Military Review

The gods of the big battalions. The world after the dismantling of international law

104
The gods of the big battalions. The world after the dismantling of international law



The most important outcome of the “Syrian incident” will certainly not be the victory of one or another of the parties or the attainment of a compromise (although this factor is also significant: most likely, it is he who will finally determine the nature of wars in the 21st century).

The most important result of the far from finished “Syrian incident” has already become, in fact, the final act of actually dismantling the entire system of international law that took shape after World War II. For some, this is already an obvious fact, but it's time to describe how this very world will look after the dismantling of the law.

But to begin with, we recall, so to speak, the “stages of a long journey”.

Stage one, Yugoslavia.

The point there was not even the first, since the Second World War, the bombing of a European city. Just after Yugoslavia, with its Kosovo finale, it somehow became ridiculous to talk about the principle of inviolability of borders, sacred during the times of the Cold War.

Further more.

After the second, “Iraqi” stage, it became clear that the objectionable regime of a sovereign state could be changed through external military intervention: even the USSR in Afghanistan did not act so frankly and cynically. Although then he was strongly condemned by all progressive humanity.

The third stage was Libya, an example of an operation in which not only showed how arbitrarily, with appropriate military power, it is possible to interpret any, even the most innocent resolutions. But he also enriched world politics with the famous “wow!” In response to the cannibal killing of an old man who had been cornered and recently kissed his cheeks and allowed him to smash his Bedouin tent on the lawn in front of the White House. But that is not all: the silently “swallowed” murder of the American ambassador is also an unprecedented case. It’s just that, unlike the incomprehensible “Syrian chemistry”, it is such an adequate reason for declaring war that even Russia and China wouldn’t have dared to object exactly and decisively: the ambassador’s figure is sacred, he personifies the country .

The fourth stage is Cyprus, which showed the unreliability and holy of holies of the “Western world” (recognized as such, by the way, by default, and with us) - the inviolability of private property. Essentially, apart from the fact “whose money was washed there” is, above all, a precedent. Now, if you do not manage to protect yourself, you may, under certain circumstances, be robbed in broad daylight, and in this case the police will call you completely useless. The blow, of course, to the established international system of relations is the most terrible. At the very least, it is equal to the “Yugoslavian” one, and maybe even more terrible.

... And finally, the present day.

If the United States does strike a blow on Syria bypassing the UN Security Council (otherwise it will not work, while Russia and China are in the Security Council), then the Security Council will have to be stupidly dismissed, as well as the UN itself. For there will no longer be any sense at all to keep this empty, meaningless in this world and absolutely not decisive organization. Of course, no one will do this directly, head to head: they will abide by polite and be used for image purposes until the last, but there will be no other functions except, so to speak, “representative”. And if to be expressed quite precisely - then, most likely, this is not a forecast, but a statement of an already existing state of affairs.

But it is - a common place. I'm talking about something else.

The main thing is what it is. From now on, all cute words like “veto rights” and “majority of votes in the international community” have a new meaning.

The “veto right” of the Russian Federation, for example, from now on will be referred to as the Nuclear Deterrence Force (SNF) and located in mines, on strategic bombers and submarines, and not in the corridors of the famous New York UN building.

Those. in the absence of execution by all countries, regardless of the power of the state, of laws, the world begins to live, as they say, “by concepts”. And God again takes the side of the "big battalions." Which, by the way, is bad news first of all, not even for superpowers, such as Russia and China (for us, in general, nothing will change much, we have these “big battalions”. And it’s unlikely that anyone will be able to test them for strength in current conditions ).

But it seems to me that the border states are, from now on, will continue to be bullshit purely by concepts, from the heart: like stalls and trays in the markets at the beginning of 90's. And something tells me that Russia, too, will take quite a reasonable part in this process: live with wolves, as they say.
Author:
Originator:
http://www.odnako.org/blogs/show_27907/
104 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. My address
    My address 2 September 2013 07: 37
    24
    Exaggerated, but true.
    1. krasin
      krasin 2 September 2013 08: 05
      36
      Colonel General Leonid IVASHOV. Here is a fragment of his interview with the online publication On the Eve of Ru:

      - Everyone is wondering if the West will come into conflict with its military power.

      L. IVASHOV - What is stopping them today? After all, apart from the musty speeches of the Foreign Ministry, Putin and others, we do absolutely nothing. After all, we were obliged, if there is a threat of armed aggression for a sovereign state, to do everything so that this state could defend itself - this is the principle of individual and collective defense. We had to, as a permanent member of the Security Council, promote this issue there. It does not work - it was necessary to convene the UN General Assembly - a threat to international peace, the shadow of the Third World War hangs. Humanity has entrusted us, one of the five states, with its security, I am talking about permanent members of the UN Security Council, why should we sit and wait - "will or will not"?

      We must attack them with political and diplomatic means, convene a permanent joint Russia-NATO alliance and warn: the first missile has flown, we are generally tearing apart the fundamental act of partnership between Russia and NATO, withdrawing from all structures, recalling our representatives and declaring you "enemies of the world." Why can't we do this? Why don't we hold consultations within the SCO and BRICS, within the framework of the Arab League? And we don't do anything. Because the power is corrupt, they sold everything.

      Most Russian leaders have their capital abroad, have their own real estate, etc. This is a noose around the neck, and all the special services of Western countries carefully monitor this and set conditions: either you mumble something there, protest and do nothing to prevent the aggression from happening - then your capital will remain intact. If you behave too actively, we will seize your accounts, your real estate, as they have done more than once, showing us our readiness. And so we rent, sell our friends, our people, our independence ...

      As Gorbachev says, that's where the dog rummaged
      1. Very old
        Very old 2 September 2013 08: 16
        +5
        Unfortunately, at the UN Russia has only one "trump card" - the right to impose VETO on an unacceptable decision. This talker has long been in Washington's pocket. But you +
        1. Sergh
          Sergh 2 September 2013 09: 53
          30
          Quote: Very old
          Russia has only one "trump card" - the right to impose VETO

          Well, why? You can talk with someone and heart to heart. For example, in February 2012. Vitaly Churkin, Qatar’s Foreign Minister Hamad bin Jassim, briefly and clearly outlined the picture to his request: “I warn Russia that if she does not refrain from the veto and decides on the UN, she will lose all the Arab countries.”
          In response to this, Churkin allegedly quietly replied: “If you talk to me in this way, then today there will no longer be such a thing as Qatar.” True, the newspaper notes, many Russian media, for example, Russian News Service, translated Churkin’s words much more rudely: “Once again blather something in this tone, and your Qatar will not live to see tomorrow.”
          Well, how not to hang out in such a warm and confidential atmosphere (with sarcasm)?
          1. creak
            creak 2 September 2013 10: 19
            18
            "Vyakni again and your Qatar will not live to see tomorrow." Very harsh ... True, after the BEATING OF THE RUSSIAN AMBASSADOR in Qatar back in November 2011 Qatar for some reason continues to live up to now. Even diplomatic relations were not severed, although at least it should have been. Therefore, one should not take wishful thinking.
            1. alone
              alone 2 September 2013 16: 48
              +4
              Well, to say this is not a Kremlin to build. Everything is decided by the GDP, not Churkin.
          2. old man54
            old man54 3 September 2013 05: 56
            0
            Quote: Sergh
            The Russian News Service, translated Churkin’s words much more rudely: “Once again blather something in that tone, and your Qatar will not live to see tomorrow.” Well, how not to hang out in such a warm and confidential atmosphere (with sarcasm)?

            empty chatter of non-active power! For young gullible boys! Real men do not say much and do a lot!
      2. Basil123
        Basil123 2 September 2013 10: 07
        -5
        put a minus for alarmism am in fact, the issue is not in Syria and striking at it will be a blow to the world because Obama will not give birth to anything and will not give birth to anything. Apparently, Syria will fall and we cannot fight there. request to deliver high-quality military equipment there as if in a pipe, everyone would demolish it exactly and the Assad understands this and says that it is not necessary. after the war there will be a redivision of the world, then it will be needed angry in the meantime, the teachings of the doctrine are being prepared .............
        1. arkady149
          arkady149 2 September 2013 21: 36
          0
          Quote: Vasily123
          after the war there will be a redivision of the world, then it will be needed

