Military Review

A cold look at foreign policy, or democracy comes to you.

66
What is the difference between domestic politics and foreign ones ??? First of all, in the internal there is a struggle with circumstances, events that have developed for certain reasons. Foreign policy, most often, is characterized by the presence of a rival, a clash of interests, the struggle for resources and spheres of influence. The presence of an opponent, in turn, implies multi-pass combinations with various options for action, depending on the opponent's last moves. Well, chess, in a word.




True, chess is very cynical, where the states and the lives of their citizens are in the role of figures, and at the moment very serious prey is put up - undermining or preserving US hegemony in the military, social and economic spheres. The stakes are high, in a word.

And, in this game, the victory remained, up to now, for Russia. Well, judge for yourself - Assad, the “bloody dictator”, under the heart-rending cries of Western diplomats and custodians of “universal human values”, 3-th year stubbornly does not go anywhere. He does not hold on the support of the people or the cohesion of the nation (in any case, this did not help other countries) but on the support of Russia (and he received the support of the people only after solid statements by the Russian Federation).

Consecutive actions on the part of Russia and, in part, of China, tied the hands of the United States and, for the time being, blocked their access to military intervention. And everything was fine, but the Americans themselves dug a hole, above all, by the statements of Obama and Kerry that “Assad must leave,” “Assad is illegitimate,” etc. put the United States in a very awkward position, when any action other than a declaration of war means losing the party. In other words - if you leave Syria - you lose, you leave everything as it is - you lose. The Americans made a strategic mistake, shouting at each corner about the illegitimacy of Assad, and Russia, in turn, without changing the rhetoric about Syria, gave the Americans the opportunity to make such a mistake.
Russia's position on Syria deserves separate discussion. First of all, it is worth noting that Syria is NOT an ally of Russia, so waiting for the fact that our country will fight on the side of Assad is at least mistaken. And it’s very good that Russia and Syria have no union treaty (similar to Iranian), because a country that has an authoritarian management style (well, let's take a look at the truth) and periodically fights with neighboring states (let's look the truth in the eyes again) of Russia as an ally is needed. However, the situation is such that Syria is still an ally of Russia, simply without obligation. And for this kind of cooperation Russia has done a very, very much - supplied and supplied weapon in Syria (knowing in advance that Syria will not pay for it), defends the sovereignty of Syria through diplomatic channels, sends warships, well, etc. Syria, in turn, is a buffer zone between the Russian Federation and terrorists.

Therefore, the main victory of Russia is setting the United States in a pose. The Americans have nowhere to go, they are locked in the choice of position and time, and therefore they will attack. Naturally, at the beginning of the bombing, a howl from the side of the mountain-patriots and pseudoliberals would rise that “Putin surrendered Syria” to “Fse prapal”, but Russia did everything she could and did everything right. Now the Americans are being ridiculed, because even the allies are turning away from them, and the war in Syria for them, for the time being, will have the local character of swotting Syria from around the corner, because it is scary to approach closer. At the same time, Russia is actively strengthening its relations with China, and this is a victory of the 2 number (the St. Petersburg summit and the signed contracts are proof of this)
Therefore, an act of aggression by the United States is inevitable, and it is unlikely that it will only be in the nature of attacks with cruise missiles. Otherwise, why sanction (pre) attacks on 60 days? By 3 rockets per day, or what ??? This is done to tighten the time and clarify the position. In fact, this means the possibility of a ground operation, because during these 60 days a lot can happen (for example, the next chemical attack).

Continuing to develop my thought about the absence of moves from the United States, I come to the conclusion that the Americans will fight to the last and, most likely, will blame Assad, since they simply had no choice. However, the losses in this case will be quite tangible - they will do it almost alone, human, financial and image-oriented. After the fall of Assad, the vector will shift to Iran, and here everything will be completely different - China will take a tougher position. Let me explain: China has no interests in Syria (they don’t take weapons, they don’t sell weapons), but Iran is China’s partner (atom, oil and weapons), and China will butt for it just like Russia is now for Syria. Coupled with the position of Russia, which, after the possible loss of Syria, will also be trapped in actions, they will be able to give a truly worthy rebuff to Western countries.

Some variables remain unknown until now. The first is the response of Iran, as an ally of Syria. In theory, he should block the Strait of Hormuz (and, along with it, sign an economic death sentence for himself) and sink American ships (declare war on the USA). I firmly doubt that Iran will support Syria, since they will not dig a hole for themselves alone.

Another variable is the relations between Russia and China, their further options for cooperation. But this is a separate topic of conversation.

