Military Review

The war in Syria and the moment of truth for the citizens and allies of Russia

97
Discussing the decision on the war in Syria no longer makes any sense. We are dealing with a political decision that has already become historical reality.


So, we have two main facts:

First, Russia wages war in the Middle East

Secondly, the Supreme Commander has the right to use troops abroad.

These two facts add up to a new reality in which we all have to live in the near future: the war in Syria against ISIS has become Russia's entry point into a qualitatively new stage of post-Soviet development. The start of the bombing in Syria is an introductory chapter to the history of the Third World War, which began to spin not yesterday, but almost immediately after the collapse of the USSR.

The best thing you can do in a new reality is to develop your own attitude towards it. You can support the decision on the war in Syria and enjoy the evening chronicle of the victories of the Russian weapons on federal channels. You can condemn this decision and consider that a new Afghanistan is waiting for us in Syria ... No matter how you think, the reality will not change: Russia is leading the war, and now anyone connected with Russia is the enemy of ISIS. So far, only for ISIS.

It is today LIH seems to be something far from the TV. However, in the new reality, each of us is separated from ISIS only by the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation. Nothing, except Russian weapons, does not stand between each of us and LIH.

ISIS is a brand. Below it, federal television denotes everyone who is considered the enemy of Russia in the Middle East. A year and a half ago, the collective image of the “Right Sector” emerged - an armed scumbag excited by Ukrainian nationalist ideas and animal hatred of Russians and Russia, so did the ISIL brand.

War is always creating an image of the enemy. You can be a pacifist thrice, but if you live in a country that is fighting a war, then you automatically become an enemy for the enemy of your country. And you can even not consider him an enemy - he considers you as such anyway. And believes that you must be destroyed.

The black and white military picture of the world is much simpler than the “multi-valued” peaceful one. Gradually, our picture of the world will be built from “ours” and “enemies”, because the psychology of the masses does not work in a different way.

This division into camps will inevitably affect all states and societies that suffer from Russia. Although in the Eurasian Union and the CSTO the status of all participants is equal and sovereignty is respected, but it is clear that both Belarus, and Kazakhstan, and Armenia, and Kyrgyzstan, and Tajikistan, having joined the defense alliance with the Russian Federation, identified themselves in the same camp with it and its citizens.

Each world war is preceded by a period of blocking and creating alliances. Thus, the First World War began after two camps were clearly defined - the Entente led by Britain and the Triple Alliance led by Germany. The situation was similar before Napoleon's invasion of Russia. In fact, it was not France who attempted to defeat Russia. This is a huge alliance of peoples and states, including Poland, Prussia, Austria and others. Fought against Russia, which was supported by England.

The open war of the Russian Federation in Syria is just a statement of the fact that Russia is ready to create pre-war alliances. Which, incidentally, immediately changed reality. So, Caspian cruise missile launches flotilla can and should be considered the day of the formation of a real military alliance between Moscow, Tehran and Baghdad. Because the missiles, in order to get into ISIS, passed through the airspace of Iran and Iraq. That is, in fact, Tehran and Baghdad gave the green light to Russia's use of its space to fight against a common enemy. This is the real military alliance, and not what they sign at round tables and discuss at conferences.

A key task for Russia will be the verification of all its military alliances, which were concluded in peacetime. And the main tests are waiting for the CSTO, which includes Kazakhstan, Belarus, Kyrgyzstan, Armenia and Tajikistan.

The war with ISIS is not just a war between Russia and terrorists. Today, ISIS is fighting in 500 kilometers from the Armenian border. A large number of citizens of Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Kazakhstan are fighting in the Middle East in the ranks of ISIL. Today, taking on the costs of the war in Syria, the Russian army defends the interests of at least Astana, Bishkek and Dushanbe. And if we consider that all the CSTO participants are under the nuclear shield of Russia, then we can say that the moment of truth has come for all the post-Soviet republics. Because it’s one thing to sign treaties and say beautiful words about eternal friendship, but it’s quite another to take part in a war with a common enemy. Moreover, today it may be ISIS, and tomorrow there will be new ones.

This means that the CSTO allies are forced to decide here and now in relation to the actual alliance of Moscow, Tehran, Baghdad and Damascus. In the event that the CSTO allies do not join the new alliance, the viability of the CSTO itself will be on the agenda. Because today you refused to stand shoulder to shoulder with the Russian army, and tomorrow the Russian army refused to protect you. Because it is not clear whether it is possible to count on allies who are ready to maintain neutrality even in relation to ISIS terrorists.

