Military Review

Do not become a "conveyor belt of war"

35
Do not become a "conveyor belt of war"



Until the Second World War, the United States kept away from the “alliances that lead us into something,” as George Washington put it. America defended in a special way - simply did not intervene in conflicts in the Old World. But during the Second World War and the Cold War, the United States changed course, fearing the domination of hostile powers in Eurasia. This opinion was expressed in his article by Forbes columnist Doug Bendow.

Today, according to the author, Washington does not need to either defend Ukraine or expand NATO. His position - for the defense of Europe, let Europe itself be responsible. After the collapse of the communist regimes, the threat to the “old Europe” evaporated, Bendou believes, and the remaining threats to the US allies could cope on their own.

“However, American politicians turned US alliances into a goal instead of a means — they began to look for a new purpose for old organizations. NATO joined the EU in efforts to strengthen ties between the former communist regimes and the West. in conflicts that did not carry a serious threat to any of its members, "the article says.

The reception of the former Warsaw Pact countries has radically transformed NATO: the alliance has expanded territorially in a region that is very important for Russia.

But, according to the Forbes columnist, "the United States did not have reasons for its security to take the risk of war in order to protect the countries over which Moscow had dominated for a long time."

Even worse, many embryos of future conflicts have arisen in many of these countries. With the end of the Cold War, Moscow's apparent conflicts with traditional Western opponents ceased. "On the contrary, its former allies had common borders with Russia and ethnic Russians as part of its population, they interpreted differently historical experience directly affected the security of Russia, "Bendow points out. However, Washington carelessly invited a dozen new members to NATO, treating the" membership cards of the alliance "as sweets that are given to guests in hotels, the author believes.

NATO even made a promise to accept Georgia and Ukraine, but the Europeans were wary of this idea, fearing political problems in the domestic political arena and in relations with Moscow.

And what to do now, when, after the invasion of the Crimea, there are calls for intervention by the United States and other NATO countries? In March, the alliance ordered to plan measures to strengthen Eastern European members, the article says.

NATO Secretary General Rasmussen said that the alliance "will intensify military cooperation with Ukraine", including help with the modernization of its army. Washington announced that annual military exercises would be held in Ukraine in July under his leadership. Some American politicians and experts recommend supplying Ukraine weaponsand analyst Stephen Metz - to prepare Ukraine and other non-NATO countries for a guerrilla war with Russian forces.

There are a lot of proposals to expand NATO, the author continues. Senators McCain and Graham suggested expanding cooperation and support in relations with "Ukraine, Georgia, Moldova and other non-NATO partners", as well as admitting Georgia and Moldova to the alliance. It is proposed to admit into Ukraine Ukraine, Finland, Sweden, Macedonia, Montenegro, etc.

Another idea is to increase defense budgets (as far back as March, Obama called on all NATO members to “take over their part of the burden”).

The author comments: in practice in NATO, "Europeans still travel to the hump of the United States - if not for free, then for cheap, and have no reason to change their policies while Washington showers them with assurances, ensuring their safety." Over the past 20 years, the US defense budget has grown by 37%, and the collective spending of the remaining 27 NATO members has declined by 3,4%. At the same time, Europe still has a tremendous superiority over Russia: in 2012, 27 of the European countries of NATO spent 319 billion on their armed forces, while Moscow - 91 billion. It is believed that NATO's role is to contain potential conflicts. But the author of the article warns: history is replete with examples when alliances did not prevent conflicts, but, on the contrary, turned into "conveyors of war" (World War I, World War II, and even the Peloponnesian War).
Author:
Originator:
http://www.rg.ru/2014/04/11/konveyer.html
35 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Keeper
    Keeper April 13 2014 07: 06
    +15
    I do not think that ordinary people in all countries have a desire to fight among themselves (and even for Ukraine ...).
    Do not add "planet overpopulation" here !!!
    Enough space for everyone!
  2. Same lech
    Same lech April 13 2014 07: 12
    +20
    Ukraine is our red line for which the West has no right to cross.