          Yes, you, my friend, a Kommegsant ...
      3. Luger
        Luger 2 September 2013 10: 31
        +3
        I agree with Ivashov about the money of our ruling "elite" in the West, a very restraining factor, that they were in vain tyr and sawed loot, or what? As for a bunch of ways to part with NATO, to announce the withdrawal from all partnerships, I disagree, and here's why.
        1. Exits from joint programs will give an occasion to aggravate the situation in foreign policy;
        2. Russia will become the center of the axis of evil;
        3. There will be a lot of reasons to doubt the democratic processes in the Russian Federation;
        4. In addition to desire, there will also be an occasion for the promotion of democracy on the territory of the Russian Federation;

        Regarding the imposition of democracy, in principle, the West is ready, in my opinion, the Russian Federation has been taxed from all sides (the northern borders do not count), only there is no prepared public opinion in Western countries. So why bother once again when you need time to prepare, so as not to be subjected to forced democratization or even exclude it. We will die about Syria and will continue to rivet rockets, planes, tanks, teach people, and by 2020 we will have the right to swing, if we still have something to do.
        1. Zhylaw
          Zhylaw 2 September 2013 13: 59
          +6
          Quote: Luger
          3. There will be a lot of reasons to doubt the democratic processes in the Russian Federation;
          4. In addition to desire, there will also be an occasion for the promotion of democracy on the territory of the Russian Federation;


          Excuse me, comrade Luger, but who really cares about the state of democracy in Russia? The murmur of the West on this subject will not stop anyway. On the one hand, sincere democrats will always doubt Russia's democracy in connection with Western propaganda on this subject. However, sincere democrats in the West, as a rule, are people who do not have real power and importance. On the other hand, people who have real power and significance do not take seriously these nonsense about democracy.
          As for the desire to introduce "democracy" in Russia, it has never disappeared, at least in the last few centuries. I am sure that if Russia allowed its military and political and economic power to be weakened, any potential "friends" from the West would try their luck again with the new Barbarossa plan.
          The West respects only power. Without petroleum jelly. They do not deserve it. wink
          1. Current 72
            Current 72 2 September 2013 16: 55
            +3
            I very much agree with your last words of the text. We are not as weak as it seems, and it’s time to bristle and show our teeth, for real.
            1. Setrac
              Setrac 2 September 2013 18: 02
              +5
              ... We retreated silently for a long time,
              It was a pity, they were waiting for the battle,
              Grumbling old people:
              "What are we going to winter apartments?
              Do not they dare, commanders
              Strangers tear their uniforms
              About Russian bayonets? "...

              M. Lermontov
      4. denson06
        denson06 2 September 2013 10: 53
        +2
        As Gorbachev says, that's where the dog rummaged

        Here Gorbachev as an example to cite here was completely out of place .. otherwise the thought is correct about accounts and real estate .. not in vain right now measures are being taken in this regard to civil servants ..
        1. Andrey Yuryevich
          Andrey Yuryevich 2 September 2013 12: 57
          +8
          yeah .... hunchback done ... now = consequences ... a nail to him in the 200 spot ... negative
          1. Current 72
            Current 72 2 September 2013 17: 01
            +4
            Yes, I agree with you, Gorbachev, Yeltsin (although he died), Kravchuk and Shushkevich, should have been brought to justice for a long time. Here a dog is buried, why not attracted.
      5. Arabist
        Arabist 2 September 2013 11: 01
        +1
        And what friends did we surrender (sell) in the opinion of this general?
        1. Andrey Yuryevich
          Andrey Yuryevich 2 September 2013 12: 59
          +1
          and what is not enough? Yugoslavia, Iraq, Libya, Cuba ... crying
          1. Arabist
            Arabist 2 September 2013 13: 02
            +4
            Is Iraq our friend? Libya is our friend? And how did we pass Cuba? As for Yugoslavia, you can still think about what to expect from Boris Sorokogradusny? And Afghanistan is by chance not yet our friend?
            1. Setrac
              Setrac 2 September 2013 18: 05
              +3
              Quote: Arabist
              As for Yugoslavia, you can still think

              Yugoslavia is not our friend either. They were not even in the Warsaw Pact.
          2. Arabist
            Arabist 2 September 2013 13: 19
            +5
            Do you put cons? I did not expect another, the gap of the template is the same. It's so bold, fashionable to scream, we all surrendered and surrender.
            1. Kurkin
              Kurkin 2 September 2013 15: 46
              +4
              It’s not that fashionable. Although many succumb to this trend. The main idea is that by surrendering sovereign states to be torn apart by the West under ridiculous pretexts in bypassing the norms of world law, we are "Russia" making it clear to the West that we agree with the new rules of the game, that who is stronger is right. In addition, the destabilization of the Middle East and the fall of Syria and God forbid Iran will adversely affect the security of our southern borders. The raids of terrorist gangs, active recruitment and propaganda of Wakhabism and separatism in our Muslim regions will begin. Behind all this will be the West and the Gulf monarchies. There is only one goal - the collapse of Russia from the inside, since outwardly they have little guts to attack, after all, the forces of nuclear deterrence and the forces of deterrence. But if it turns out to bring Russia to a civil war, then there are a lot of prospects for interested persons, up to the introduction of NATO peacekeeping forces, that is, a full-fledged intervention, as during the civil war.
        2. Alexander borey
          Alexander borey 2 September 2013 13: 22
          +6
          Quote: Arabist
          And what friends did we surrender (sell) in the opinion of this general?

          The general is not "THIS", but a comrade colonel-general, military scientist, Russian military and public figure, an expert in the field of geopolitics, conflict management, international relations, and military history. Colonel-General of the Reserve (since 2001), President of the Academy of Geopolitical Problems. Doctor of Historical Sciences (1998), Professor of the Department of International Journalism at MGIMO. Former head of the Main Directorate of International Military Cooperation of the Ministry of Defense of Russia (1996-2001). Member of the Writers' Union of Russia. And finally, a very respected person, whose opinion is listened to at the very top, and you would not hurt.
          1. Arabist
            Arabist 2 September 2013 13: 27
            +3
            Are you here giving me advice after Syria? Grachev was generally a marshal, which did not prevent his brilliant plan to take Grozny in 2 hours by the Airborne Regiment. And with a known result. Or General Khrulev, who did not bother to scout the road before driving along it during the war in South Ossetia. Who to listen to and who not, I decide.
            1. Alexander borey
              Alexander borey 2 September 2013 13: 35
              -2
              I don’t give advice to anyone, I’ve already said about your opinion for myself, but we must respectfully speak out to Leonid Grigorievich Ivashov, Grachev doesn’t suit him. If you do not agree with him in something, it’s your right, but show respect. He did not deserve to be called "THIS". On people like Ivashov L.G. Russia stands and will stand.
              1. Arabist
                Arabist 2 September 2013 13: 39
                +4
                Russia holds on thanks to its people. And no one else.
              2. Prorox
                Prorox 2 September 2013 14: 16
                +4
                Can you tell me what the general has done useful for Russia, except for conversations, ala Zyuganov.
              3. alone
                alone 2 September 2013 16: 51
                0
                Do you think Russia is worth thanks to Ivashov and others like him? what
              4. Setrac
                Setrac 2 September 2013 18: 08
                0
                Quote: Alexander Borey
                but we must respectfully address Leonid Grigoryevich Ivashov

                Respect must be earned by deeds, not titles. I also have new nobles.
                1. velikoros-xnumx
                  velikoros-xnumx 18 September 2013 15: 40
                  0
                  Quote: Setrac
                  Respect must be earned by deeds, not titles

                  Ivashov, with his actions in Yugoslavia, put himself out of favor from the then Kremlin, infuriated overseas bearers of democracy, and for Russia he bargained for somewhat less shameful conditions during negotiations on the "post-war" arrangement of the former Yugoslavia.