A review of all military alliances that the Russian Federation has attempted to make since 1991 should be carried out as soon as possible. Because the army of the Russian Federation must protect only those frontiers that are recognized by the territory of historical Russia - not the one that emerged from the privatized RSFSR, but the Russia that was the Russian Empire, the Soviet Union, and now is being transformed into the Eurasian Union. And with its borders, accordingly, you will also have to decide: either defend the recognized borders, or expand existing ones. The third is not necessary. This is the true meaning of the beginning of the war in Syria.
Author:
Originator:
http://www.odnako.org/blogs/voyna-v-sirii-i-moment-istini-dlya-grazhdan-i-soyuznikov-rossii/
97 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. MIKHALYCH1
    MIKHALYCH1 13 October 2015 14: 56 New
    +6
    So, we have two main facts:
    First, Russia wages war in the Middle East

    Russia does not wage war in the BV .. And we don’t need to hammer it! If Russia starts to fight, it will not be the Middle East ... and it will be a real war!
    1. 3 Gorynych
      3 Gorynych 13 October 2015 15: 05 New
      +2
      I support not we are at war, do not need these BBC stuff.! 99% of the truth and a little bit to distort the essence and it turns out a different picture.!
      1. sa-ag
        sa-ag 13 October 2015 16: 31 New
        -20
        Quote: 3
        I support not we are at war

        Well, yes, we are rendering an international duty to the fraternal Syrian people, I have already heard something like this
      2. Vanko
        Vanko 13 October 2015 19: 37 New
        14
        I explain for Mikhalych too. I drove you and Gorynych to the minus. If Russia is bombing ISIS, then it is fighting. This is war. And no other way. And as the author of the article correctly noted, the war so far is only against ISIS. But everything can change easily and naturally. The First World War began not with the assassination of the Duke of Ferdinand, as some victims of propaganda think, but with the reaction of the influential powers at that time, who were led to this very propaganda. Or organized it.

        So we closely follow the news and remember where the nearest shelter is.
        1. ksv1973
          ksv1973 13 October 2015 20: 15 New
          +4
          Quote: Vanko
          I explain for Mikhalych too. I drove you and Gorynych to the minus. If Russia is bombing ISIS, then it is fighting. This is war. And no other way. And as the author of the article correctly noted, the war so far is only against ISIS. But everything can change easily and naturally. The First World War began not with the assassination of the Duke of Ferdinand, as some victims of propaganda think, but with the reaction of the influential powers at that time, led to this very propaganda. Or organized it ...

          I fully support!
          The knot of the Middle East contradictions is so complex, so MANY and LONG TIME tied in it that any more or less significant reason can become fatal!
          This is not Ukraine, which made the Crimean circumcision, but it wiped snot and only splashes verbal diarrhea.
          And yet - somehow I really can’t believe that the Supreme Commander-in-Chief did not calculate all the possible scenarios after the start of the operation in Syria. If Russia decided to speak out loud and harshly, it means she has every reason for that!
        2. Arkon
          Arkon 13 October 2015 20: 38 New
          +1
          If Russia is bombing ISIS, then it is fighting. This is war. And no other way.


          You can, of course, call any armed conflict a war, however, usually all the same, by war they mean:
          Military authors usually define war as an armed conflict in which rival groups have equal strengths to make the outcome of the battle uncertain.


          What can not be said about the IG.
          Therefore, after all, "fighting". Not a war. While. Next - let's see ...
          1. ksv1973
            ksv1973 13 October 2015 23: 00 New
            +2
            Quote: Arkon
            Therefore, after all, "fighting". Not a war. While. Next - let's see ...

            Ah-ah-ahrenitelny logic !!!
            Fighting is not a war ?! On True Shit (IG) Russian VKS drop toy bombs, or what ?!
            1. Zai pali
              Zai pali 14 October 2015 01: 06 New
              0
              You have not seen war.
          2. Boa kaa
            Boa kaa 13 October 2015 23: 06 New
            +3
            Quote: Arkon
            Therefore, after all, "fighting". Not a war.
            Fighting - conducted by the armed forces, in this case, the contingent (part of the airborne forces). Moreover, the people (country) are not widely involved in this. Martial law is not introduced in the country, etc.
            War is a socio-political phenomenon in which the whole society, economy, and armed forces of the country are involved; wartime laws apply. At the same time, databases are part of the war. What can not be said about the war, as part of the database!
            Yours faithfully, hi
            1. jktu66
              jktu66 14 October 2015 01: 43 New
              0
              War is a socio-political phenomenon in which the whole society, economy, and armed forces of the country are involved; wartime laws apply. At the same time, databases are part of the war. What can not be said about the war, as part of the database!
              "Iron!" logic! RYa non-war 1904-5, Crimean non-war 1854-55, Finnish non-war 1940, and many, many more non-war happened laughing
        3. g1v2
          g1v2 13 October 2015 21: 07 New
          +1
          The war has been going on for a year and a half. Syria is only one of the fronts and it is foolish to consider it without interruption from the rest. Everything is interconnected - economics, finance, import substitution, oil, Ukraine, Donbass, Syria and so on. So far, the bill is strongly in our favor, but everything can change. However, if we win in Syria, and in any case we fight there (we don’t have to lie to ourselves), then we can go on the offensive on other fronts. At the same time, in case of victory, our positions will become stronger and this will affect everything - from military positions to economic ones. If we lose and the mattresses knock us out of Syria, this will also affect everything, including prices in the store and living standards and safety.
    2. morozik
      morozik 13 October 2015 15: 10 New
      10
      Sorry, of course, but the fact that Russian people are dying in the Donbass is not a war? and the fact that our guys in Syria are taking part in hostilities is not a war? ...
      It just doesn’t concern us yet, but someone has already died
      1. Buffalo
        Buffalo 13 October 2015 15: 16 New
        14
        Rejecting - offer.
        Suggest - do it.
        Did - answer!
      2. Homo
        Homo 13 October 2015 16: 21 New
        +8
        Quote: morozik
        Sorry, of course, but the fact that Russian people are dying in the Donbass is not a war?

