            Hudo 29 August 2013 10: 52 New
            +1
            Quote: Kavtorang
            Your proposal: Breastfeel in defense of fraternal Syria


            Where did I make such a proposal, do not specify a quote? The very presence of a sobering effect on demented democrats, and any manifestation vigilance weaknesses are interpreted by them in their favor.

            Quote: Kavtorang
            Well, about politics yesterday, the discussion was: “Moscow” to Venezuela, “Varangian” to Australia. Our TOF BOD - according to the plan in Adena. Here and all politics and all tool.


            In such a case, why did such a policy instrument surrender that it can only make “friendship” visits (with whom ???) to make and sweep cigarette butts and chewing gum wrappers in ports of different Papuans and port whores with charms?
            1. Kavtorang
              Kavtorang 29 August 2013 11: 12 New
              +3
              Oh, and I do not like empty idle talk, but you wrote higher in the post - our ships there (in Tartus) have the very place. What the hell? Protect rusty floating boats, coastal sheds of corporate Soviet style - "temporary"? And if not, then it's about covering up an alleged ally by the fact of presence. So, or did I come up with something?
              Since a couple of weeks ago, there were the memories of an officer who was in such a skin when they gave intelligence and waited that every second they would get on board as much as they could have time to say "Mom". Then it was lucky, the mattresses did not dare, but then the flag on the ship was different and the country was somewhat different.
              About the Navy, as a policy tool in the execution of the current leadership of the Russian Federation-this is not for me. I brought you the latest plans and facts. I can add on my own that, calculating together with my colleagues, just a year ago, the consumption of the Varyag’s motor resources and BOD for all this nonsense, we cried in chorus.
              1. Hudo
                Hudo 29 August 2013 11: 22 New
                0
                Quote: Kavtorang
                And if not, then it's about covering up an alleged ally by the fact of presence.


                This is what is being discussed.
                1. Kavtorang
                  Kavtorang 29 August 2013 11: 38 New
                  +3
                  I understood your thought. With all due respect to you - no. I won’t go there myself, but my son, fortunately, is still earlier than the yacht club and by all means I try to convince him not to plan his life with reference to military service. I do not believe a single word of the leadership of the Russian Federation. Even if they recruit a crew of under-liquidated Zarnitsa fanatics and this crew lies there along with the ship or ships (God forbid, of course). The country's leadership will wash their hands: "... What about the boat? - She drowned ...".
      2. Papakiko
        Papakiko 29 August 2013 10: 19 New
        0
        Quote: Kavtorang
        This is part of the Syrian naval base and will be punched for sure, but for a couple of broken-down floating peers, they will apologize. Like, it happened - equipment malfunctions.

        This vokurat cannot be allowed.
        If you didn’t want to support an ally, then you wouldn’t be able to develop a resource of ships and generally send ships in the Mediterranean Sea.
        So it is clear from everything that the Mediterranean squadron, which should appear in these waters on a permanent basis in 2015, will not remain without a coast.
        From these lines, it also expires that Tartus will be.
      3. egor 1712
        egor 1712 29 August 2013 11: 00 New
        0
        Here for such "failures" to take and in response a couple of times "shmalnut". Not much will seem ...
      4. DEfindER
        DEfindER 29 August 2013 11: 32 New
        0
        Quote: Kavtorang
        This is part of the Syrian naval base and will be punched for sure, but for a couple of broken-down floating peers, they will apologize.