                  "... On June 9-10, 1999, negotiations were held with Generals D. Foglsong and J. Casey in Moscow. L. G. Ivashov began negotiations, proceeding from previously agreed positions and in accordance with Resolution No. 1244 on the military presence of members of the UN and international organizations in Kosovo, which gave Russia and the US equal rights. General Foglsong said that the American side considers the previously agreed positions invalid. He showed the documents agreed in the Pentagon, where all sectors were already divided on the map, and proposed the presence of one or two battalions in the American sector. Ivashov categorically refused to consider this document. After in the second round of negotiations the American side did not offer any other solution to the issue, Ivashov, having terminated the negotiations as useless, said that Russia would act strictly in accordance with within the framework of Resolution No. 1244, bearing in mind the equality of the parties. He told the journalists: “We will not be the first to enter , but we won't be the last! ""
                  As a result:
                  "... Soon negotiations were held in Helsinki, where Secretary of State M. Albright, US Secretary of Defense W. Cohen and 76 experts were present on the American side, and Foreign Minister I. S. Ivanov and Defense Minister I. D. Sergeev, accompanied by a team of 8 experts. Russian troops totaling 3600 were deployed in 3 sectors. "
              5. I'm Russian
                I'm Russian 2 September 2013 20: 06
                0
                Ivashov L.G. put forward his candidacy for the presidency of the Russian Federation, but the US State Department didn’t want this very much. On the sidelines there were rumors that the State Department promised GDP full support in the elections, provided Ivashov was not registered for the presidency of the Russian Federation --- as it happened.
                1. velikoros-xnumx
                  velikoros-xnumx 18 September 2013 15: 45
                  0
                  Quote: Russian
                  The State Department promised GDP full support in the elections, provided Ivashov is not registered for the presidency of the Russian Federation

                  As we remember, these elections were recognized in the USA as the most transparent, open with a minimum number of minor violations. This indirectly confirms the existence of a "gentlemanly" agreement between the GDP and the State Department.
            2. berimor
              berimor 2 September 2013 18: 04
              +1
              Lad, do not confuse God's gift and fried eggs!
              1. Setrac
                Setrac 2 September 2013 18: 55
                -1
                Quote: berimor
                Lad, do not confuse God's gift and fried eggs!

                What a deep thought. He said as he flicked into the water, the content is zero, but the bubbles are coming.
          2. NEMO
            NEMO 2 September 2013 15: 58
            -1
            Quote: Alexander Borey
            dear person whose opinion is heard at the very top

            How far up ?! what , although first you would have to ask - Are you a believer or an atheist?
            1. Alexander borey
              Alexander borey 2 September 2013 16: 33
              +4
              But instead of getting clever in the forums for days and asking stupid questions, it’s better to develop. I see the matter is generally dark here. Only hats are flying in all directions ... laughing This is my answer to the three of you, at all. And to Major NEMO I will say separately that my faith does not concern anyone, including you. It is necessary to possess information, not to ask and I am not a teacher to explain to everyone. It will be necessary - you will find all the necessary information yourself. hi
              1. NEMO
                NEMO 2 September 2013 17: 21
                0
                Quote: Alexander Borey
                It is necessary to possess information, not to ask, and I am not a teacher to explain to everyone. It will be necessary - you will find all the necessary information yourself.

                See answer below
              2. Prorox
                Prorox 2 September 2013 17: 24
                +3
                So you also have no information about the merits of the general, and Russia's stability has never been determined by demagogues. That's just the question in the VO a lot of people come in and more than enough opinions, slogans and appeals of the local people can’t get through. And it’s good that not a teacher, there will be less uneducated people.
          3. NEMO
            NEMO 2 September 2013 16: 28
            +5
            Quote: Alexander Borey
            The general is not "THIS", but a comrade colonel-general, military scientist, Russian military and public figure, an expert in the field of geopolitics, conflict management, international relations, and military history. Colonel-General of the Reserve (since 2001), President of the Academy of Geopolitical Problems. Doctor of Historical Sciences (1998), Professor of the Department of International Journalism at MGIMO. Former head of the Main Directorate of International Military Cooperation of the Ministry of Defense of Russia (1996-2001). Member of the Writers' Union of Russia. And finally, a very respected person, whose opinion is listened to at the very top, and you would not hurt.

            Considering that we are in the Opinion section, I will bring to you that there are other opinions besides yours, here is an example:
            "About a simple "army officer" Lenya Ivashova .....
            In the life of a "simple army officer" Leonid Ivashov, several "amazing" events took place. Who honestly "pulled the strap" will understand me. In 1971, Ivashov immediately entered the Frunze Academy from the "high position" of the company commander. In 1976, after a serious injury as a result of a car accident during a training exercise, instead of being transferred to the reserve "due to flight" and health reasons, the sick major was appointed to the post of senior adjutant to the USSR Minister of Defense.
            It is unlikely that Ivashov’s deep knowledge and extensive military experience contributed to his prestigious appointment (by the way, the last post of the future “strategist and commander” in the troops is the deputy regiment commander for combat training). In Soviet times, this was clearly not enough to be included in the nomenclature; strong ties and a correct origin were needed. Just with this, Leonid Grigoryevich was all right. A high-ranking relative in the military party elite, a favorable marriage, the ability to please and guess the wishes of his superiors, all this helped Ivashov to land successfully at the age of 33 on the parquet in the "Arbat Military District", on which he lasted a quarter of a century .....
            Back in 1976, with the light hand of the Minister of Defense Marshal Ustinov, the fate of Officer Ivashov changed dramatically. Now real military happiness has come into his life. While classmates in the Tashkent VOKU and the Frunze Academy were running around the garrisons, dying in Afghanistan, resisting the collapse of the Union, Ivashov received early titles, dust-free headquarters posts, orders for length of service, rested in prestigious military sanatoriums, overgrown with Moscow apartments, summer cottages, academic degrees. "More at http://dymovskiy.name/archives/27690
            1. Alexander borey
              Alexander borey 2 September 2013 16: 42
              -1
              And not too lazy to deal with this chernukha? AND? Write about yourself about what you have done for the Motherland, and do not pour mud on a person. There were still not enough compromisers. negative
              1. NEMO
                NEMO 2 September 2013 17: 11
                +5
                It is you who create an idol for yourself from a person who "did not smell gunpowder", but there are enough "analysts" without him, with no less list of regalia. I would like to read about your achievements for the good of the Motherland, well, with the exception of your posts to the glory of Ivashov
                1. Alexander borey
                  Alexander borey 2 September 2013 20: 33
                  -2
                  That's when you live to see his stars and gray hair, which is very unlikely, (I'm talking about the stars) you will achieve what Ivashov L.G. has achieved, then we'll talk about "analysts" and "regalia." As for the "gunpowder", I can say that The fatherland is achieved not only in trenches and with a gun at the ready, but also on the ideological front, which is no less important. If you did not know, then I will say that now there is a full-scale information world war and Leonid Grigorievich is taking an active part in it. On the side of Russia, of the Russian people and the Slavic-Orthodox civilization. He is not an idol for me, but a person who deserves sincere respect. And my achievements before the Motherland are known to a limited circle of people, which, as you probably already understood, you are not part of.
          4. Setrac
            Setrac 2 September 2013 18: 08
            +2
            Quote: Alexander Borey
            Professor, Department of International Journalism, MGIMO

            Quote: Alexander Borey
            . Member of the Union of Writers of Russia.

            This does not color him.
      6. Val_y
        Val_y 2 September 2013 12: 10
        +3
        I don’t agree, that negotiations are ongoing, that’s good, that’s politics, and it’s an extremely delicate thing, and if today deputies have lowered their blair and tailed the eagle’s tail (well, what’s practically with Obama Huseynovich, except for the Turks supports), then this is a GIANT VICTORY after the failures and betrayal of the 90s of the 2000s. So, this is VICTORY (every day delays of invasion or air strikes, VICTORY) soldier
      7. Andrey Yuryevich
        Andrey Yuryevich 2 September 2013 12: 54
        +1
        I agree with L. Ivashov completely! one of our few generals adequately assessing reality! I respect this man very much for his directness and honesty ... that’s who should be the Minister of Defense, or even higher ... hi
        1. NEMO
          NEMO 2 September 2013 16: 21
          0
          Quote: Andrew Y.
          and even higher ...