        Do not distort. Russian people and Russian citizens are not the same thing. Russians perish in Israel and in the USA and Africa, and many more where. But this does not mean that Russia is fighting there.
        1. morozik
          morozik 13 October 2015 16: 50 New
          -4
          I mean the citizens of Russia !!! that is, volunteers die - this is not war, it is - fun for the lazy. The Russian war in Ukraine doesn’t concern us either - like they voted for themselves ... Russia is figuratively rockets that the whole world has * fought, this is also a show ...
          1. Vanko
            Vanko 13 October 2015 19: 53 New
            +5
            Well, what do you reason like a little. Sorry, right word. It is necessary to distinguish between concepts.

            If the STATE declares the beginning of hostilities using the ARMED FORCES of the STATE, then this is WAR.

            If a handful of volunteers travels somewhere, picks up machine guns or sits in tanks, then this can be interpreted as you like, from terrorist activities to guerrilla warfare.

            Something like that.

            Russia declared war on ISIS. All. If you are guided by the Russian mentality, then we will either win or lose. If Amer or European standards, then the percentage of solving the tasks. Like in Afghanistan.
            1. Nyrobsky
              Nyrobsky 13 October 2015 23: 28 New
              +3
              Quote: Vanko
              Sorry, right word. It is necessary to distinguish between concepts.

              The fact of the matter is dear, that it is necessary to distinguish between concepts, and not replace the concepts with the essence of what is happening. The Junta called the Kiev war ATO, but conducted 6 waves of mobilization, which is not provided for ATO (work for internal troops and special forces).
              War is the solution of interstate contradictions by military means (if this is very simple)
              The conduct of hostilities is the conduct of military operations to solve specific operational and tactical tasks, which include the CTO (counter-terrorism operation).
              ISIS is not a subject of international law for the simple reason that there is no ISIS state, and therefore there is simply no one to declare war on. Bandits ???
              Russia did not declare war on ISIS !!!!!!!
              Russia is participating in the hostilities against ISIS in the framework of the anti-terrorist operation on the side of Syria at the invitation of a legitimate government!
              In diplomacy and international law - WAR and PARTICIPATION IN B / D - completely different concepts, which respectively imply different responsibilities, both political and economic, in the form of collecting indemnities from the losing side.
              They are trying hard to impose on us the understanding that Russia has declared war on ISIS. Recognizing this, we will very quickly be transferred to the category of "aggressor" who attacked the peacefully cutting heads of sheep breeders.
              If in your opinion this is a war - how do you think we can determine the time frame for our participation in it?
              a) Until complete victory?
              b) Upon completion of certain tasks?
              The Security Council of the Russian Federation gave permission for the participation of the Armed Forces time bound
              In the first case, it can drag on for years, as in Afghanistan and is associated with the risk of leaving without achieving a complete victory, which means the world will regard this as a defeat.
              In the second case, the operation will last from a month to six months, and at the same time, the possibility of leaving without a defeat, but simply upon the completion of the tasks.
              In the near future it is planned to bring the number of sorties from 60 to 200 per day, so it seems to me that we will not be there for a long time. We grind everything strategically interesting in the trash, and the local fighters clean it up.
              As for the CSTO’s examination of lice, it is too early to talk about this. The CSTO is not involved in international military operations. Collective protection is provided in case of an attack on one of the parties to the contract. So far, it seems like no one has attacked any of the CSTO member countries.
          2. Boa kaa
            Boa kaa 13 October 2015 23: 56 New
            +1
            Quote: morozik
            Russia has rockets that the whole world has gotten rid of, this is also a show ...

            No, this is not a show ... This is the maintenance of limited databases. DB is a part of the operation of the Russian Aerospace Forces abroad (in the ATS). But Russia is not at war! Fighting is not even conducted by all aircraft, but only part of the VKS! Can you imagine the WAR (!), In which the sun does not translate into BG FULL !?
            The plan does not come into force in the country ..., well, and so on ...
            It seems like the phenomenon of "one field of the berry", but the scale and degree of society's involvement are incomparable.
          3. MSL
            MSL 14 October 2015 16: 04 New
            +1
            Quote: morozik
            I mean the citizens of Russia !!! that is, volunteers die - this is not war, it is - fun for the lazy. The Russian war in Ukraine does not concern us either - like they themselves voted ...