    The question of our national security acutely arose after the seizure of power by the Nazis in Kiev ... there’s simply nowhere to retreat and repulse Western military structures in ANY EVENT (so as not to share with us the fate of the Indians in NORTH AMERICA driven into the reservation)
    1. andrewvlg
      andrewvlg April 13 2014 07: 34
      +1
      Quote: The same LYOKHA
      Ukraine is our red line for which the West has no right to cross.
      The question of our national security acutely arose after the seizure of power by the Nazis in Kiev ... there’s simply nowhere to retreat and repulse Western military structures in ANY EVENT (so as not to share with us the fate of the Indians in NORTH AMERICA driven into the reservation)

      You just like B. Obama say - a red line, pathos. But any NATO military intervention in the conflict in Ukraine is ruled out. This has been repeatedly stated by the NATO leadership.
      And we cannot solve the problem of the Nazis in Kiev by military means, not because of NATO, but because of the "mass insanity" of the majority of the inhabitants of the square who support the "junta."
      But if the Nazis remain in power for a long time, then they can provide territory for NATO bases and, theoretically, join the alliance.
      Therefore, it is not the Western military structures that need to be rebuffed now, but the "junta". Agree, this is not the same thing.
      1. 11111mail.ru
        11111mail.ru April 13 2014 07: 41
        +15
        Quote: andrewvlg
        any military intervention by NATO in the conflict in Ukraine is ruled out. This has been repeatedly stated by the NATO leadership.

        What kind of noodles were they hanging in the 90s about not expanding NATO east? NATO believe it does not respect yourself!
        1. andrewvlg
          andrewvlg April 13 2014 07: 47
          0
          Quote: 11111mail.ru
          What kind of noodles were they hanging in the 90s about not expanding NATO east? NATO believe it does not respect yourself!

          Expansion is one thing, military operations are another. So do you think that NATO is ready in the near future to enter the war with Russia over Ukraine, or what? Let me remind you that when they had a similar choice - to support Saakashvili, they refused to even consider this possibility.
          Let me remind you that Ukraine is not a member. No one will fight for its "independence". The maximum is tougher economic sanctions. So, NATO will not hurt us in the next 3 years for sure in the next XNUMX years to send troops to Ukraine and disperse the "self-proclaimed" government. The very population of Ukraine interferes.
      2. Same lech
        Same lech April 13 2014 07: 57
        +12
        This has been repeatedly stated by the NATO leadership.


        The NATO leadership also promised Gorbachev not to push its borders to the east .... it promises its missile defense in ROMANIA and not to use POLAND against RUSSIA ... it also promised something ... so their promises can be wound on the ears of gullible simpletons.
        1. andrewvlg
          andrewvlg April 13 2014 08: 05
          +3
          Quote: The same Lech
          The NATO leadership also promised Gorbachev not to push its borders to the east .... it promises its missile defense in ROMANIA and not to use POLAND against RUSSIA ... it also promised something ... so their promises can be wound on the ears of gullible simpletons.

          I agree that you do not need to believe the word. In this case, their statement is true.
          In your opinion, is NATO ready to enter into a military conflict with Russia over Ukraine? I affirm that even if Russia enters troops into Ukraine, NATO will not fight under any circumstances. Is not it so?
          1. andrewvlg
            andrewvlg April 13 2014 10: 21
            +2
            Quote: andrewvlg
            In your opinion, is NATO ready to enter into a military conflict with Russia over Ukraine? I affirm that even if Russia enters troops into Ukraine, NATO will not fight under any circumstances. Is not it so?

            Nobody wanted to answer these questions. That's right, it's easier to put a "minus" without hesitation. Why join the discussion, then?
            1. Same lech
              Same lech April 13 2014 13: 52
              +3
              That's right, it's easier to put a "minus" without hesitation.


              You are wrong ... I’m not going to put a minus to you, because I feel that I am communicating with an adequate person.
              In essence, I’ll say this: NATO’s statements are worthless.
              If you look at the chronology of NATO as a military organization, it slowly and steadily pushes its military bases to the borders of RUSSIA.
              This can be considered as preparation for the invasion of RUSSIA under favorable conditions.

              Yes, now NATO may not risk invading Ukraine and Russia ... it’s too risky to get into a tambourine, while I think everything will be limited to various kinds of sanctions.

              But NATO’s intentions are clear to me like a day without any statements on a number of actions of this military organization.
              1. andrewvlg
                andrewvlg April 13 2014 14: 14
                0
                Quote: The same LYOKHA
                In essence, I’ll say this: NATO’s statements are worthless.
                If you look at the chronology of NATO as a military organization, it slowly and steadily pushes its military bases to the borders of RUSSIA.