          I already asked the question about "... above", on the same thread, but about "above ..." I wanted to ask - Do you mean the position of UN Secretary General ??? smile
      8. NEMO
        NEMO 2 September 2013 16: 58
        +1
        Quote: krasin
        L. IVASHOV - What is stopping them today? Indeed, in addition to the musty speeches of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Putin and others, we are absolutely not undertaking anything .... Why can not we do this? Why do not we hold consultations within the framework of the SCO and BRICS, within the framework of the League of Arab States? And we do nothing. Because corrupt power, they sold everything.

        This is a noose around the neck, and all the special services of Western countries carefully monitor this and set the conditions: either you mumble something there, protest and do nothing to prevent the aggression from happening ... And so we surrender, we sell our friends , your people, your independence ...

        The capricious slogans of Yeralal Ivashov are designed for a very inexperienced layman who once a week reads the news in the regional newsletter. As always, he alone knows who and what had to be done, and at the same time, he always lost everything:
      9. Sandov
        Sandov 2 September 2013 17: 12
        +3
        Quote: krasin
        Most Russian leaders have their capital abroad, have their own real estate, etc. This is a noose around the neck, and all the special services of Western countries carefully monitor this and set conditions: either you mumble something there, protest and do nothing to prevent the aggression from happening - then your capital will remain intact. If you behave too actively, we will seize your accounts, your real estate, as they have done more than once, showing us our readiness. And so we rent, sell our friends, our people, our independence ...


        Clever Ivashov, he said everything correctly.
        1. Oleg14774
          Oleg14774 2 September 2013 19: 21
          +1
          Quote: Sandov
          Clever Ivashov, he said everything correctly.

          Well yes!? I’m looking at the English parliament, thinking, Germany refused, Italy, Spain! And, moreover, Austria did not allow NATO aircraft to fly over. Yes, of course Ivashev is "right", what is it!
          But seriously, think about who to believe. Look at the facts! After talking with Putin, Cameron's tone changed (or Blair, who they have there now).
    2. aksakal
      aksakal 2 September 2013 08: 17
      +8
      Quote: My address
      Exaggerated, but true.

      - I am from Kazakhstan and something is somehow not good from this article.
      Although there is hope, Israel is certainly among the top five militarily strongest powers, despite only 8 million people. In Kazakhstan - 16 million. But in the sweat of the face to militarize to the limit you need now. Do our politicians understand this?
      1. Orel
        Orel 2 September 2013 08: 25
        +9
        The ancient principle comes into play: "The strong does what he wants, and the weak endures what he must endure." A relatively calm age without large-scale and frequent wars has come to an end ... We need to prepare for war if we want peace.
      2. Wedmak
        Wedmak 2 September 2013 08: 49
        14
        Israel is certainly among the five strongest militarily powerful countries, despite the entire 8 millionth population.

        Comes in. For the time being .. So far, the United States has generously supported him financially, and while the United States is interested in the existence of this country. There will be no interest - a subside will be lost, Israel will simply be torn apart by Arabs, like a tusik heating pad.
        1. GDP
          GDP 2 September 2013 09: 39
          +3
          Whatever the military and technological power of Israel, Israel is first and foremost a country of one blow. Now, with the development of delivery systems for precision-guided munitions, the entire territory of Israel is the site of the first strike. Israel’s missile defense, no matter how perfect, will not provide one hundred percent protection. During the war in Iraq, the United States supplied Israel with Patriot systems, so far the most advanced complex in NATO countries, so what? They could not intercept a single SCAD missile ancient Soviet junk. It only saved that Iraq could not use them properly ... In the USSR, they understood this, and therefore, instead of placing laser satellites in orbit, they stupidly started riveting more rockets ...
        2. Andrey Yuryevich
          Andrey Yuryevich 2 September 2013 13: 01
          +1
          and everyone will be happy ... smile
        3. escobar
          escobar 2 September 2013 14: 04
          +4
          I do not agree. Israel will fall only when (if) the USA itself collapses, and they are very tied, one office or you can compare Israel as a subsidized US state in the Arab world.
      3. largus886
        largus886 2 September 2013 10: 54
        +8
        Israel has never fought with a more or less organized army. It basically drives the Arabs through the deserts, but there is no sense in them. It's like the Georgians singing songs, drinking wine, selling mandarin, yes, but no fighting! I would have looked at the Jewish army in a clash with our Army, which is constantly being mocked! Read Weller's story "Ginger"
        1. Lk17619
          Lk17619 2 September 2013 14: 25
          +2
          I read "Ryzhik")))). Opinion about the story is not unambiguous .... But if at least our army is 40% such as "Ryzhik" then pi ..... everyone who climbs into Russia.
      4. ed65b
        ed65b 2 September 2013 11: 52
        +1
        Of course, Kazakhstan needs to arm itself. Nazarbayev at this stage fully relies on Russia, but times are changing and how God knows what will happen next. militarily, the Kazakh armed forces did not show themselves anywhere, it is unclear what their power and ability to fight is. There was an occasion to support Russia in a conflict with Georgia, but Kazakhstan did not use this chance, although it is listed as an ally and is a member of the Collective Security Treaty Organization.
        1. Essenger
          Essenger 2 September 2013 13: 12
          +3
          Quote: ed65b
          militarily, the Kazakh armed forces did not show themselves anywhere, it is unclear what their power and ability to fight is. There was an occasion to support Russia in a conflict with Georgia, but Kazakhstan did not use this chance, although it is listed as an ally and is a member of the Collective Security Treaty Organization.

          You can’t calm down with the CSTO and these conflicts. I remember at least twice explaining to you why RK did not enter into this conflict.
          1. ed65b
            ed65b 2 September 2013 16: 23
            -4
            Your explanations to me that the dead poultice, just scared, allies are bad.
          2. Alibekulu
            Alibekulu 2 September 2013 22: 42
            +1
            Quote: ed65b
            Your explanations to me that the dead poultice, just scared, allies are bad.
            ..
            Quote: Essenger
            You can’t calm down with the CSTO and these conflicts. I remember at least twice explaining to you why RK did not enter into this conflict.
            Calm Yesen stop That you can't see that he is a "downed pilot" ...
      5. Sandov
        Sandov 2 September 2013 17: 20
        +1
        Aksakal, we will unite. BRICS is, we stand against all.
      6. Setrac
        Setrac 2 September 2013 18: 47
        +1
        Quote: aksakal
        Although there is hope, Israel is certainly among the top five militarily strongest powers, despite only 8 million people.

        What a fright? These are the dreams of the Jews of world domination, not backed by real power.
    3. Crocodile
      Crocodile 2 September 2013 08: 57
      +4
      If there is a blow to Syria, de facto we get a new redistribution of the world! Russia needs to define its interests and strategic directions. To begin with, join several "friendly" countries from among the former republics of the USSR, looking towards the West! The main thing the peoples will be for, and the leadership according to the example filed by the United States can be replaced! Well, it goes without saying to organize "requests" from the people!
      1. My address
        My address 2 September 2013 09: 31
        +3
        To the master.

        I agree with your idea. A new world order is coming and one cannot miss the time. Whoever does it quickly does it doubly.

        I have no doubt that the Kremlin is browsing this and other interesting sites. The question is only in the ability and desire to use good ideas.

        Take a plus here and in the rating upgrade. Please join others.
      2. Max otto
        Max otto 2 September 2013 12: 15
        0
        Join? And drafted? Of course, some hot guys can charge on the scoreboard, you even need to, but then feed them, teach the mind to the mind, do you need it? You would have to deal with your territories and deal with the north.
        1. Boa kaa
          Boa kaa 2 September 2013 22: 54
          +1
          Quote: Max Otto
          Join? And drafted?

          Territory, natural and human (mobilization) resources.
          Quote: Max Otto
          it is possible, even necessary, but then feed them, teach the mind to the mind

          Expanding the range of the Russian language, improving the culture of indigenous peoples, education, etc.
      3. Andrey Yuryevich
        Andrey Yuryevich 2 September 2013 13: 03
        +1
        and Russia has already decided on its "interests" - they will gouge Syria, oil will soar in price ... and who is sitting on the pipe? like that ....
        1. Boa kaa
          Boa kaa 2 September 2013 22: 58
          +2
          Quote: Andrey Yurievich
          gouging Syria, oil will skyrocket ... and who is sitting on the pipe? like that ....