And the main unknown remains the fate of Assad, because if they send the entire US military machine at him, he has a chance to survive. We wish him good luck.
Author:
66 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 7 September 2013 06: 43 New
    +2
    I agree. Babama has clearly regretted that he had previously talked about Syria. But he can’t go back - and all make-ups are backed up from behind, and one cannot admit to children's cocksiness, and retreating means to show that he was previously at the door.
    1. Deniska999
      Deniska999 7 September 2013 07: 15 New
      +3
      Now America can’t fight. Firstly, the Americans themselves do not want this (only 25%), secondly, they probably all heard that Iran would take revenge, and other Muslim countries could follow it, and thirdly, the opposition also has unity on this issue . Recently, one of the leaders said: we will figure it out, this is our business.
      1. Revolver
        Revolver 7 September 2013 08: 13 New
        +2
        Quote: Deniska999
        Iran will take revenge, and other Muslim countries can follow it

        "Other Muslim countries"specifically Saudi and Qatar, meanwhile, promised to compensate America for the cost of the operation - apparently to make it easier for Obama to drag the operation through Congress. Well, with the lousy Arabs even wool shred dough to fuck.
        1. Sandov
          Sandov 7 September 2013 09: 15 New
          +3
          Quote: Nagan
          Well, with lousy Arabs, at least a bunch of dough should be fucked.


          Well, amers here want freebies too.
        2. olviko
          olviko 7 September 2013 14: 45 New
          +5
          Yeah, Barak Husseinovich picked up, it’s not politics but hell you’ll understand, no common sense. How else to explain that just yesterday America was fighting fiercely with Al-Qaeda, and today it actually provides it with its aircraft carriers? How witty jokes joke - Al-Qaeda Air Force will bomb Syria. And soon it may come to the point that the Americans will think, scratch their heads and admit that with the elimination of Osama bin Laden, they were clearly in a hurry. Very his talents would be useful at first in Syria, and there, you see, in Iran. Anyway, the old man was not so bad ...
          The most interesting thing is that this time it will be not the long-suffering American taxpayers who are tired of constant gigantic military expenses, but the Gulf countries - Qatar and Saudi Arabia that will pay for the aggression against Syria. And this, admittedly, is the know-how of Barack Obama. For the first time in its history, the US Army acts as a mercenary, since the Pentagon will not spend a cent on a strike on Syria. In antiquity and in the Middle Ages, this practice was common. Some king or emperor hired a gang of thugs and went with her to the enemy. It seemed that such times had long passed, but Obama again confirmed the old truth - nothing is new under the moon. True, it is hard to imagine somehow that the Roman legions would be hired, for example, by the Parthian king, but Obama again showed that America is such an advanced country and so free from prejudice that now its army and navy can easily be hired and sent to “wet” the sovereign country. Moreover, the Arabs act as employers, many of whom cannot stand the very word "democracy" and everything connected with it, but they are going to settle scores with the Arabs using American bombs and democratic slogans. Absurd? Not at all - the USA has long taught us that when they get down to business, even the impossible is possible
          Not in the eyebrow, but in the eye, by golly!
          Read the full story: http://www.km.ru/v-rossii/2013/09/06/siriiskii-krizis/720064-amerika-ne-mozhet-s


        3. baltika-18
          baltika-18 7 September 2013 21: 32 New
          0
          Quote: Nagan
          Other Muslim countries, specifically Saudis and Qatar, meanwhile promised to compensate America for the cost of the operation

          They don’t fail either. The operation will begin, oil prices will go up. And this is additional income. So here is the money.
        4. Micex
          9 September 2013 08: 22 New
          0
          Well, if the Arabs compensate for the US attacks on Syria, this will mean that aircraft carriers can now be leased. Pay a billion and bombs, whoever you want. It seems to me that amers will not subscribe to such compensation, directly.
      2. alone
        alone 7 September 2013 15: 40 New
        +3
        Muslim countries do not have such unity as you think. Suffice it to say that among Muslim countries there are almost no countries that could follow Iran. The "opposition" is also not united on this issue: if one of the leaders said that this is our business, the other no less important figures are busy compiling a list of objects on which rockets should fall.
      3. Setrac
        Setrac 9 September 2013 05: 16 New
        0
        Quote: Deniska999
        that Iran will avenge, and other Muslim countries can follow it

        The unity of Muslim countries is a myth; Islam has not united anyone for a long time.
    2. Alexander Romanov
      Alexander Romanov 7 September 2013 07: 19 New
      +1
      Quote: My address
      , and retreat means to show that previously was pri-d-ur-com.