                I completely agree with this. Just to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO, it is necessary not to fight against the "military structures of the West - NATO", but to help Ukraine itself make the right decision.
                How do you propose "to rebuff NATO"? Germany is in NATO. How can you scrape it out of there? The only option is to influence through negotiations either the countries that want to become members, or the organization itself. The latter option has never succeeded since 1991.
                So, it remains only to try to influence, for example, the Ukrainian authorities. Which is hard enough.
                That is the essence of my objection.
                1. Same lech
                  Same lech April 13 2014 14: 32
                  +1
                  and help Ukraine itself make the right decision.

                  So we help ... they helped for 35 and there is no sense and it seems that progress is not expected.

                  How do you propose "to rebuff NATO"? Germany is in NATO. How can you scrape it out of there?


                  And what UKRAINE wants to become a member of NATO?

                  Galicia ..yes, PART OF THE WRITTEN UKRAINE ... YES- and the rest of UKRAINE is against (their
                  zapadentsy and are not going to ask whether they want it or not) -of course this will cause people to be rejected.

                  Negotiations with NATO ... this is a smokescreen for which they still push their interests.
                  I must say that RUSSIA very often made concessions to the WEST without any benefit for itself ... now the concessions have become dangerous for the security of RUSSIA, further expansion to the east of the WEST will inevitably lead to an armed conflict with RUSSIA.

                  There in WASHINGTON everyone still can not understand this ... in view of their exceptionalism.
            2. Dart2027
              Dart2027 April 14 2014 07: 12
              0
              It's not ready to fight in the open. But in our time, even direct military action can be "undeclared".
        2. velikoros-xnumx
          velikoros-xnumx April 13 2014 11: 06
          +2
          Quote: The same LYOKHA
          The NATO leadership also promised Gorbachev not to advance its borders to the east .... it promises its missile defense in ROMANIA and not to use POLAND against RUSSIA ... it still promised something ...

          Promising to get married and getting married is not the same thing.
      3. Turkir
        Turkir April 13 2014 08: 01
        +6
        The red line is not Obama said, but the Russian Federation. I do not see any pathos.
        And the rest, I completely agree with you. The poisoning by Nazism occurred mainly among young people, this is the main problem.
        -------------
        Pathos (from Greek páthos - suffering, feeling, passion), inspiration, enthusiasm, uplift.
        And what you meant when you wrote the word pathos is called arrogance. Arrogant - Too sophisticated, high-pitched, pompous
        1. andrewvlg
          andrewvlg April 13 2014 08: 17
          +3
          Perhaps you are right, high-flown is a more suitable definition in this case. True, its use, it seems to me, causes some irritation in the opponent (for example, pompous in many is associated with negative nouns - blockhead, etc.). Therefore, I did not dare to use it, so as not to increase the atmosphere.
          Obama, however, used the term "red line" earlier when discussing the situation on Syria. Here is a link to the RT article:
          http://russian.rt.com/article/14999
          Quote: Obama, of course, was referring to his own statements made a year ago. Then he said that if chemical weapons are moved or used in Syria, the “red line” will be crossed and the United States will begin active operations.
          Therefore, I remembered Obama.
          Yours faithfully, hi
  3. mamont5
    mamont5 April 13 2014 07: 19
    +4
    “Before the Second World War, the United States stayed away from 'alliances that entangle us in something,' as George Washington put it. America defended itself in a special way - it simply did not intervene in conflicts in the Old World. But during the Second World War and the Cold War, the United States replaced course, fearing the domination of hostile powers in Eurasia. "

    They also changed course in 1 World War and tried to play the winners. But there, their contribution was too obviously insignificant and the Entente countries quickly turned them over. It did not work out that time to divide the world as they wanted.
    1. 11111mail.ru
      11111mail.ru April 13 2014 07: 47
      +2
      Quote: mamont5
      their contribution was too obviously insignificant