            Absolutely right! There is no WAR in Russia, we are not at war.
            We are participating (legally) in Syria’s struggle against international terrorism.
            And we are trying to extinguish the "rug at our door" in Ukraine.
            And the fact that VOLUNTEERS die, ........ they are VOLUNTEERS. Good luck to them, alive.
            "Russia figures with rockets that the whole world has gone wild, this is also - so, show ..."

            You have a strange idea of ​​the "Whole World".
          4. Homo
            Homo 14 October 2015 18: 38 New
            0
            Quote: morozik
            I mean the citizens of Russia !!! that is, volunteers die - this is not war, it is - fun for the lazy. The Russian war in Ukraine doesn’t concern us either - like they voted for themselves ... Russia is figuratively rockets that the whole world has * fought, this is also a show ...

            Verbiage!!!
    3. SS68SS
      SS68SS 13 October 2015 15: 16 New
      10
      Author Semyon Uralov: "This is the true meaning of the beginning of the war in Syria"


      The meaning is on the surface. Russia needs a strong ruble, so we need to influence oil prices. Syria, Iran and Iraq are among the largest suppliers of oil to the world market. We need to be friends with them. Even if this friendship is not "for" but "against" someone ...
      1. NordUral
        NordUral 13 October 2015 17: 30 New
        12
        Russia needs a strong ruble. Yes! For this, Russia needs strong and successful ones: production and science, agriculture and education, a healthy population and medicine, and much more. And the brains cleared of a liberal infection, first of all.
      2. Vanko
        Vanko 13 October 2015 20: 21 New
        +1
        Damn, the matrix in action.

        I will explain to the young. Now, while the crisis is on, Russia does not need a strong ruble at all. Because the WTO. Now we need just such a ruble as it is.

        I will explain on the fingers. GASOLINE CHEAPER. If in December 2014 a liter of gasoline cost a dollar, now it costs half a dollar. But tuyeva, a business hub and an agricultural office, gained loans in dollars in the wake of high oil prices and the relative stability of the economy at that time.

        Draw conclusions.
        1. Saratoga833
          Saratoga833 13 October 2015 22: 09 New
          +7
          Quote: Vanko
          GASOLINE CHEAPER

          If you get paid and live in dollars, then maybe gasoline has fallen for you. Personally, I get in rubles and buy gas for rubles, and for me, who lives in Russia, gas has not become any cheaper! And my salary depends on the dollar exchange rate very, very little. And to me, unlike the Duma, a double increase in payments does not threaten me!
    4. Buffalo
      Buffalo 13 October 2015 15: 45 New
      +7
      In your opinion, now there’s not a real war going on there?
      Putin has already received permission to use troops in Syria. And at any time he can introduce them there, if necessary. The Syrian army is exhausted and thinned out in order. These are ISIS fighters, the ATS army - no.
      It cannot go on for so long.
      1. Dembel77
        Dembel77 13 October 2015 17: 42 New
        +6
        War is always the creation of the image of the enemy. You can be a pacifist three times, but if you live in a country that is at war, then you automatically become an enemy to the enemy of your country. Moreover, you may not even consider him an enemy - he still considers you to be such. And believes that you should be destroyed.
        How can my country’s participation in the war look for each of us personally? In principle, one of us can easily lose our health and even life itself. And it doesn’t matter in which part of the country we live (distance will not protect us from terrorists). This needs to be understood and taken into account by each of us. Naturally, this also applies to our CSTO allies.
      2. yuri_svoi
        yuri_svoi 14 October 2015 10: 47 New
        0
        A military operation is underway in Syria! A large-scale war (World War 3) will not begin until Obama leaves the post of US President! Russia's goal in Syria is to save the black race!
        It takes time for a distracting maneuver, for any military operations, since international criminals bankers are demanding that Obama start a world war to save the dollar!
        Saving a nation is a complex geopolitical process! The Supreme Commander-in-Chief, in agreement with the President of the United States, designated this operation as the "Olympics"
    5. GradusHuK
      GradusHuK 13 October 2015 17: 46 New
      +2
      Have you forgotten Spain? No Pasaran!
    6. Sergey-8848
      Sergey-8848 13 October 2015 18: 58 New
      +1
      The article is the idea that I am already at war and that we are already at the forefront of my head and my family. Despite all the "ALARM" in the article, no one was scared. Well, okay, and away we go, so what.
    7. user
      user 13 October 2015 19: 00 New
      +5
      Moreover, the main tests await the CSTO