        They’ll kill her if there aren’t our ships, and if there are ships, then any missile span within a radius of 100 km, direct aggression against Russia with all the consequences, the presence of our fleet there would just prevent the war ..
        1. Kavtorang
          Kavtorang 29 August 2013 11: 52 New
          +1
          Well, you still suffered. ... 100km, the presence of a fleet ...
          Yes, read the same militaristic you are our protocol of the agreement. B ... yes how much is possible !!! fool
          THIS IS NOT A MILITARY BASE, with all the ensuing consequences from the so-called. international and maritime law. This PMTO - refueling, supply, minor dockless repairs. And no one will directly attack the ship at the pier - the ship has sovereign territory (according to the naval command and control regiment), and the PMTO doesn’t. PMTO - the territory of the host state. And if the ship in the PMTO fell under the distribution, this is a problem for diplomats, not the military. What is direct aggression? What are the consequences? A couple of grievances about anything at the UN Security Council? Yes, they will apologize, maybe with compensation, but no more.
          1. DEfindER
            DEfindER 29 August 2013 13: 29 New
            +1
            Quote: Kavtorang
            THIS IS NOT A MILITARY BASE, with all the ensuing consequences from the so-called. international and maritime law. This is PMT

            And what of this, did I say that an empty PMTO cannot be bombed, I spoke only about our fleet whose presence will not allow this bombing.
            Quote: Kavtorang
            And if the ship in the PMTO fell under the distribution, this is a problem for diplomats, not the military. What is direct aggression?

            But here I didn’t understand you at all, but what then is aggression if the bombing of a warship is not it? Those. if we bomb an American ship, for example, in some port not even a PMTO, is this not aggression?
            Any sailor will tell you that approaching a warship on duty at sea is an act of aggression ..
    2. a52333
      a52333 29 August 2013 10: 26 New
      +3
      I agree. and then something smacks of the surrender of the Russian Federation to Syria.
  10. Net
    Net 29 August 2013 09: 54 New
    +5
    The sharp escalation of the armed conflict in Syria and speculation around a visit by Russian warships to Tartus force us to look for safer ports
    sad
    I immediately recalled the phrase of Marshal Akhromeev, who, looking at Gorbaty’s surrender of our positions in Europe, joked bitterly: “Maybe we should ask for political asylum in neutral Switzerland beforehand?”
  11. King
    King 29 August 2013 10: 01 New
    -2
    the base in Tartus must be enlarged and troops and modern weapons should be introduced to protect it. and give the order to shoot down everything that flies in a radar of 3 thousand km then the ardor of NATO warriors to bomb Syria would fall below the plinth
    1. Kavtorang
      Kavtorang 29 August 2013 10: 11 New
      +9
      Do you understand the difference between a military base and a PMTO? In short, the military base has extraterritoriality for the period of its existence and with rare exceptions (and the exception is again only in Russia, for example, in Sevastopol), the state in whose territory the WB is located cannot go into questions of the number of military personnel, the number of equipment and issues who and what is doing there.
      PMTO is under the jurisdiction of the state-owner of the territory. Intergovernmental agreements clearly spell out how many and for what reason.
      In relation to 720 PMTO - the supply of fuel, water and consumables to the ships of the 5th (Mediterranean) squadron, as well as minor repair of ships by the personnel of the Black Sea Fleet floating workshops.
      All. What kind of troops and modern weapons in FIG? What orders to shoot down in FIG. Wake up.
  12. Kowalsky
    Kowalsky 29 August 2013 10: 10 New
    +2
    That is, Russia is already preparing to agree that it was exiled from Syria. How is it in Putin's way. Got a spit in his face and wiped himself off.
    1. svp67
      svp67 29 August 2013 10: 14 New
      -1
      Quote: Kowalsky
      That is, Russia is already preparing to agree that it was exiled from Syria. How is it in Putin's way. Got a spit in his face and wiped himself off.
      This so far suggests that we are preparing for various developments, including one in which a restricted area for flights and passage of ships will be established around Syria. Then for help it will be possible to use the ports and bases of Lebanon ...
    2. svp67
      svp67 29 August 2013 22: 41 New
      0
      Quote: Kowalsky
      Got a spit in his face and wiped himself off.
      Yes, it does, but at least he is trying to do something and has his own opinion, and is not trying to please both ours and yours ... as your politicians do.
  13. svp67
    svp67 29 August 2013 10: 12 New
    -1
    At bilateral negotiations with the Lebanese leadership, the possibility of calling the ships of the Russian Navy in the port of Beirut was discussed
    we would have a few more airfields ...
  14. Guun
    Guun 29 August 2013 10: 18 New
    0
    It’s unsafe for ships in Tartus, so one of the ships of the Russian Navy will be sunk and filmed as a bearded English saboteur, under skillful make-up, mowing a ship under the Arab man - what will we get in the end? Those who yell that the fleet needs to be in Syria would then instantly shout that in vain the fleet would have been brought there by fools and off the president. And the fact that the port of Beirut is very close to Syria.
  15. Per se.
    Per se. 29 August 2013 10: 47 New
    +6
    The British sat and sit in Gibraltar during all wars, including when the war was in Spain. "The sharp escalation of the armed conflict in Syria and the speculations surrounding the visit by Russian warships of Tartus force us to look for safer ports for their business calls," will we still dance around Tartus? Security and development of the base themselves will not fall, the Syrians could have long gone to expand our possessions on the coast, welcoming our military presence. No, there will always be their own Anglophile Vorontsov, who will lobby the interests of the United States and England in the Russian government, finding a million reasons and dangers against the base in Tartus.
    1. svp67
      svp67 29 August 2013 11: 07 New
      +2
      Quote: Per se.
      The British sat and sit in Gibraltar in all wars, including when the war was in Spain
      Why, there was a civil war in Spain, they were sitting there when the Second World War was going on, and Spain was an ally of Germany, and then when England and Spain became NATO members ... This is the place they will leave the last ...
      1. Per se.
        Per se. 29 August 2013 18: 17 New
        +2
        Quote: svp67
        This is the last place they will leave ...
        Who would doubt that the motto of Gibraltar is "Nulli Expugnabilis", which is from Latin, - "The enemy will not drive us out." Three hundred years, the Spaniards have been trying to return Gibraltar captured in the 1704 year by Britain, with the Utrecht peace treaty of the year 1713 imposed with the assistance of France. Such, here, the British. If it were not for the assassination of Paul I, which took place not without the assistance of England, Malta then could well have become not only the naval base of Russia, but also its overseas territory. Now there was a chance with Cyprus, but ... It’s a pity that we are replayed, simply put, they have been kidding us for a long time, including the prospect of expanding PMTO to the naval base in Tartus, in general, to our presence in the Mediterranean, throughout Russian military construction. Such, as they say, is life.
  16. Stiletto
    Stiletto 29 August 2013 10: 49 New
    +1
    Quote: Guun
    It’s unsafe for ships in Tartus, so one of the ships of the Russian Navy will be sunk and filmed as a bearded English saboteur under skillful make-up mows a ship to sink under an Arab - what will we get in the end?