          For a year or two, and then they will lay a pipe through the territory of Syria from Saudi Arabia (Qatar) and will pull the Russian Federation out of Europe. Yes, and I think prices will also fall.
          This has already been written on the site.
    4. Civil
      Civil 2 September 2013 09: 57
      +1
      Friends to all enemies of the law! And where is it wrong ?!
      1. My address
        My address 2 September 2013 11: 19
        +4
        I believed that if I promised even a foe to deprive of a premium by 50%, it is necessary to deprive no more than on 25. And if someone promised for the achievement of 20% in addition, you must do at least 25.

        I understand that you had in mind something else, but nonetheless. But they believed me. And tried. And the former subordinates with the pensioner greet. It is especially nice from the workers.

        In this connection, the movements of power in Smerdyukov and others look ugly. Like this I crushed.

        This is utterly free, and Kvachkov and Khabarov were immediately in jail.

        It is disgusting if a high-level relative returns a part of the stolen (Smerdyukov's son-in-law) and the criminal case is discontinued.

        All the best, Vadim.
    5. Rus2012
      Rus2012 2 September 2013 11: 27
      +3
      Quote: My address
      Exaggerated, but true.

      But the states of limitrophy, I think, from now on will continue to be pulled purely by concepts, from the heart: like stalls and stalls in the markets at the beginning of the 90's. And something tells me that Russia will also take an entirely feasible part in this process: live with wolves, as they say.


      Yes, BUT ...;)
      Nevertheless, there is HOPE that, as seers and prophets have said, the Righteous Holy Russia will be a role model for all peoples before the End of Times ...
      These times are coming. There will be a New World and a New Earth, New Times will come ...

      http://www.peremeny.ru/books/osminog/4501
      On the meanings and intentions of the "Battle of the End." The role of the President of the Russian Federation in overcoming the global crisis through the war
      1. Rus2012
        Rus2012 2 September 2013 11: 32
        +2
        ... and yet, about what will happen -
      2. Andrey Yuryevich
        Andrey Yuryevich 2 September 2013 13: 04
        +1
        blessed is he who believes ... smile
    6. cdrt
      cdrt 2 September 2013 13: 06
      +1
      Exaggerated but true

      Not quite right. So it turns out to behave only when:
      1. A clear victory (at least temporarily) in the information war (an example of the Afghan war of the early 2000s and the presence of the broadest coalition)
      2. Superiority in power that allows you to behave this way

      Nobody canceled the old Roman wisdom:

      Quod licet Iovi non licet bovi.

      So ...

      Vae victim
    7. Sandov
      Sandov 2 September 2013 17: 09
      +2
      But it seems to me that the border states are, from now on, will continue to be bullshit purely by concepts, from the heart: like stalls and trays in the markets at the beginning of 90's. And something tells me that Russia, too, will take quite a reasonable part in this process: live with wolves, as they say.

      It is doubtful that Russia will behave this way. So far, this has not happened to her. Including historical times.
  2. tronin.maxim
    tronin.maxim 2 September 2013 07: 38
    +5
    The United Nations as our bureaucrat is not much to the point! Just words.
    1. Very old
      Very old 2 September 2013 08: 05
      +5
      Maxim, you noticed: each US representative to the UN is the future Secretary of State. It seems to them that this talking room is a kind of teaching and internship. Being trained, so to speak ...
      1. Arabist
        Arabist 2 September 2013 11: 31
        +5
        Well, it was not in vain that the teacher told me that the UN-organization of inveterate villains.
        1. alone
          alone 2 September 2013 16: 57
          +2
          laughing teacher respect. not everyone will give such a clear description
  3. dojjdik
    dojjdik 2 September 2013 07: 43
    +4
    not, the UN will not dissolve the states until the first - self-assembly of the Soviet Union or, even worse, the creation of the India-Russia-China bloc; what then do the states and Israel do? -right: hide behind this very UN
    1. Revolver
      Revolver 2 September 2013 08: 39
      +2
      You are recording India in a bloc with Russia and China, while the Indians are preparing to defend themselves from China. The problem.
      1. alex13-61
        alex13-61 2 September 2013 13: 05
        +1
        Quote: Nagan
        You are recording India in a bloc with Russia and China, while the Indians are preparing to defend themselves from China. The problem.

        Neighbors were always at the boundary, perhaps an example that would refute this and not be found ...
        And BRICS is a reality ... Efficiency would be ...
    2. Essenger
      Essenger 2 September 2013 13: 15
      +3
      Quote: dojjdik
      firstly, self-assembly of the Soviet Union or, even worse, the creation of the India-Russia-China bloc


      That's bullshit. The dream of Russian geopolitics when they realized that their strengths confront America is not enough.
    3. alone
      alone 2 September 2013 17: 00
      0
      as you imagine, in one block, China and India, which themselves conflict with each other? I think self-assembly of the USSR is impossible. Nobody will do it. Of the former republics of the USSR, only 2-3 can more or less provide themselves. The rest will go back to the budget. your 500 billion deficit do you need it?
    4. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa 2 September 2013 23: 13
      +2
      Quote: dojjdik
      what then do the states and Israel do? -right: hide behind this very UN

      Look at the budget (contributions of member countries) to the UN. In fact, it is maintained by the States, and whoever pays calls the tune. Therefore, the UN is a legitimate instrument of the United States. There would be no Security Council and the right of "veto" of its permanent members, then there would be a complete scribe. And what's the worst - according to the law! Yes, man-eating, but the law!
  4. a52333
    a52333 2 September 2013 07: 50
    10
    Short but succinct. Unfortunately, the US has bitten a reason. It is worth complaining that due to the efforts of the marked traitor YABG there are fewer, it is worth rejoicing that they have remained at all. Recent trends = the increase in the military budget in the last 3 years cannot be called wasted.
    1. The comment was deleted.
  5. anfreezer
    anfreezer 2 September 2013 08: 17
    +6
    You just need to create another OOНH- United Nations Normal (in the sense of adequate) Nations .. tongue And then here in front of these cowardly "squirrel rats" grovel, convince ... No.
    1. sergo0000
      sergo0000 2 September 2013 11: 48
      +2
      I support. And shift the center of political and financial power to the East. Somewhere near Krasnoyarsk. wink
    2. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa 2 September 2013 23: 22
      +1
      Quote: anfreezer
      You just need to create another UNN- United Normal (in the sense of adequate) Nations ..

      Two questions:
      1. Who will enter them (UNN)? China? India? Venicezuela etc.
      2. Who will contain the organization’s apparatus and its relationship with the UN?
      You can still ask a bunch of questions, but these, I think, are enough.
  6. GELEZNII_KAPUT
    GELEZNII_KAPUT 2 September 2013 08: 32
    +2
    And it's scary that the United States can do it in love, whether it attacks Syria or not! I'm just afraid they won't succeed in bombing, their "comrades" in the UN Security Council will definitely be drawn in to the full, with a landing and a bunch of corpses! And what follows from this? UN liquidate immediately after the war as League of Nations, maybe before ... and the war will be 3 world. They do not seem to have anything to lose, the question is how they will decide, with honor, or not, i.e. to be or not to be a war!hi
  7. MIKHAN
    MIKHAN 2 September 2013 08: 35
    +3
    We must attack them with political and diplomatic means, convene a permanent joint Russia-NATO alliance and warn: the first missile has flown, we are generally tearing apart the fundamental act of partnership between Russia and NATO, withdrawing from all structures, recalling our representatives and declaring you "enemies of the world." Why can't we do this? Why don't we hold consultations within the SCO and BRICS, within the framework of the Arab League?
    This is true !! Again, let’s slip what are we waiting for ??
    1. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa 2 September 2013 23: 28
      +2
      Quote: MIKHAN
      Why can't we do this? Why are we not holding consultations within the framework of the SCO and BRICS, within the framework of the League of Arab States?