      Now, if you remain silent, as in the case of Libya, then there will really be tests and tests of strength. In the world before, and even more so now, they only understand strength (in the sense of a state with powerful armed forces), but if you are weak (and you have some resources that are not necessarily natural, a good geographical position will come down too), then all kinds of color revolutions "go to You".
    8. 31R-US
      31R-US 13 October 2015 19: 47 New
      +2
      Seriously everything. I read the comments and think. Maybe not in the subject. But I’ll give a personal example. I have a grandmother in 1924, a participant V.O.V. has awards, a pension, and not a bad 25000 rubles, this winter fell, a hip fracture the doctors came to take a picture, fixed it, said that the grandmother was allowed a wheelchair free of charge, we collected all the necessary documents, they took a blood test from my grandmother, it is not clear why. In "TOTAL" I bought a chair in October at my own expense.
      Syria needs help, but I would ask the President not to forget about those thanks to whom we now live.
      It's a shame.
      1. Tambov Wolf
        Tambov Wolf 13 October 2015 20: 47 New
        +4
        First you need to remove the liberals from power. Then maybe they will take care of the people. And now it is useless. Chubais still walks in favor.
    9. Zai pali
      Zai pali 14 October 2015 00: 59 New
      0
      Syoma exaggerates the power of ISIS. He is only by the stupidity of the Americans. And sink into oblivion.
      1. MSL
        MSL 14 October 2015 16: 17 New
        0
        He himself will not sink into oblivion. America wick set fire to the side. And the wick has not burned out yet.
  2. Engineer
    Engineer 13 October 2015 15: 03 New
    +2
    The third world ... yes, the author suffered. In general, the meaning of the article is this: Putin is a sucker, Abama easily pulled him into the war in the BV, it will cause large defense spending, the war will drag out, there will be terrorist attacks in Russia, the authority of Putin and the security forces will drop sharply in front of the people, and the Americans ...
    1. NordUral
      NordUral 13 October 2015 17: 35 New
      13
      Terrorist attacks will, sadly admit it. And let the FSB and other services work successfully. But much greater danger for all the republics of the former Union is the collapse of Syria, then, possibly, Turkey and our former fellow citizens, the republics of Central Asia and the Caucasus. Then this terror will seem to us a paradise. Therefore, it will be necessary to strangle the snake in Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan. I hope that the neighbors will help. It also concerns them.
      1. Berthan
        Berthan 13 October 2015 19: 55 New
        +3
        Moreover, do not forget: "snake"- only one of the tools of the Ancient Enemy. And he has that, with the instinct of self-preservation everything is in order - he himself will not trample on the rampage.
  3. Vladimirets
    Vladimirets 13 October 2015 15: 05 New
    +9
    Moreover, the main tests await the CSTO, which includes Kazakhstan, Belarus, Kyrgyzstan, Armenia and Tajikistan.

    I think none of them is ready to fight for our geopolitical interests. And the CSTO, as a document, and not as an alliance, is still a legitimate instrument for Russia to repel the military operations of Western "partners" on the territory of these countries. So that it does not work, as with Ukraine.
    1. Grbear
      Grbear 13 October 2015 15: 20 New
      12
      Vladimirets
      I think none of them is ready to fight for our geopolitical interests. And the CSTO, as a document, and not as an alliance, is still a legitimate instrument for Russia to repel the military operations of Western "partners" on the territory of these countries. So that it does not work, as with Ukraine.


      And it is not required that the Collective Security Treaty Organization would fire medium-range missiles at the enemies of Russia. It is important that they work at full height on their borders. Without fools and other non-Russian liberal liberalism. IMHO. hi
    2. Darkoff
      Darkoff 13 October 2015 15: 55 New
      +9
      plus. The countries mentioned did not conclude the Collective Security Treaty to fight for our geopolitical interests, but to fight for their existence in the event of an external threat. The Russian Federation concluded the Collective Security Treaty in order to have the possibility of defense at long distances. This all coincides with the national interests of all participating countries. And each of them understood what they fit in and not fools made decisions. Symbiosis is a mutually beneficial coexistence.
      Simon Uralov disappointed. He showed himself to be a terry couch strategist.
      1. tolian
        tolian 13 October 2015 17: 27 New
        +5
        And the name and surname of Saman tell me about the unreliability of the author. It blows with provocation. Or is he stupid. Pay attention to the end of the article. Consonant with recent assurances from Western media that Putin is rebuilding the USSR.
    3. NordUral
      NordUral 13 October 2015 17: 35 New
      +1
      For ours - no. But for their own - have to. We, I hope, are also not going to fight for the interests of others.
      1. Kasym
        Kasym 13 October 2015 17: 59 New
        13
        In addition to the Russian Federation, there are no such weapons in the CSTO countries. There are no calibers and Su-34s with Su-24s, all the more so high-precision munitions. Also, GDP denies the ground operation of the RF Armed Forces, but calls on neighboring Muslim countries to join. And everything is clear to me here - without the consolidation of neighboring countries, efforts can go into the sand. They will run away to neighboring countries and will organize raids, terrorist attacks, etc. from there (remember what the spirits did after the first Chechen one).
        But if, after the ATO in Syria, peacekeepers are required for some police functions, for example, to clear mines, and the Russian Federation gives the go-ahead, then I think the CSTO will react. And even more so if the local population is "FOR".
        On the ground, the United States will definitely try to arrange a second Afghan for us. Yes, and after going through this "crucible", the Syrian people will be much more monolithic and will have immunity to all these provocative revolutions. It is necessary that the countries of the region themselves solve this problem - they should live there, this is their land. Otherwise, you will constantly have to perform "police" functions in the region. And with the status of a superpower, there is no need to try on the functions of a "world gendarme", that's enough for us during the Soviet era. hi
        1. Talgat
          Talgat 13 October 2015 23: 19 New
          +1
          Dear fellow Russians! Look a little wider