    As a result, we get a real and legitimate opportunity to mow the fuck with all available means and bearded, and under them make-up. And under the pretext of protecting their bases to create a no-fly zone not only over Syria, but also over the entire warhead.
    There is no gain without risk of loss. But warships, for a minute, are needed not only to demonstrate the pennant in Australia and in Papua. They are designed and created to protect and ensure the national interests of the country, including (and first of all) where it is especially hot.
    1. ale-x
      ale-x 29 August 2013 11: 37 New
      0
      Everything is true, however, it turns out that the time has not come yet. And will it come ......?
  17. UV58
    UV58 29 August 2013 11: 29 New
    +1
    Why are they needed then in the Mediterranean ???
  18. kwazarik
    kwazarik 29 August 2013 12: 12 New
    0
    Yes, there will be no conflict, Putin had a meeting with Obama, most likely there will be an exchange: Russia and China do not announce the creation of their financial space (replacing the Western financial system), and the West does not openly attack Syria. If an agreement succeeds, the Russian Federation and China will wait for a new suitable case for a statement, while the United States will continue to quietly spoil the Middle East
  19. Grbear
    Grbear 29 August 2013 12: 14 New
    +1
    Lord! Have you ever played chess?
    Remove your figure from under the blow and do not weaken the position - that’s where the skill is!
    A "carcass" on the embrasure - no mind. Especially if the carcass is not your own.