      Yes, he especially does not hesitate to show himself like that. Eating hamburgers, drinking cola, well, I won’t come up with rock.
    3. Crocodile
      Crocodile 7 September 2013 09: 53 New
      +7
      Yes, Obama is also happy to retreat - but they don’t give him any more ... So he turned to Congress for permission, most likely with hope - and then they won’t allow it! Lucky Cameron - he was banned, now with a clear conscience he can throw himself at the walls! If Iran fits in to the full, then the situation can generally turn against amers - China can get involved in the game! Although in my opinion we have come to another Caribbean crisis ... Russia has not in vain hinted at the danger of getting out of control of chemical weapons ...
      1. Gato
        Gato 7 September 2013 14: 40 New
        +3
        Quote: Crocodile
        with hope - what if they don’t allow it!

        Allow. Voting is scheduled for September 11th. In such a "jubilee" they cannot but allow.
        1. alone
          alone 7 September 2013 15: 41 New
          +2
          viz. that is why they will do it on September 11, so that when voting they remember about these events.
    4. 755962
      755962 7 September 2013 16: 11 New
      0
      Quote: Deniska999
      Now America can’t fight. Firstly, the Americans themselves do not want this

      American soldiers on the invasion of Syria: "We are on the limit, we are exhausted and we are in decline"
      After President Obama said during the Saturday’s speech in the Rose Garden that the United States should be “attacked” in Syria, Republican Congressman Justin Amash (Michigan) turned to Twitter to challenge this statement with in all likelihood this order will be executed.

      “I hear a lot from representatives of our Armed Forces,” Congressman Justin Amash wrote on Twitter. The message that I constantly hear is, "Please vote against hostilities against Syria."


      http://mixednews.ru/archives/41107
  2. serge-68-68
    serge-68-68 7 September 2013 06: 52 New
    16
    Option 1: Obama has lost pace. I decided to wait for the allies, and those, looking at his indecision, were also smeared. The attack on Syria had to be done in the style of Israel - without asking anyone. Justification: a blow to the chemical troops of the "Syrian dictator and the bloody criminal Assad." Silently - storm the headquarters, combat-ready units and Assad himself. The excuse is "oh, a little missed." The list of goals and geographic location should be taken from the same Israel. The bulk of the public would make noise and forget. Russia would be wiped out. The rebels won.
    Option 2 is expressed in the well-known Russian proverb “if you don’t want to cf. - don’t torment the train.”, Or, more culturally, having not decided on goals, don’t set goals.
    Obama, on the other hand, chose something in between, and in this case, the worst.
    1. My address
      My address 7 September 2013 07: 10 New
      +2
      Cool expression about "do not want - do not torture"! Babama really lost pace. And it will not look smart (to put it mildly) anyway.
    2. Alexander Romanov
      Alexander Romanov 7 September 2013 07: 23 New
      +6
      Quote: serge-68-68
      : Obama has lost pace. I decided to wait for the allies,

      He cannot create a coalition, the allies merge. YouTube does its job, people looking at the democratic scumbags screaming allah akbar, begins to wonder who Obama is going to fight for.
      1. Denis
        Denis 7 September 2013 07: 40 New
        +2
        Quote: Alexander Romanov
        He cannot create a coalition, allies merge
        Where it breaks thinly, and the liquid ... pours
        Pity him like uncle tom with a hut
      2. Gato
        Gato 7 September 2013 14: 52 New
        +4
        Quote: Alexander Romanov

        He cannot create a coalition; allies merge.