          Firstly, the Collective Security Treaty Organization is still a military bloc and is clearly spelled out there. that in the event of aggression, the rest enter - God forbid, the boot of a foreign soldier enters the territory of the Russian Federation, and the Belarusians and Kazakhs and the rest enter the war and fight - such an obligation was given by all CSTO countries by signing the treaty - the same applies to Russia, if any troops (God forbid) cross our borders

          Secondly, one must understand that in limited external conflicts, such as Ukraine or Syria, Russian diplomacy makes good use of the fact that the KZ and Belarus are like separate republics - as a result, there are platforms for negotiations with those you cannot speak directly to - in Minsk negotiations with Porosenko, in Astana with the Syrian opposition - is anyone really so naive that they will believe that Astana has decided to pursue its independent course and policy towards Syria and the opposition? This is teamwork!

          And there is no need for Kazakhs or Belarusians to fight in Syria or Ukraine right now, this is not 1941 near Moscow - we will bring more benefit as instruments of Russian diplomacy in this case
  4. Peacemaker
    Peacemaker 13 October 2015 15: 05 New
    +9
    War is always suffering and blood ... But the house must be protected from all sorts of scumbags. We are all pacifists. God is helping the sun protecting civilians and brain sobering to zombie people who are walking in the paths of evil. Slowly, some still get it. http://1news.az/world/20151007124409044.html
  5. smith7
    smith7 13 October 2015 15: 10 New
    14
    Quote: MIKHALYCHXNNX
    So, we have two main facts:
    First, Russia wages war in the Middle East

    Russia does not wage war in the BV .. And we don’t need to hammer it! If Russia starts to fight, it will not be the Middle East ... and it will be a real war!

    Leads, leads ... And no need to replace concepts. Russian troops on Russian military equipment hit targets deployed in the Middle East according to the plan of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation. In these military operations, Russia has quite definite goals and objectives that coincide with the goals of the Allies. So what is it if not war? In addition, the military-industrial complex of the Russian Federation works seven days a week, budgets are cut in the interests of the same military-industrial complex ... We are at war. No other way.
  6. rf xnumx
    rf xnumx 13 October 2015 15: 12 New
    21
    First, Russia wages war in the Middle East
    How much can you write to all sorts of idiots and alarmists? Russia provides military assistance to a friendly country and destroys filth in order to protect their country from "infection", feel the difference in help
    1. tolian
      tolian 13 October 2015 17: 29 New
      +5
      We did not understand that from cookies to dryers one step.
  7. maiman61
    maiman61 13 October 2015 15: 18 New
    +8
    Please list allies of Russia! Not those who with an outstretched hand always whine: "Give me money!", But those who are fighting shoulder to shoulder with us in Syria!
    1. Asadullah
      Asadullah 13 October 2015 15: 31 New
      +8
      who is fighting with us shoulder to shoulder in Syria!


      Iran. Persia.
    2. Tambov Wolf
      Tambov Wolf 13 October 2015 20: 53 New
      +1
      Yes, no problem. Iranian units and special forces, Hezbollah, volunteers from Iraq. Syria is understandable.
  8. smith7
    smith7 13 October 2015 15: 18 New
    13
    You can talk about military assistance to a friendly state as much as you like, but in reality Russia is trying to defeat evil in the territory of a friendly state so that this war does not come to our homes.
  9. ilyaches
    ilyaches 13 October 2015 15: 19 New
    +9
    That is, do not need to help the weak? And do not need to protect and defend your interests? What nonsense.
  10. Fucknato
    Fucknato 13 October 2015 15: 37 New
    +7
    I think in the end we will come to what the Russian Emperor Alexander the third said that Russia has two friends - the Army and the Navy.
    1. NordUral
      NordUral 13 October 2015 17: 38 New
      +4
      In general, we have long come to this, back in 1941.
  11. Alexander 67
    Alexander 67 13 October 2015 15: 37 New
    +3
    Although I put + on the article. And I wanted to write a little. But the last phrase "killed" this desire. In fact, the entire "article" is defined by the Russian proverb: "We started for health, and ended for peace." (C) And if you look at it from the side of logic and political technology, then this is called "substitution of the thesis"! Such "authors" in the old days of my ancestors were tied to birches by both legs. This "author", together with the same, is the most dangerous threat to Russia.
    1. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa 14 October 2015 00: 28 New
      +1
      Quote: Alexander 67
      This "author", together with the same, is the most dangerous threat to Russia.
      Wow! Captured the very essence of the design of this article !!! Bravo! good
  12. Buffalo
    Buffalo 13 October 2015 15: 37 New
    +8
    Many office plankton and couch generals still share liberal views on the conflict in Syria. This is explained by the fact that while they are not threatened with mobilization. When it touches everyone, their attitude will change radically. Take Israel, a small state, for example. So there, unlike Russia, there is a state. propaganda is unity regarding the issue of defense. And then there is the liberal media, the children of whose owners are not threatened with being drafted into the active army. Their children are already "over the hill", or they are ready to go there at any time, because they have dual citizenship, foreign business, real estate, capital.
    1. BMW
      BMW 13 October 2015 16: 51 New
      +3
      Quote: Bison
      And here there are liberal media, the children of whose owners are not threatened with being drafted into the active army. Their children are already "over the hill", or they are ready to go there at any time, because they have dual citizenship, foreign business, real estate, capital.