      By September 1918, the number of American troops on the western front was more than 1 million. How do you think: one million troops is a lot or a little, in relation to the bloody meat grinder of 1918?
      1. Artem1967
        Artem1967 April 13 2014 09: 18
        +2
        One million Americans on the scales in 1918 - that's a lot. The trouble is that they got involved in the First World War at the final stage, when Germany was already convulsing the sea blockade and the victory of the Entente was only a matter of time.
  4. polkovnik manuch
    polkovnik manuch April 13 2014 07: 20
    +4
    Who will fight, obviously not the ones who are shouting about it! Any war (aggressive, defensive) is a very costly event, which usually leads to an "strain" of the economy. The confrontation between Russia and Ukraine is a scandal of "close relatives" Carefully "planned by neighbors" the reason for which is not only new sales markets and the acquisition of cheap labor as a result , but the most important thing is not to give Russia the opportunity to rise from its knees! Strong Russia + its self-sufficiency is "a bone in the throat of not only, not only, and not even Europe at all.
  5. plotnikov561956
    plotnikov561956 April 13 2014 07: 21
    +4
    The look of a sober man. But how many are there in America, but it’s not even interesting .. The whole history of Russia says-Russia has two allies, the Army and Navy ..! The mentality of Russia, territory, resources .... will always be the subject of envy and, as a result, CONSTANT OF ENEMIES ..! It’s just a geopolitical axiom ...
  6. nikkon09
    nikkon09 April 13 2014 07: 22
    +2
    Yes, NATO is no longer a deterrent, it seeks and finds conflicts in which it is involved. Yugoslavia, Iraq, Afghanistan where diplomacy has not exhausted itself NATO is already torn into battle. The alliance withdrawal has become aggressive, inert and arrogant, a kind of navel of land that serves certain interests, ignoring the interests of other countries.
  7. delfinN
    delfinN April 13 2014 07: 25
    +3
    It began to reach many in the SGA that everyone - rested their horn on the red line. Further only:
    1. RONIN-HS
      RONIN-HS April 13 2014 09: 52
      +1
      Size matters! "Geniuses of Photoshop", the left foot of our Motherland covers their pedestal, like a bull a sheep. The statue should be three times higher, IMHO good
  8. redka
    redka April 13 2014 07: 25
    +1
    NATO is thinking about expansion, Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia, etc. Why won't Russia take over the initiative? Or are we "right"
    1. dmitriygorshkov
      dmitriygorshkov April 13 2014 08: 53
      +2
      Quote: redka
      Nato is thinking about expanding, Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia, etc. Why Russia will not seize the initiative?

      Do you propose creating a bloc with these countries? Our task is to strengthen the army, and not to destroy it!
  9. Name
    Name April 13 2014 07: 43
    0
    ... during the Second World War and the Cold War, the United States changed course, [b] fearing the domination of hostile powers in Eurasia. [/ b]-[b] in these lines the "diagnosis" of amers. [/ b]And the worst thing is that this disease is progressing geographically ... It's time to get to grips with the "fifth columns" and NGOs in Russia, and not give them relief ... [b] After all, TOLERANCE IS A TERM AND A MEDICAL- a decrease or complete absence of a normal reaction to any drug or other substance that causes the manifestation of certain symptoms in the body.[/ b] [b] Russia-organism and the time for reaction to appear on those whom they introduced from the side. [/ b]
  10. andrewvlg
    andrewvlg April 13 2014 07: 50
    0
    Quote: andrewvlg
    Quote: 11111mail.ru
    What kind of noodles were they hanging in the 90s about not expanding NATO east? NATO believe it does not respect yourself!

    Expansion is one thing, military operations are another. So do you think that NATO is ready in the near future to enter the war with Russia over Ukraine, or what? Let me remind you that when they had a similar choice - to support Saakashvili, they refused to even consider this possibility.
    . Do not forget that Ukraine is not even a member yet... No one will fight for its "independence". The maximum is tougher economic sanctions.
    1. Igarr
      Igarr April 13 2014 08: 54
      +5
      And PMCs in Ukraine, these same "deaf jaguars" - what do you think?
      They won’t fight, they won’t fight ...
      And sanctions are not a war?
      What ... blue ... destroyer with the Aegis system ran into the Black Sea? Who needs missile defense there?
      ...
      Ukraine is definitely not a member. Members are those who try to steer there, allegedly in the government.
      Only you, Andrei, somehow get one-sided.
      1. Little Muck
        Little Muck April 13 2014 11: 38
        +3
        All the same, I will once again express the idea that if our nuclear submarine appeared in the territorial waters of Cuba, with the announcement of joint exercises or just a friendly visit., All bravado
        Quote: Igarr
        .blue .. destroyer with Aegis system

        immediately blown away. repeat
        It is necessary to raise the question firmly and send in plain text, enough polites. am
      2. andrewvlg
        andrewvlg April 13 2014 14: 56
        0
        Quote: Igarr
        And sanctions are not a war?

        Sanctions are an economic war, right. Just the same Lech calls:
        Quote: Igarr
        there’s simply nowhere to retreat and a rebuff to Western military structures in any case.