    Now your move, "cannibals."
  20. Ryzhikov
    Ryzhikov 29 August 2013 12: 39 New
    0
    Russia merges another ally repeat
  21. Ryzhikov
    Ryzhikov 29 August 2013 13: 29 New
    +2
    Oh normul Beat the newcomers !!! Well, God bless him, I’m not here for pluses. What do you think after the fall of Assad and the arrival of martyrs in power in Syria, the Russian fleet will be allowed into Tartus? NO here they are looking for new bases and Assad is thrown as a waste material SHAME soldier Current who needs such friends who bashfully turn away when they beat a friend
  22. Kowalsky
    Kowalsky 29 August 2013 14: 17 New
    +1
    Quote: GrBear
    Lord! Have you ever played chess?


    Yeah, with such a "game" as it is now, Russia will soon have one naked king without figures. From the 91st they only did what they removed from the road of the NATO rink.
  23. Kavtorang
    Kavtorang 29 August 2013 15: 25 New
    -1
    Quote: DEfindER
    But here I didn’t understand you at all, but what then is aggression if the bombing of a warship is not it? Those. if we bomb an American ship, for example, in some port not even a PMTO, is this not aggression?
    Any sailor will tell you that approaching a warship on duty at sea is an act of aggression.

    It is not.
    It’s bad that they didn’t understand - they perverted the meaning, they didn’t reach the practical implementation. This is not true, a warship that respects itself as a maritime power is an example of compliance with international law. And did you think the shift of the commanders of the BDK Pacific Fleet was random? Yeah, some allowed themselves to have an opinion in the style of a number of our members of the forum (and yours, including). Just what rolls on the forum, with a bang, does not roll in life. And this was perfectly understood by the operational control officers and officers of other departments, departments and services, who, by chance, were constantly in the OS.
    Easier: You can fumble here in hatred of the damned Americans. To call on the heads of their punishment great ones that you may have heard of once, to demand IMTU IMMEDIATE. But the "fiction effect" will be zero. For in this country, nobody needs it.
    To bomb an Amerian ship off the coast of Syria - this is for you in the thirties of the XX century - would be a chance.
    Now, please, hand the flag, only personally. Hope you run into sobering mode.
    Not involving me, other more or less sane officers.
    Fight. Restless gnome.
    Only themselves or in a narrow collective of limited persons.
  24. tilovaykrisa
    tilovaykrisa 29 August 2013 15: 43 New
    +2
    Quote: GELEZNII_KAPUT
    It seems to me that in the light of the statements that have been made so far, Egypt can fuck up Israel if it engages in the Syrian conflict, at the same time it fights off protest moods, with such an attractive idea for Muslims to destroy Israel! smile


    In the light of recent events in Israel, everyone can hammer.
  25. Kavtorang
    Kavtorang 29 August 2013 16: 26 New
    0
    Quote: tilovaykrisa
    In the light of recent events in Israel, everyone can hammer.

    Well, yes.
    When in the extreme tough Arab-Israeli conflict of 1982 (for some reason, it was customary not to notice anything interesting between non-military men), when Israel already had “Jericho -1” in firing positions (though, in the variant: “Do not wait, me, Mom ... ") and run around TO" Jericho-2 "everyone said nothing. All - all fagots, called the global community.
    Yes, I wanted to ask the citizens of a freshly bought historical homeland: since what year has Israel officially entered the Nuclear Club? Or not yet entered, I'm not me and not my ass.
  26. kartalovkolya
    kartalovkolya 30 August 2013 11: 52 New
    0
    No one needs polemics and recriminations, the question is about the Mediterranean squadron, and you started peeing again ... and try it! The main fleet of the Russian Federation is in the Mediterranean, and everything else will follow and the GDP probably knows what it is doing. For Syria " peacekeepers "worked back, and this is something! And the Navy is here on time and on the spot too!