      So under their breath. good drinks
    2. tolian
      tolian 13 October 2015 17: 43 New
      0
      Bizon, what do you mean by "liberal views" on the conflict in Syria? Isn't it complete approval?
  13. iouris
    iouris 13 October 2015 15: 38 New
    +7
    The main ally is a strong rear. The war is won not only by the army, but by the whole people. The spiritual factors of victory are determined by the nature of the state, its internal policy aimed at the population. If this is a real war, then our state must change quickly.
    1. smith7
      smith7 13 October 2015 15: 48 New
      +5
      At the same time, it is also important not to confuse "strong rear" with "thick w about p"
      1. Tambov Wolf
        Tambov Wolf 13 October 2015 20: 56 New
        +1
        Do not write like that, otherwise they will be banned, like me recently. Here soon, as in a muslin women's institution, we will "write out" a pretzel.
    2. The comment was deleted.
  14. Alekseyklg
    Alekseyklg 13 October 2015 15: 41 New
    0
    The article did not like! The author’s goal is to guard screaming or to prepare for war for everyone !?
  15. veksha50
    veksha50 13 October 2015 15: 49 New
    10
    In fact, in the morning, one author wondered why China had not yet started military operations in Syria on the Russian and Syrian side ...

    Now the second is wondering why the CSTO fighters on our side are not fighting ...

    CSTO and Syria - two huge differences ... And the countries - members of the CSTO - are NOT required to participate in hostilities in Syria ...

    This is a matter of morality rather than action ...

    The moment of truth is for us, but not for them ... And it will also be if we are attacked from the west, not the east - alas, no one will come to help for many reasons ... and our own weakness, and unwillingness to die for Russia ... So in vain we want to get help from someone ... The whole history of the USSR-Russia says that we are tolerated and supported when we are rich and powerful ... But in trouble ... And both the USSR and modern Russia are in trouble should rely only on themselves ...
    1. Vladimirets
      Vladimirets 13 October 2015 15: 51 New
      +3
      Quote: veksha50
      The whole history of the USSR-Russia shows that we are tolerated and supported when we are rich and powerful ...

      I think this is true not only for us.
      1. padded jacket
        padded jacket 13 October 2015 16: 00 New
        +8
        It seems that all the same, not only advisers but also fighters of the Iranian army actually appeared in Syria (possibly vacationers smile ).
        Iranian Safir SUVs with 106 mm BO in Syria.


        Our Mi-24P:

        mp-navigator.livejournal.com/382353.html#comments
    2. Talgat
      Talgat 13 October 2015 23: 30 New
      0
      Quote: veksha50
      if they attack us from the west, not the east - alas, no one will come to the rescue


      Here you are wrong. Veksh, with all due respect.

      With aggression against Russia, both Belarus and Kazakhstan are, in the first place, simply obliged to join the CSTO treaty in force

      Secondly, they will do it due to the "merger" of our military and diplomatic departments and states in general (we even have one air defense system now) - especially since we are now actually integrating into the EAU

      Thirdly - even if the "bureaucracy fails" our peoples will not sit still - in all 3 republics there is one people in fact - these are Russians who live in Russia and in KZ and by the way make up a significant, if not most of the command staff, this is Turks of the steppe - in Russia there are Tatars, Bashkirs and dozens of other peoples, the same in Kz and Kazakhs who are not just relatives to these peoples, but almost one people with them,

      Fourth, both the people and the leadership understand that we and the Russian Federation have one destiny and one future - both under the Golden Horde and now

      In general - God forbid that what happens in the West - 100% and the Kazakhs and the same Kyrgyz and Tajiks will all come - this is definitely

      And also the Mongols will come - that’s probably the Russians will be surprised
  16. akula
    akula 13 October 2015 16: 03 New
    +7
    Quote: vc 72019


    Some kind of pro-American brains in people. Once the telly was so formulated, the meaning is so. It’s just that the war is now modern, according to technical progress. But how do you think Assad has been holding up for so many years? Was there anything without help? There was military help before the planes were introduced -tanks there, machine guns, money. And now there is a war with pilots, planes, missiles.
  17. sl22277
    sl22277 13 October 2015 16: 04 New
    0
    I’ll tell you my opinion right away: I simply did not evaluate the article. I will explain the reasons: There is a war going on in Syria, nothing else. Our Armed Forces participate in this war as aid, on foreign territory, protecting their interests in the first place. The interests of the legitimate government of Syria and Russia coincide. But this is not our war. This means that Russia cannot wage war in the Middle East.
    1. BMW
      BMW 13 October 2015 17: 07 New
      0
      Quote: sl22277
      The interests of the legitimate government of Syria and Russia coincide. But this is not our war. This means that Russia cannot wage war in the Middle East.