        The question is how to fight back NATO.
        My answer: it is not necessary to fight with NATO, but to influence (diplomatically, economically - whatever) the countries that have not yet joined NATO.
        I am happy to hear how you can "rebuff the military structures of the West." That is, how to defeat NATO? Otherwise, you might think that you are calling for an armed struggle against NATO - this will automatically lead to World War III.
    2. 11111mail.ru
      11111mail.ru April 13 2014 10: 14
      +1
      Quote: andrewvlg
      Ukraine is not even a member yet

      That's not exactly a MEMBER. Her membership in the EU was promised (in Heropa). Now suck at the Slovaks trying (gas).
      I repeat for the gifted: NATO to believe this is not to respect yourself! The world of NATO does not need!
  11. 11111mail.ru
    11111mail.ru April 13 2014 07: 54
    +5
    Forbes columnist says, "The United States had no reason for its safety to risk war to protect countries long dominated by Moscow" By Doug Bendow (Forbes columnist)

    However, Lord Palmerston back in the XNUMXth century rashly gave out a pearl: "How hard it is to live when no one is at war with Russia."
  12. mountain
    mountain April 13 2014 08: 00
    +1
    It is necessary to discourage everyone, to unceremoniously interfere in the internal affairs of Russia. And then engage in hegemony, and possibly in parallel.
    1. Junior, I
      Junior, I April 13 2014 08: 14
      +2
      At first hegemons, the EU will not climb, they do not need this. Everyone for the seed. As soon as they feel that the smell is fried. Europe 45-th remembers.
  13. A1L9E4K9S
    A1L9E4K9S April 13 2014 08: 11
    +2
    Gentlemen, senators are calling on the people of a foreign country to guerrilla warfare against Russia, dear senators, and how do you feel about guerrilla warfare in the United States, a question has been asked for discussion in Congress.
  14. tnship2
    tnship2 April 13 2014 08: 58
    +1
    The weapons of the West (NATO) are getting out of control? They hardly believe. The new redistribution of the world seems to them in a dream and in reality. To blow up Eurasia, that’s what they need.
  15. homosum20
    homosum20 April 13 2014 10: 27
    0
    "The author comments: in practice, NATO" Europeans still travel to the back of the United States - if not for free, then cheaply, and have no reason to change their policy while Washington showered them with assurances, ensuring their safety. " Over the years, the US defense budget has grown by 20%, while the collective spending of the remaining 37 NATO members has decreased by 27%. "
    It seems that aftop does not listen and does not read economists.
    "To ride the hump of the United States is nonsense." The phrase is meaningless. USA is beggars. All they have is a printing press, FRS, and a fleet (partly out of the picture due to poverty).
    Nato is hiding behind American aircraft carriers and cruisers. But this can be formulated in another way. There is no NATO. There is aggressive America and its armed forces under different flags. You need to understand - what is your enemy. Then it can be predicted. And win.
    But Ukraine must be occupied urgently, otherwise America will enter there by the summer. (May 25 elections. They will be falsified according to the US scenario. The ruling clique will ask the United States (no matter in what person) to send troops to defend - and that’s all, to the southeast. Under the cover of machine guns of the American Marines, they will quickly be pacified (the amount of blood will be simply disproportionate compared with a provocation to send our troops now) and the patriots will be put on our border.A fleet of the United States will be based in Odessa.
    I already wrote that from the geopolitical point of Crimea, nothing is worth it. They threw it to us - as compensation. For our moral satisfaction. Estimate - if you back up our Black Sea fleet with a large American one in Odessa, at the crossroads and along the borders - patriots - he will be taken back at any time. He will simply be constantly surrounded and it is difficult to protect him (in history he was captured three times). Without New Russia, this is just a hole in the budget and another internal conflict that will be inflated by the 5th column of the Crimea - Crimean Tatars.
    There is no time to waste. “A time to scatter stones and a time to gather stones.” Old Testament.
    Now is the time for our stones.
  16. slovak007
    slovak007 April 13 2014 11: 44
    +1
    At the same time, Europe still has a tremendous superiority over Russia