      1. For well-known reasons, we are not entering the League.
      2. In this situation, we cannot bluff without losing face. We are not ready for war with the States and NATO.
      Continue, or is it clear already?
  8. serge-68-68
    serge-68-68 2 September 2013 08: 37
    +2
    The topic raised by the author is quite curious. An arbitrary strike against Syria, authorized in fact only by its own legislators (and even then not by all), sets a dangerous precedent. However, nuclear weapons, while ensuring the relative security of the owner countries, will not be able to ensure the security of the target countries - the bluff of the threat to use nuclear weapons to protect the principles of international law is obvious. Alternatively, a new blocking campaign is likely, when the small and weak will huddle together and / or look for powerful patrons. This can only be used by a state that can project its power (primarily in its non-nuclear form) over the entire globe. Those. the resuscitation of the "gunboat policy" is possible. In general, we need to think more seriously.
    1. Tatarus
      Tatarus 2 September 2013 08: 52
      0
      And let everyone join the SCO or ODBC
  9. Tatarus
    Tatarus 2 September 2013 08: 46
    +2
    Military-diplomatic sources confirmed to NG (Nezavisimaya Gazeta) a report from the London-based Al-Quds al-Arabi newspaper that Russian S-300 anti-aircraft missile systems (AMS) are already in Syria with our military advisers. At the same time, it was noted that the supply of these types of air defense weapons to this country was carried out in the strictest confidence for the past two years. And currently on the Syrian territory there are all four S-300 divisional complexes, the supply agreement of which was signed in 2010. ( http://politikus.ru/events/6111-rossiyskie-voenspecy-uzhe-v-sirii-oni-
    gotovyat-chetyre-diviziona-s-300-k-boevoy-rabote.html
    )
    That's interesting is it true? I would like that to be true.
    1. berimor
      berimor 2 September 2013 19: 14
      +2
      4 SAM S-300 - this is negligible against the massive use of first missiles to suppress air defense systems, then to finish off control systems and life-forming infrastructure in Syria - aviation. In the conditions of Syria, the affected zones at low and extremely low altitudes of these complexes so far (oh, this is "so far") almost do not overlap! And the early detection system does not yet meet modern requirements. Do not forget that from the flanks Syria is supported by two "friends" Turkey and Israel! The main thing during the battles is not to lose control or switch to decentralized control in time, but no one cancels the interaction!
      1. Boa kaa
        Boa kaa 3 September 2013 00: 17
        +1
        Quote: berimor
        4 S-300 air defense system is negligible

        It's about 4's divisions! with TPU! One day air defense is 12 PU.
        Today on the site, as the news of the day, there was infa that on the border with Jordan, the Syrians blocked the F-22 with the help of the S-300 (S-400?), And 4 tomahawks launched in test mode to test the air defense system were shot down " Shells ". Now it's worth considering: who sat at the control panels of the complexes. The Amers seem to be thinking. Obama, so as not to be extreme, appealed to Congress. At least the resolve has diminished. It became clear why Assad said that Syria was ready to resist the invasion.
  10. Wedmak
    Wedmak 2 September 2013 08: 53
    +2
    As long as we have nuclear weapons, we can sleep relatively calmly. But at the same time, it is necessary to accelerate the pace of rearmament of the army with conventional weapons. And when this is done, when all borders are covered, the army will be trained, and a couple of strategists with hypersonic missiles will constantly hang in the air ... then you can safely dissolve the UN and bill the United States for all sins.
    And the account will be awesome ....
  11. Bakht
    Bakht 2 September 2013 09: 02
    +7
    Quote: serge-68-68
    The topic raised by the author is quite curious. An arbitrary strike against Syria, authorized in fact only by its own legislators (and even then not by all), sets a dangerous precedent. However, nuclear weapons, while ensuring the relative security of the owner countries, will not be able to ensure the security of the target countries - the bluff of the threat to use nuclear weapons to protect the principles of international law is obvious. Alternatively, a new blocking campaign is likely, when the small and weak will huddle together and / or look for powerful patrons. This can only be used by a state that can project its power (primarily in its non-nuclear form) over the entire globe. Those. the resuscitation of the "gunboat policy" is possible. In general, we need to think more seriously.

    It is a true observation that nuclear weapons cannot serve as a guarantee of security. The USSR had nuclear weapons. From the defeat in the Cold War and the dismemberment of the state, this did not save.

    Only full support of the population can guarantee the security of the state. And of course, the Armed Forces, so that no one tries to check "for lice." But the main thing is the internal stability of society. Moreover, high rations for officials is not a method. Saddam was betrayed by his generals. The population needs social benefits, but they also do not guarantee complete security. Libya's example is too recent.

    Need an idea. It is the idea of ​​state building. If you want, the goal. In the USSR there was a goal, but it was lost in the 70s. In today's Russia there is no goal. As there is no dominant ideology. Modern Russia is a country without ideology. In any case, it is written in the Constitution. Why should ordinary people sacrifice their lives or property? For the palaces of the oligarchs or at the expense of the same oligarchs in offshore? This is the main destabilizing factor of government. The lack of ideology in the State.

    Dixi.
    1. a52333
      a52333 2 September 2013 10: 31
      +1
      Need an idea. It is the idea of ​​state building. If you want, the goal. In the USSR, there was a goal, but it was lost in the 70. In today's Russia there is no goal. As there is no dominant ideology. Modern Russia is a country without ideology.
      You are right. + To you. The GDP raised this issue (as well as many others, deoffshorization), but EVERYTHING is drowning in this liberal swamp of Medvedev!
    2. plohoy
      plohoy 2 September 2013 13: 46
      +5
      What kind of palaces and offshore are you talking about ..... Personally, I’ll go to fight for my Family, for my House, for the birch tree that grows in my yard, for the neighbors, for the Russian Land ..... or in a word For the MOTHERLAND! !!! Is this not a reason to go and fight? What else could be an ideology ??? If there is any threat to all this, if I get up and go without any thought, here is My ideology !!
    3. Theophanes
      Theophanes 2 September 2013 23: 37
      0
      In Russia, it means only how much money has stolen! The most nasty thing is the betrayal of the rulers! Medvedev with his liberals is a burp of Russia, after a hangover from drunk Yeltsin and his lousy predecessors, who did not die of Gorbachev, YakOlevlev, Shevarnadze and other shit, who were ready to sell everything and everything just to let them drop the money, sabotaging all the decrees of the President. betrayals? Russia needs to restore the army and navy as soon as possible !!! There is no other way to peace, neither among us nor other peoples of the world who want to live as their ancestors bequeathed to them, and not as the full-time United States and their naya (rather fascist) democracy prescribe !!!!! Obama, the Nobel laureate, is worse than Hitler (in any case, Hitler is more conscientious and more honest) But Obama is simply the victim of an unsuccessful abortion by the Rothschilds and the Rockefelds. I’m sorry but damn!
  12. Alexxeg73
    Alexxeg73 2 September 2013 09: 05
    13
    I deeply sunk the words of Oleg Vereshchagin, which accurately characterize our reality:
    “The man lowered his pants.
    Consciously, albeit for reasons unknown to us.
    And now he lives with his pants down. He walks in them. Sits. He’s even trying to run. It is inconvenient to live with the pants down. He makes some kind of device to improve the comfort of life with his pants down. Sympathizers create a public organization. Others are starting to argue that living with their pants down is a creatiff and we have been going to this for a million years. There are dissertations for and against flat pants. It turns out that under Hitler everyone went IN PANTS, and the federal government is preparing a law on the introduction of lowered pants everywhere and for everyone, because otherwise it turns out fascism ...
    Man still lives with his pants down. Everyone sympathizes with him. He complains to everyone. He does not sleep well. He does not eat. He goes to psychologists and takes pills. He is filming a television show about his problem.
    In this program, in the midst of debate, whooperism, crying, moaning and slogans from the audience, a gray-haired, like a moon, straight as a stick, strict old man and a well-set strong voice says: “Put on your pants, dog pig!”
    THE WORLD OF DRAWN PANTS SOLVES THE PROBLEM WITH FULL BEST. DO NOT CONSIDER ONLY ONE EXIT - PUT ON PANTS! In the words of several thousand people who killed several people, Roland Disneyn: “In the name of the faces of your fathers!” “PUT ON THE PANTS, imperfections !!!”
    Put on your pants! Those who live with their pants down are not respected and not afraid. Our place in the world, conquered by our grandfathers and shamefully squandered by our fathers - we will have to win back with blood. Until it's too late, until there are even more of us than there are, until our houses are on fire and the alarm bell is shouting in the night - put on your pants! "
  13. Vtel
    Vtel 2 September 2013 09: 28
    +2
    The Yankees were afraid of the USSR, because they really could launch rakebacks, and now, as the GDP says, they’re not quite right - these are our friends in America. So think about where we are and who we are now, one hope for the Lord God, he will not throw us.
  14. Sharingan
    Sharingan 2 September 2013 09: 36
    +2
    Small states alone are not even special: in Europe, the EEC, in South America - UNASUR, in Eurasia - the SCO, in Africa - the African Union. And the worse the situation in the world, the stronger the attraction to the centers of power. As a result, the world will return to a block structure, but in the new version - a multipolar and, therefore, more stable version. 6-7 poles - this is the new Security Council, each member of which has real power. It remains to resume South Africa, and to create nuclear programs in South America.
  15. GDP
    GDP 2 September 2013 09: 41
    +2
    I wonder what will happen to the relationship between the US and Russia when a Republican like McCain comes to power ...
    1. Essenger
      Essenger 2 September 2013 13: 23
      +3
      Quote: GDP
      I wonder what will happen to the relationship between the US and Russia when a Republican like McCain comes to power ...