        The most faithful remain:
        Australia, Albania, Canada, Denmark, France, Poland, Romania, Turkey, Kosovo.
        Albania, Denmark, Poland and Romania are especially pleased. And without the Kosovo’s fighting power, war is not war.
    3. Crocodile
      Crocodile 7 September 2013 10: 06 New
      +5
      One tangible blow by Syria to Israel will raise Assad in the face of saints! The situation can change dramatically! It would be interesting to listen to the address of the rulers of Qatar and the Saudis to their people, about the need to remove Assad after that! East is a delicate matter - it just seems that the amers do not understand this laughing
    4. Mikhail3
      Mikhail3 7 September 2013 11: 39 New
      +4
      The Israelis, with all my ... warriors in general. About the Americans ... "Take Farlaf for Ruslan ?! So you can confuse only drunk!" Attack on the defenseless? How many you want. On Asad’s veterans, what year have they been waging a bloody war and defeating it? What are you ?!
      Now, if Assad’s army gathered somewhere compactly, it’s better in the barracks to cover it with a couple of missile salvos and a big bombing ... But you have nothing to wait for. The Americans have lurked recently - they decided that the Afghans are nosed savages. Well, we got a very substantive Pashto lesson. If it were not for the drug trade and the system of its industrial production, which made it possible to establish relations with the tribes, they would simply have simply been torn apart. With all the high technology ...
      So there will be no "rebels", it is simply impossible.
    5. alone
      alone 7 September 2013 15: 44 New
      +1
      Bobama simply shifts part of the responsibility to the Senate and Congress. The main target is Assad. Even if we limit ourselves to blows and leave, the situation for Assad will become difficult. The militants choose the goals.
    6. Bekzat
      Bekzat 8 September 2013 23: 42 New
      0
      Greetings to all, for Sergey 68-68, cool comment !!!
  3. Valery Neonov
    Valery Neonov 7 September 2013 06: 55 New
    10
    "... after all, in these 60 days, very, very much can happen (for example, another chemical attack)." and possibly in the US ...
  4. Lech from ZATULINKI
    Lech from ZATULINKI 7 September 2013 07: 21 New
    +8
    In the ground part of the operation, the main striking force will be Rebel bandits (like cannon fodder) and special forces of countries striving to throw ASADA (USA, FRANCE, TURKEY, possibly ISRAEL and ENGLAND) as an organizational force.
    All this resembles a proven option in LIVIA.

    Under these conditions, the ASADA troops need to get close to the positions of the militants as close as possible - this will exclude the possibility of an air strike against them, then it is necessary to use universally false positions, various false maneuvers i.e. the war should become more maneuverable and mobile.
    In addition, it is necessary to pay special attention to the fight against enemy reconnaissance assets (to destroy drones, enemy reconnaissance groups, etc., if possible, to actively disinform them), in general, the set of measures to combat such insidious opponents is quite wide.
    All this is not new and much depends on the ability of the ASADA military leaders to quickly adapt to changing conditions.
    1. Mikhail3
      Mikhail3 7 September 2013 11: 43 New
      +1
      It makes no sense to get closer - it doesn’t exclude anything, with what fright the Westerners will feel sorry for the gangster? Mix with dirt unwavering hand. The rest is in my opinion true.
  5. vasiliysxx
    vasiliysxx 7 September 2013 07: 24 New
    +9
    It is often written that Russia is next, but I think we have only reacted harshly in words to Syria, half of NATO is already pulling out of our pants, and if the amers offer them something to stir up power against Russia, then they will have to be searched no closer than Mars smile
    1. Nick888
      Nick888 7 September 2013 07: 57 New
      -2
      They will climb, especially the Baltic states (but they are not very opponents either). Russia is beneficial to Europe as a "banana republic", no more. Conventional armaments are generally better developed for them, and the total NATO army in terms of quantity exceeds ours. It is another matter if China intervenes for us, possibly India, and the BRICS countries, then another conversation.
      1. ivshubarin
        ivshubarin 7 September 2013 15: 16 New
        +6
        We don’t need China or India, we have an ally of the Strategic Missile Forces
      2. Setrac
        Setrac 9 September 2013 05: 26 New
        0
        Quote: Nick888
        Russia benefits Europe as a "banana republic"