    But we have a homeland!
  17. sanek0207
    sanek0207 April 13 2014 11: 47
    +1
    NATO-ASSOCIATION OF HYPERSONS AND JO..LIZES OF THE USA!
  18. Boa kaa
    Boa kaa April 13 2014 12: 07
    +3
    The tragedy of Ukraine lies in the fact that it is the main link in Washington’s strategy aimed at undermining the geopolitical situation in the zone of vital interests of Russia. If the States succeed in drawing Ukraine into the sphere of their policy, then NATO bases will be at our side, along with the missile defense position area and the possibility of intercepting ICBMs starting from Siberia. After that, the plans of the Moscow State University from the concept will be transferred to the sphere of practical implementation. But for this Ukraine needs to be tied to its military chariot.
    therefore
    NATO Secretary General Rasmussen said that the alliance "will intensify military cooperation with Ukraine," including helping with the modernization of its army.
    After that - the complete military-technical dependence of Ukraine on NATO.
    Second, the
    Washington announced that in July, under his leadership, Ukraine will host annual military exercises.
    In other words, commanders and commanders with their headquarters will begin the practical development of theater of operations.
    And to prevent this from happening, you need to solve the problem with the presidential elections on May 25. Either choose the "correct" one (and there is no such thing in the applicants), or boycott them, which is what South-East Ukraine calls for. Conduct a referendum, adopt a new constitution that would consolidate the federal structure of the country.
    Otherwise, will have to exercise the right granted to the President by the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation to use the aircraft in Ukraine. But it will be a completely different story in which options are possible ...
    Personally, I’m closer to the peaceful path of victory for our diplomacy: recognition of the federal structure, support for the SE regions to leave Ukraine and join Russia. And all this by the will of the people, as in the Crimea. IMHO.
  19. kocclissi
    kocclissi April 13 2014 12: 52
    0
    The fact is that 3,14 ride, these are not bags to turn over! In Ukraine, many people scream with foam at the mouth: I will shoot Russians if they come! But in real life, only those who were trained to jump will jump! They are afraid of independence, they’ll be afraid of benches and they’ll be afraid of farting! And you don’t need this: Most of the population is against .... what? Russia? West? Yes, no against the war, why don’t anyone need it! That's how it is ....
  20. Anton Gavrilov
    Anton Gavrilov April 13 2014 14: 31
    0
    Do not become a conveyor of the war, they have already become one.
  21. Russ69
    Russ69 April 13 2014 15: 31
    0
    In Kharkov, now it’s not calm either. There were clashes, there are wounded. Maidanut chased ...
    Stream ... http://www.ustream.tv/channel/kharkov-antimaidan
  22. Predator
    Predator April 13 2014 15: 34
    0
    It’s time to tell everyone: we studied for a long time from USA-23 and learned! Thank you and a big bow to them! And now, as good students, in order to please Uncle Sam, we announce that Ukraine (the whole) zone of vital interests of Russia, we will bomb them a little (National Guard and forces of the other sector), separate buildings in Kiev, Lviv and other cities (BP, SBU.MVD, etc.), hang and shoot figures such as Yarosh, Yatsenyuk, Tymoshenko, etc. (for this, polite people will come to visit on the tractors and gannahs), since we are very afraid of them. Uncle was scared of Hussein’s chemical weapons and sent troops to Iraq, and here (0 horror!) They threaten us with vigorous bombs, which means they are in the nest egg , in 1991 they hid it, and we urgently need to look for them! And Ukraine is big, it’s not a desert for you, but forests and fields, so 200-300 thousand search engines are needed, and what would you not beat-1000-1500 tractor and 2000- 2500 gnanagi, as well as 500 dragonflies and 800 squirrels, that they would look for the road from above. Well, if the banderlog is crushed, there’s nothing to go down on the road and violate traffic rules. Didn’t find it? And what was late? So the uncle is not in a hurry either ... and it is necessary to stay! We’ve come to my sister!
  23. vlad.svargin
    vlad.svargin April 13 2014 15: 59
    0
    NATO Secretary General Rasmussen said that the alliance "will intensify military cooperation with Ukraine," including helping with the modernization of its army. Washington has announced that it will host annual military exercises in Ukraine in July.

    This is so that NATO troops are constantly present in Ukraine. As they say, so far unofficially, but "time will tell" there. Why did the head of the CIA unofficially arrive in Kiev to meet with the power bloc? America creates a "noise background" against the Russian Federation, and under the guise of continuing its policy of rejection of Ukraine. We, too, should not stand aside, and so we are still accused of interference. And the fact that they are trying to "flex their muscles" remind of male monkeys scaring away pretenders to their territory is a common tactic of the Americans.
  24. Sergei75
    Sergei75 April 13 2014 20: 20
    0
    The Cold War did not stop for a second, just the primary goal was hidden by the myth of the fight against communism, now that the enemy is at the gate, we begin to see clearly and understand that the true goal of NATO is the destruction of Russia, as the only bastion of resistance and the reign of Evil over the world .