      It is customary for you to think that Republicans are hostile to you. But the Kennedy Democrat will take a look at the Caribbean crisis, Democrats Clinton and Albright bombed Serbia.
  16. shinobi
    shinobi 2 September 2013 09: 58
    +2
    The Chinese had such a curse: for you and your children to live in an era of change! But the bastard who cursed us all is still alive and even tries to speak from Germany. Terrible times are coming. Chechnya and Afghanistan seem like a joke to children against their background.
    1. serge-68-68
      serge-68-68 2 September 2013 15: 02
      -2
      The Chinese have no such curse. In any case, the familiar Chinese (Taiwanese), with whom they had studied together, had not heard anything about him.
      1. serge-68-68
        serge-68-68 3 September 2013 00: 31
        0
        Wise men who put a minus something: specify a source of this quote? Or is minus something personal? :)
  17. The comment was deleted.
  18. andruha70
    andruha70 2 September 2013 10: 31
    +3
    what is it that turns out, eh? is the next round of the historical spiral approaching the point of the previous round, with a mark of ancient centuries? again the wars of ancient Rome, Greece and other Persians? only tanks instead of horses, and missiles instead of arrows? the one who said is right: history teaches that it teaches nothing ... request or is it the end of a spiral, with a large red dot at the end, and an armageddean inscription? not fun somehow ... recourse
  19. Mikhail3
    Mikhail3 2 September 2013 11: 10
    +6
    We basically have two options. One is suggested by the author of the article. That is, to join the robbery. And the second ... Why? Why should we, with our tail lifted up, run after the gopota in the hope that we will "get rich" by theft and murder? It's strange how Lekuh suddenly spoke ...
    Actually, why don't we tackle the second option? Let the SGA finally drop the mask. Did it help them? What nonsense! This is the beginning of the end for them, and they did not throw off the mask themselves, it is the result of many years of work ... some good people, yes ... laughing In short - we will just observe international law. We will defend, defend, even we will fight for it, for sure. What will it give us?
    This will give us (almost the first time in history) faithful allies. Because it’s a wolf in sheep’s clothing could deceive, entice, pay ... And the wolf, smeared with the blood of all who ever trusted him, who threw and sold those who thought to himself that he was an ally (Germany, ay! Where is your little coin? and how are American companies throwing you at eavesdropping and nashivat? like? how do you like a friend?), no, such a predator will not be imposed into friends as easily. We will defend Syria, or at least we will be for them to the last extreme - we will always have any resources, help, support, people, money ... dozens of countries will be for us. Because the land will come - we will stand for them, that’s all. THEY will throw and we will.
    It sounds cynical, but so FAVORABLE. Americans have been exploiting this for decades - they scared the USSR and made rescuers out of themselves. Well, now? Something like that...
    1. andruha70
      andruha70 2 September 2013 11: 53
      +1
      Michael3 take off my hat hi great comment! except for two points: do not touch Lekuha angry literate man ... wink and secondly, it seems to me that, just the same, Germany has already tasted, with whom it is necessary to be friends.
  20. ed65b
    ed65b 2 September 2013 11: 55
    +3
    Of course, it is clear that no one is going to leave the UN even if it is a half-dead structure, there is at least a minimal chance to pull the rubber. But to leave the Council of Europe, Pase and all international courts, it is high time, except for a headache and mockery of Russia, there is nothing there.
  21. Peaceful military
    Peaceful military 2 September 2013 12: 29
    +1
    Si vis pacem, bellum for - want peace - get ready for war
  22. Hort
    Hort 2 September 2013 13: 34
    +2
    Well, what if they get a precedent in the form of placing a bolt with a device on the UN and everything connected with it, it will be possible, for example, to solve the same issue with the Kurils "by concepts." Moreover, there is still no legal peace treaty.
    Well, or at least unequivocally hint to the Japanese about the possibility of solving the Kuril issue in this way, at the same time sending them to thank the United States and NATO countries for reviving the "era of large battalions."

    But it is, as an irony ...
  23. KG_patriot_last
    KG_patriot_last 2 September 2013 14: 05
    +2
    Putin even wants to dissolve the G8 and solve problems based on the G20. He knows these problems for a long time and according to my students he somehow spoke about the tiger and jackals.

    It’s time for the UN to dissolve for a long time - it ceased to fulfill its functions in the 1990 years. Now it is a very corrupt structure. For Germany, for example, a European mandate is enough. And for the LAS of his mandate.
  24. repytw
    repytw 2 September 2013 15: 21
    +2
    The situation with Kosovo made it possible to recognize Abkhazia and South Ossetia, the situation with Syria, if there is aggression, may allow Russia and the PRC to take a tougher stance against weaker countries, I will not mention it, otherwise it can be a lot offended. The United States, creating a pretender with Syria itself falls into a situation about which later it will be possible to regret.
  25. ed65b
    ed65b 2 September 2013 16: 29
    +2
    Quote: repytw
    The situation with Kosovo made it possible to recognize Abkhazia and South Ossetia, the situation with Syria, if there is aggression, may allow Russia and the PRC to take a tougher stance against weaker countries, I will not mention it, otherwise it can be a lot offended. The United States, creating a pretender with Syria itself falls into a situation about which later it will be possible to regret.

    The United States has not created a whole cloud of these precedents, and they don’t have a fig for it, and there won’t be a fig. since today there is no such force that would break them off. and Putin will sit evenly, because financially he has everything tied to America and the Chinese have the same thing, and cries about the US’s illegitimacy are true for kids. Russia cannot do anything at the moment, nuclear weapons only save.
  26. saag
    saag 2 September 2013 16: 43
    +3
    Quote: Bakht
    Need an idea. It is the idea of ​​state building. If you want, the goal. In the USSR there was a goal, but it was lost in the 70s. In today's Russia there is no goal. As there is no dominant ideology. Modern Russia is a country without ideology. In any case, it is written in the Constitution. Why should ordinary people sacrifice their lives or property? For the palaces of the oligarchs or at the expense of the same oligarchs in offshore? This is the main destabilizing factor of government. The lack of ideology in the State.