        So where do you get this from? Despite the fact that strong Russia is not profitable for Europe, the banana republic will not be physically able to extract resources for Europe in the region of the far north.
  6. saag
    saag 7 September 2013 08: 00 New
    -1
    "... In theory, it should block the Strait of Hormuz (and, together with it, sign an economic death sentence for itself"
    There, the Saudis built an oil pipeline along the bay, just for this case, of course, its throughput may be slightly less, but with its introduction, the mantra about blocking the Strait of Hormuz will remain just a mantra, as well as about the sinking of AUG
    1. alicante11
      alicante11 8 September 2013 07: 41 New
      +4
      And how will we protect the oil pipeline from missiles? We will deliver "Patriots" every 10km?
    2. Micex
      9 September 2013 08: 29 New
      0
      but Iran itself, how will it sell its oil through a closed channel? I talked about this
  7. ramsi
    ramsi 7 September 2013 09: 44 New
    +4
    Iran has nothing to lose; it is after Syria. I would, in their place, hit without warning if the operation against Syria began. (And not in Israel, but in the US group)
    1. ivshubarin
      ivshubarin 7 September 2013 15: 24 New
      +5
      The Iranian confessor has already said how they will act. They will abduct and kill the children of Western politicians. Monster War with Monsters
      1. alicante11
        alicante11 8 September 2013 07: 44 New
        +2
        This is hardly a real threat, and it is unlikely that they really said that. Now there are so many stuffing that the truth is generally difficult to find.
        But the fact that Iran needs to fit into the war is builders. Better to fight with Syria than without Syria.
  8. Stiletto
    Stiletto 7 September 2013 09: 58 New
    16
    In my opinion, the task of Russia now is to bring as many high-quality weapons as possible to Syria to solve the following main tasks:
    1. To dig the Yankees properly, so that another time they think where they are climbing, and for the next year or two, or better - for tens or even hundreds of years, to moderate the warlike ardor of these cowboys;
    2. To create conditions so that as many as possible those who after the war in Syria planned to continue it in Russia would go to paradise.
    3. Conduct assertive, but balanced information propaganda in the following areas:
    - The US authorities violate all conceivable and inconceivable norms of international law, and therefore are war criminals;
    - European countries that do not support such a US policy are worthy of gas discounts and all kinds of praise (we must slowly drive the aspen stake into the North Atlantic and other alliances);
    - The proletarians of all countries (that is, those who do not want to be "democratized") - unite (around Russia), and do not spare money for modern Russian weapons! For whoever does not want to feed and arm his army will feed the US army.
    1. Sandov
      Sandov 7 September 2013 11: 06 New
      +3
      Alexey clearly and succinctly answered what to do and what to do. When they understand this above, the amers will cease to rattle their weapons.
  9. deman73
    deman73 7 September 2013 11: 26 New
    +1
    there should be a clear and consistent policy towards Syria and everyone and the Yankees will surrender
  10. Gato
    Gato 7 September 2013 14: 37 New
    +1
    I come to the conclusion that the Americans will fight to the last and, nevertheless, most likely, they will knock down Assad, as they simply have not been left with a choice.

    I have a slightly different forecast.
    The Americans will not fight until the last - they will only indicate a strike, so at least not to lose the remnants of a "political face." Propaganda rhetoric is already shifting emphasis from the Assad regime to the need to respond to the use of chemical weapons. They will hit in any case, but it seems to me that they will be limited to several dozens of missiles, without widespread use of aviation.
    Without a large-scale ground operation (and it is not planned yet), it is unlikely to overthrow Assad’s regime, therefore, after rocket fire, the stake will again be placed on the "opposition", but on a larger scale.
    So personally, I see no reason for apocalyptic forecasts.
    1. Micex
      9 September 2013 08: 32 New
      0
      I emphasize the fact that the ruling Assad means losing the United States, which, in my opinion, they will not do for the reasons I have described.
  11. forester
    forester 7 September 2013 14: 52 New
    0
    But in general, it would be nice if you could play off with the Chinese and while they are there, they are struggling to chop up their affairs in the Middle East. Qatar and the Saudis will soap the withers. And Assad will be tame, otherwise he may forget our kindness
  12. michajlo
    michajlo 7 September 2013 15: 22 New
    +7
    Good day to all!

    The article itself put a plus, but it bothers me too much "accounting / sorry for directness zhidovsky" calculation of debit and credit !?

    With all the modality and expansion, everything should be transferred to money and PROFIT, to all “Accountants in power” and here on the site, both “in geopolitics” and “in ordinary life” EVERYONE from US, I would like to recall several important points.
    1.
    Probably you should NOT count everything only in money! Character traits that distinguish RUSSIANS and all of us Slavs from others, such as FAITHFULNESS TO FRIENDS, WORD, PRINCIPALITY, DURATION, HELP AND PROTECTED WEAK (at the moment), DO NOT MEASURE with any money !!!
    2.
    In addition, do not forget that as soon as our classic RUSSIAN approach to friends, to enemies we will REPLACE for money and profit, so with any troubles and difficult moments in life (and there WILL BE a lot of them), we are Russian / Soviet, any of today's friends, partners, EXACTLY ALSO KINET "because of attendants" !?
    And then it will be too late to remember what we were "good once", if we actually turned into ordinary traders / extortion jews ...
    3.
    In addition to all the BIG and invaluable assistance of Syria from Russia, the Arabs of the enemies-Israel / Hezbollah and Iran, we must still remember what's the main factor for today's opportunity to show the world
    how RUSSIA / "Putin" returns to world politics, this is reality,
    that President of the SAR Assad stands on the WIDE support of the people and the army, which is SUCCESSFULLY defending for the 3rd YEAR andand the last 4-5 months - COMES !!!
    And at the beginning of the special operation, the CIA, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar-Syria were given resistance only 2-4 months ?!
    Blood in Syria against Wahhabi intervention Putin himself and not our military specialists or paratroopers spills, Syrians are fighting there using our help, advice, technology, etc.
    4.
    In my opinion it is still very early Rejoice or Cry because the war in Syria, as well as the danger of UNLOADING of the 3rd MV, are constantly PRESENT, and shouting "Glory" is probably not worth a very long time.

    Although at the moment, for the country of RUSSIA, the pride and joy of many(not just me) !!! good
    1. alicante11
      alicante11 8 September 2013 07: 47 New
      +1
      And here from this article I felt a little more scared for the Syrians. Because if there are articles that explain that no one was draining Syria ("they bombed it" = "she drowned), then nothing serious will be done. Let's hope that this is not so.
    2. Micex
      9 September 2013 08: 35 New
      0
      A little bit touched by the "Jewish motive", I did not want to count at all, as in a pharmacy, but it turned out a bit dry, yes))) Such an analysis grew out of the theory of conflicts, which I have the honor to study and write on this topic thesis.
  13. D_L
    D_L 7 September 2013 15: 27 New
    +2
    Oh Barack, Barack! It would be better if he threw stones anywhere than he delivered such a number of speeches, speeches that put him in a sad situation.
    Assad can seriously spoil the situation in the United States in many areas. It is gratifying that V.V. Putin gave the green light to help Syria.
  14. repytw
    repytw 7 September 2013 16: 22 New
    +2
    I have a slightly different forecast.
    The Americans will not fight until the last - they will only indicate a strike, so at least not to lose the remnants of a "political face." Propaganda rhetoric is already shifting emphasis from the Assad regime to the need to respond to the use of chemical weapons. They will hit in any case, but it seems to me that they will be limited to several dozens of missiles, without widespread use of aviation.
    Without a large-scale ground operation (and it is not planned yet), it is unlikely to overthrow Assad’s regime, therefore, after rocket fire, the stake will again be placed on the “opposition”, but on a larger scale


    Obama may want to do so, but who will give him. As soon as he gets involved in the war, the military-industrial lobby and about the Israeli, too, will push him "to the end." Do not forget about those whose money he does it - the Saudis and Kater are not interested in paying only for the fear of Assad.
    1. Gato
      Gato 7 September 2013 17: 08 New
      +1
      Quote: repytw
      Obama may want to do so, but who will give him.

      Well, we will not perceive the states as something unitary and indivisible. The forces behind this cardboard dope (Obama) sometimes also have directly opposing interests. Therefore, it seems to me that the described scenario is the only way for America to get out of the situation with the least losses.
      Unless, of course, all Americans are considered clinical idiots.
  15. DAOSS
    DAOSS 7 September 2013 17: 19 New
    -7
    The article is similar to the order of the Kremlin, to prepare public opinion on the drain of Syria.
    Vanga did predict the truth. World War 3 will begin when Syria falls.
    1. Alexander borey
      Alexander borey 8 September 2013 15: 34 New
      -5
      Quote: DAOSS
      The article is similar to the order of the Kremlin, to prepare public opinion on the drain of Syria.

      So it is. Moscow realized that Syria has already been lost and US military aggression is inevitable. The Kremlin cannot do anything, everything has already been done for it. In order to somehow save face before the Russian people, portions of information will now be thrown to "reformat" public opinion , supposedly, "Syria is not our ally," "Russia does not need such allies," etc. As the saying goes: if you can’t avoid shame, then you should try to brighten it up at least somehow. The people of Russia expected decisive and tough actions on the part of their political leadership, and they got a big zilch. They sold Syria and now they want to save face. Attack on Syria this is aggression against Russia. The article is nonsense, not related to the real state of things. I won’t be surprised if tomorrow they say and write that Syria is our enemy. laughing
      1. Micex
        9 September 2013 08: 38 New
        0
        take the second time)
    2. Micex
      9 September 2013 08: 37 New
      0
      vayvayvay)))
  16. repytw
    repytw 7 September 2013 17: 41 New
    0
    You can tell a little about something else, maybe someone will say how much the Syrian army has, probably 70-000 people, and opposition forces, probably 100-000 people, if mobilized, the army can be increased to 10-000, and if you give out weapons to the population by creating self-defense units (Christians, Kurds, Alawites), then up to 20 - 000. So the question of what Assad does there is 200 years - the question of the effectiveness of the Syrian army, I’m afraid the Arabs are still warriors, some kind of weapon they would not be supplied.
    1. Revolver
      Revolver 7 September 2013 21: 21 New
      -3
      Quote: repytw
      the issue of the effectiveness of the Syrian army