    Here !!! It’s good that I’m not the only one, otherwise I’ll show all the conversations as we arm ourselves and admit. We need it, we really need it, we can formulate it right now, only we can’t propose saving and preserving Russia as an idea, it’s conservation without any development path, it’s just building a new society, moving away from a consumer society to a building society
  27. VladimS
    VladimS 2 September 2013 17: 03
    -3
    I read reviews and thoughts on the materials of the note
    Well what can you say: "Everyone imagines himself a strategist - seeing the battle from the side"
    Get on already.
    1. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa 3 September 2013 01: 01
      +1
      Quote: VladimS
      I read reviews and thoughts on the materials of the note. Well, what can I say: ... Smash already

      Incidentally, we gathered on the site precisely for that purpose to express our thoughts on the topic (to the best of our understanding of the problem). I believe that the ultimate truth, you do not have. Therefore, behave yourself more decently if you can.
  28. VladimS
    VladimS 2 September 2013 17: 08
    +1
    In the USSR there was a goal, but it was lost in the 70s. In today's Russia there is no goal. As there is no dominant ideology. Modern Russia is a country without ideology

    Lost because they lost faith in a brighter future is the main thinking part of the country.
    Because - they said one thing, thought another and did the third.
    1. Hort
      Hort 3 September 2013 06: 55
      0
      Are you talking about the intelligentsia? So, for the most part, she did not believe in this brightest future.
  29. ed65b
    ed65b 2 September 2013 17: 29
    +1
    They lost it because the elites in each republic suddenly realized that they could fill their pockets and there wouldn’t be anything for them, covered themselves with words about freedom of the nation, determination, independence, mustakillik, etc. That’s all, but they laid a big and a thick one on us and they put it and will continue to lay it on. They have a thirst for dollars, just like in El Salvador they gave. Joseph Vissarionovich did not raise himself a shift.
  30. tank64rus
    tank64rus 2 September 2013 17: 47
    +1
    Want peace, get ready for war. This is what the ancient Romans knew. Well, for our oligarchs and those who have a concept of Homeland with them, they are cosmopolitan in nature. As long as the West holds at their expense, families and real estate abroad, they will do everything that they are told there. And the policy in the Russian Federation will differ in inconsistency and unpredictability.
  31. poquello
    poquello 2 September 2013 19: 54
    +1
    if anyone is not quite in the topic, sorry
  32. The master
    The master 2 September 2013 19: 57
    +6
    conversation with a Swedish guide.
    "Russia is a terrible country. All empires are destroyed from military contact with it: where is the Golden Horde, the Ottoman Empire, the power of Napoleonic France?! ... Our Sweden was a great power, and after the war with the Russians, we cannot recover in any way, already We have not been at war with anyone for 300 years, and the country has only 5 million people and zero geopolitical influence in the world. "
    These words of a simple Swede make you think about the role of Russia.
  33. michajlo
    michajlo 2 September 2013 20: 13
    0
    Quote: tank64rus
    Want peace, get ready for war. This is what the ancient Romans knew. Well, for our oligarchs and those who have a concept of Homeland with them, they are cosmopolitan in nature. As long as the West holds at their expense, families and real estate abroad, they will do everything that they are told there. And the policy in the Russian Federation will differ in inconsistency and unpredictability.

    Good evening, dear Alexander! You are completely right.

    But I’ll add from myself, but what logically follows from your conclusions?
    1.
    There will be no oligarchs, so there will be no "brakes" and "side wind" in the Kremlin.
    So or not?
    2.
    What are the ways to implement this "seditious" / but in my opinion the only idea is to return to the Soviet people "OUR independent and proud Russia / post-USSR" and not "territory_1 / 6", managed by advisers and consultants of the West?
    3.
    Do you think the members of the forum will calmly wait until all of us are lowered "below the baseboard", since our "cheap lives" do not bother anyone, but all the "leaders" (real, not "Kremlin deputies"), to our desires there is nothing!
    But as for the "popular demands for power," we have not yet matured, we are still full and warm. True, these conditions can quickly deteriorate / evaporate.
    4.
    After all, in reality, in Russia itself (as in many other countries), only the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the OMON fighters raise salary authorities?
    5.
    The fact is past this topic.
    Last year's increase in salaries in the army should have been done much earlier, when there were still many old "cadres" in the army. But still better late than never.
  34. NOBODY EXCEPT US
    NOBODY EXCEPT US 2 September 2013 21: 33
    +1
    Interestingly, when special forces storm the president's palace and kill him together with his son (five-year-old), and then put his own person at the head of state, that's all, according to the author, "not so frank and cynical", it's impressive ...
  35. Bakht
    Bakht 3 September 2013 00: 33
    +1
    Quote: plohoy
    What kind of palaces and offshore are you talking about ..... Personally, I’ll go to fight for my Family, for my House, for the birch tree that grows in my yard, for the neighbors, for the Russian Land ..... or in a word For the MOTHERLAND! !!! Is this not a reason to go and fight? What else could be an ideology ??? If there is any threat to all this, if I get up and go without any thought, here is My ideology !!

    Your position is understandable, but it seems to me - we are talking about different things. Plus you mix two concepts - such as a small Homeland and the State.

    A simple example. The most logical solution for a person taking care of his family is to surrender to the enemy and go to serve as a police officer. And you can save your family and a birch in the yard. Which did the Saddam generals.
    Or go to certain death and fight for your homeland. Not for a specific birch tree, but for your State. From Halder's diary on the results of the first week of the war "Russians in the Bialystok sack are fighting not for life, but for gaining time."

    But this is all fiction and everyone decides for himself what is more important to him. The Roman Empire arose and existed for so long, because its creators did not think about themselves. And did not think about their families. It may be too much, but these are facts of history.

    Article 2
    Man, his rights and freedoms are the highest value. The recognition, observance and protection of the rights and freedoms of a person and a citizen is the duty of the state.

    Article 13
    1. The Russian Federation recognizes ideological diversity.

    2. No ideology can be established as a state or mandatory.

    Well, there is no mandatory ideology in Russia. Everyone has their own personal. One for the homeland will go to war, the other for his mansion on the Cote d'Azur. That is what I had in mind when I wrote that this is the greatest danger to the existence of the State.

    Well, how can a government official (it’s scary to say, for example, the president or prime minister) give an order on military operations if there is a potential adversary in the country, children are studying (living) with him or have a bank account?
  36. Bakht
    Bakht 3 September 2013 01: 08
    +1
    Quote: VladimS
    In the USSR there was a goal, but it was lost in the 70s. In today's Russia there is no goal. As there is no dominant ideology. Modern Russia is a country without ideology

    Lost because they lost faith in a brighter future is the main thinking part of the country.
    Because - they said one thing, thought another and did the third.

    Well I do not know. It seems to me that the management has relaxed. In the late 70s, the Constitution was adopted, where the "complete and final victory of socialism" was fixed. And if so, then you should not strain. And only then one of the liberal democrats told Gorbachev "Give us television for six months, and you will not recognize your people."
  37. michajlo
    michajlo 4 September 2013 10: 21
    0
    Quote: Bakht
    Quote: VladimS
    In the USSR there was a goal, but it was lost in the 70s. In today's Russia there is no goal. As there is no dominant ideology. Modern Russia is a country without ideology

    Lost because they lost faith in a brighter future is the main thinking part of the country.
    Because - they said one thing, thought another and did the third.

    Well I do not know. It seems to me that the management has relaxed. In the late 70s, the Constitution was adopted, where the "complete and final victory of socialism" was fixed. And if so, then you should not strain. And only then one of the liberal democrats told Gorbachev "Give us television for six months, and you will not recognize your people."

    Good morning dear Bakhtiyar!

    You are absolutely right. TV and the media in general have enormous power of BATTLING or MOBILIZATION, depending on who controls them.

    I can only confirm, and now I personally am ashamed to admit that in those decisive 80-90s I too believed the Central Committee of the CPSU and rejoiced at the changes, the withdrawal of the Soviet wars from Afghanistan and did not understand what kind of "alarm" the Chernobyl disaster / 1986 presented.

    What I hurt most of all is that even at the dawn of Perestroika in 1985, I did not think about the warnings and forebodings of ordinary old people from the people, who didn’t even have a full secondary educationBut they had talent from God and their life was taught to see people their souls, not to think about what they say or promise today, but over how it all TOMORROW will end ?!

    Now I am very distrustful of any authority in any country and I believe only in deeds, not promises.

    But during the period from the 80-90s (25-30 years) we lost ALL of our country / USSR, SPIRITUALITY, ATTRACTION, SIMPLE HUMAN RELATIONSHIP, FAITH IN GOOD disappeared and everything was replaced by personal gain, a lie, deception everywhere, vulgarity, a loss of principle and honesty, which interfere with a well-fed life and career advancement ...

    And these imbalances in life, upbringing, will have to be directed for many decades. am