      More than half of the Syrian army are disarmed and locked up in the barracks, or armed with shovels and used to clear the rubble. Assad is afraid to give weapons to the Sunni draftees so that they do not cross to the side of the bandits. There were precedents.
      Quote: repytw
      I’m afraid the Arabs are still warriors who wouldn’t be supplied with any weapons.
      What, yes, yes, they are Arabs ... hmm, Arabs.
      1. Denis
        Denis 7 September 2013 22: 33 New
        0
        Quote: Nagan
        What, yes, yes, they are Arabs ... hmm, Arabs.
        What is, that is, they regularly supplied Soviet captured equipment with Israel
        Tankers went into battle with open hatches, so that they could not slip away
  17. Naval
    Naval 7 September 2013 23: 37 New
    +1
    War is war. Now this is an external aggression that outrages even Assad’s opponents
    one of the leaders of the Syrian opposition warned Washington that military action by the United States would be a signal for retaliatory attacks by suicide bombers. This was stated in an interview with FNA (Iran) by the Secretary General of the opposition Syrian Al-Shabab party, Mahir Mirhidzh.

    He said: “Defense of the Motherland for us is above internal differences in the state. Although at the moment we are in opposition to the government, we believe that protecting the homeland from outside invasion is much more important. Therefore, we have created several battalions of suicide bombers that can conduct operations on American facilities in the Middle East. ”
  18. EdwardTich68
    EdwardTich68 8 September 2013 04: 29 New
    0
    Far from being fools, Americans and they will not fight on land, but Turks and Jordanians as well as Lebanese and gangs of cannibals from all over the Middle East, and Americans will create an advantage in the air, which is the main thing in modern warfare hi
  19. vezunchik
    vezunchik 8 September 2013 10: 33 New
    0
    And it is very good that Russia and Syria do not have an alliance agreement (similar to Iranian), because a country that has an authoritarian management style (well, let's face it) and periodically fighting with neighboring states (let's face it again) Russia as an ally does not need it. Such nonsense could freeze or a distant person or a known purchase ...
    1. Alexander borey
      Alexander borey 8 September 2013 15: 41 New
      +1
      Quote: vezunchik
      Such nonsense could freeze or a distant person or a known purchase ...

      I would call the article not "A cold look at foreign policy ....", but "Myopic squint at foreign policy ....".
    2. Micex
      9 September 2013 08: 40 New
      0
      Scroll through the history of Syria and see where and how it was spread. even the USSR did not enter into an alliance with it
      1. Alexander borey
        Alexander borey 9 September 2013 15: 04 New
        0
        Quote: Micex
        Scroll through the history of Syria and see where and how it was spread. even the USSR did not enter into an alliance with it

        It’s like you have problems with history. The Soviet Union supported Syria and the matter is not in legal details, but in fact, de facto. Let's face it, you really like to face it. Before you publish anything, first study the question in detail. You don’t understand basic things in geopolitics and write what the hell. Or you understand, but do someone’s will. As you know, nothing personal, but I said my opinion. I don’t know why there are so many good-natured advantages, but I personally even minus the laziness of the article was put. hi
        1. Micex
          10 September 2013 21: 51 New
          0
          You still essentially did not answer. It’s one thing to support (the Union and Khmer Rouge regime supported for the time being), another thing is to have allied commitments (I emphasize)
  20. Arkan
    Arkan 8 September 2013 11: 54 New
    +3
    The Syrian crisis is the first serious difficulties of the Americans. Assad’s presence of more or less modern weapons, support for Russia and China, the unpopularity of the idea of ​​intervention in America, hat-tinging rhetoric, and so on. drove hawk fleas into a corner. Now either with a shield or on a shield. The second is preferable.
  21. borys
    borys 8 September 2013 15: 36 New
    +2
    The author of the article pushes openly liberalistic thought. Assad is a villain
    and military alliances cannot be concluded with him. To begin with, I note that he is in his
    at home and in his own right. Like it or not, but he is LAW-
    By the head of state and has the support of an impressive majority of citizens
    Dan. The current situation in Syria is completely similar to the situation in Russia
    in the years 1918-1920, namely - the Civil War and the FOREIGN MILITARY IN-
    TERVETIA. So villains must be sought not in Damascus, but in other cities.
    But that is not the point. Assad’s Russian critics should remember our
    a very recent history, namely the beginning of August 1990. Then another
    the villain (Saddam Hussein) occupied Kuwait. No doubt, the act itself
    ugly. It was then that Gorbachev surrendered Saddam to the Americans. It would
    to hell with him (with Saddam), but at that moment a friendship agreement with
    their MILITARY articles. Who will respect the state, which is like this
    surrenders his allies overnight? It was then (and not in December 1991)
    There was a SECTION of the Union. This is not a mistake, it is SECTION, not collapse. So
    that real support for the legitimate government of Syria is in the interests of
    Russia.
    1. Micex
      9 September 2013 08: 42 New
      0
      I do not criticize Assad at all and I understand perfectly well that, with his removal, my country will only get worse. Just weighed the pros and cons
  22. Serebryakov.
    Serebryakov. 75 8 September 2013 16: 58 New
    0
    I agree that the United States has driven itself into a corner with militant rhetoric. The question is that a purely symbolic blow to Syria does not solve even the image problems of the Yankees. Will there be a ground operation or not?
  23. Mikola
    Mikola 8 September 2013 18: 53 New
    -4
    If in Russia democracy is evil, is anti-democracy interesting is it good on the Russians themselves?
    Employees of the Russian consulate in Crimea refused to call an ambulance for a 6-year-old compatriot who tore her leg in the territory of the diplomatic mission. It is reported by Komsomolskaya Pravda in Ukraine with reference to TSN.

    Russian woman Ekaterina Nechaeva with children stood in line at the Russian consulate. Suddenly, her 6-year-old daughter Sofia, who was playing by the fence, stumbled and struck her leg with a sharp fence pin.

    “I put my hands on the ground, and the leg I tripped over remained on this pin. I was hurt, blood was flowing. There was a lot of blood, ”says the girl.

    They put the child in blood on a bench, and eyewitnesses rushed to the consulate for help. People asked to call an ambulance, to which the workers of the diplomatic mission of Russia replied that they would not do this.

    “They asked to call an ambulance at the consulate. To which they said: we cannot call an ambulance. After 150 meters there is a landline telephone, please contact there. People asked for a first-aid kit, they were told that we didn’t, and they closed the doors, ”says the girl’s mother, Ekaterina Nechaeva.

    Employees of the consulate were not even moved by the fact that the girl was only 6 years old (the girl was a citizen of Russia). Fortunately, there was a doctor in line who stopped the bleeding. Someone brought a first-aid kit from the car, and another caring eyewitness called an ambulance from a mobile.

    The author and the fighters on the forum want to save the world from democracy, but you have to save !!! Such a situation could be with an American or other child of the Western world. Imagine what is going on at Ukrainian forums ...
    1. Setrac
      Setrac 9 September 2013 05: 33 New
      0
      Quote: Mikola
      The author and the fighters on the forum want to save the world from democracy, but you have to save !!! Such a situation could be with an American or other child of the Western world. Imagine what is going on at Ukrainian forums ...

      Maybe there was a minor wound from the point of view of a Russian person?
  24. Anatolich
    Anatolich 8 September 2013 21: 30 New
    +1
    Mykola, why are you doing this? and where does democracy? And how do you feel about the case when in Ukraine one family kept children in a barn with animals?
    1. Micex
      9 September 2013 10: 34 New
      0
      yes he is a troll
  25. Anatolich
    Anatolich 8 September 2013 21: 36 New
    0
    Personally, I am fed up with this democracy, and if in your opinion democracy is the seduction of minors, incest and p.i.d.o.r.ostia, then I do not need such democracy.
  26. Yuri Y.
    Yuri Y. 8 September 2013 21: 46 New
    +1
    And here democracy (besides the western sample) and this accident. Nobody is going to save the world from democracy, let them fuck as they want. It’s just that under the guise of democracy, the West wants to control Russia and instead of Russia, let it not come to us, we will figure out what kind of democracy we need.
    I can not say anything about the behavior of consular workers. Most likely they did not see this child and they are at work. Nowadays, when everyone’s phone suddenly begins to break into the consulate, you never know what, considering the not encouraging relations between our countries, and even the Natsiks say you are walking (democracy).
  27. Ross
    Ross 9 September 2013 02: 34 New
    0
    Quote: Deniska999
    Now America can’t fight. Firstly, the Americans themselves do not want this (only 25%), secondly, they probably all heard that Iran would take revenge, and other Muslim countries could follow it, and thirdly, the opposition also has unity on this issue . Recently, one of the leaders said: we will figure it out, this is our business.

    It seems that this is exactly what is needed for the owners of Abama (Rothschilds). They merge the States in this way and make China and its Yuan the new Leader. And the Rothschild will provide them with gold reserves (well, such as dividends of exchange)