      I also think that this is not our war, and to openly get into it is a big mistake and a miscalculation. BUT, we got involved there, i.e. we’re at war, and no matter how we treat it, cones will sprinkle on us anyway. It will hit us hard or not, I don’t know. Just a statement of the FACT - we are at war.
      PS. I did not vote for the article - a bit strange.
      PPP. We remember what the First World War led to and why. We draw conclusions. Yes, I think for a long time.
  18. aleks700
    aleks700 13 October 2015 16: 07 New
    -5
    War is always creating an image of the enemy. You can be a pacifist thrice, but if you live in a country that is fighting a war, then you automatically become an enemy for the enemy of your country. And you can even not consider him an enemy - he considers you as such anyway. And believes that you must be destroyed.
    Here, too, with Ukraine.
    The war in Syria and the moment of truth for the citizens and allies of Russia
    this moment came when the supreme refused to protect the Russians in Ukraine.
  19. erased
    erased 13 October 2015 16: 13 New
    +2
    This is a huge alliance of peoples and states, including Poland, Prussia, Austria and others. It fought against Russia, which was supported by England.


    Finally, England was behind the assassination of Paul I. England forced Russia (indirectly, kaneshno) not to conclude treaties with France. And she actually pushed Napoleon and Alexander between their foreheads. What's next is a different calico.
    Now for ISIS, ukro-natsi and everyone else, the United States stands in the company of hangers-on (NATO). The goal is world domination. This is greatly hindered by China and Russia. They will be destroyed. Methods have long been identified and scheduled. Another question is whether these two countries agree to the role of victims ?! The answer is now obvious.
    By the way, behind the States themselves are the financial aces of the main families of the planet. The Rothschilds, Rockefellers, Morgan and about a hundred more mega-oligarchs.

    It’s a pity that so far they have not found moves to parallel (panpendicular and other) worlds. It would be where to sit in nature in silence. If there are no wars there. Ehh ...
    1. avia1991
      avia1991 13 October 2015 20: 25 New
      +2
      Quote: erased
      By the way, behind the States themselves are the financial aces of the main families of the planet. Rothschilds, Rockefellers, Morgan and about a hundred more mega-oligarchs

      This is not a "discovery of America" request lol
      Quote: erased
      This is greatly hindered by China and Russia. They will be destroyed. Methods have long been identified and scheduled. Another question is whether these two countries agree to the role of victims ?!

      The question you raise is, in my opinion, incorrect - although it is clear WHAT you mean. I think it would be more correct to ask: "Do the PEOPLES of these two countries agree to become a" victim "? This question can be answered unambiguously.
      Russia's trouble in this regard is the proliferation of "agents" indicated in the first quotation of "gasspods" within our economic structures. Russia cannot be defeated in a war of weapons - this has been proven many times over. But Russia, since the collapse of the USSR, has been purposefully and successfully plundered, acting within our economy! It depends on whether we can cope with this enemy, and our bright future depends. hi
  20. plotnikov561956
    plotnikov561956 13 October 2015 16: 23 New
    +5
    The correct article ... yes. There is war and the question of audit, the environment of true friends and imaginary has long matured ...
  21. Lelek
    Lelek 13 October 2015 16: 45 New
    12
    (In the event that the CSTO allies do not join the new alliance, the issue of the viability of the CSTO itself will be on the agenda. Because today you refused to stand shoulder to shoulder with the Russian army, and tomorrow the Russian army refused to defend you.)

    I have been asking this question for a long time. I just can't understand what kind of structure it is - the CSTO. If a threat has arisen somewhere, Russia is protecting the entire alliance, while the rest at this time are selling watermelons, flirting with the western, eastern, southern and even those from whom the threat, until blue in the face, bargain with the same Russia about discounts on energy carriers, kiss with the leaders of states that have declared themselves enemies No. 1 in relation to Russia. The questions arise: what was it? How is this to be understood? And where are these very "shoulders" of the CSTO? It turns out, as in a parable: first you will ride me, and then I will ride you. Maybe I'm wrong, but IMHO this CSTO exists only on paper, and paper, as you know, will endure everything. request
    1. tolian
      tolian 13 October 2015 17: 58 New
      +2
      Lelyok, think more thoroughly. As you write "the rest" are trading, flirting. Well, let. Just don't invite the sowers of democracy with bombs on airplanes. And there is no need to feed the tsars, as in the USSR. Let them build a good life in their countries under the protection of our atom. Even if there are rascals among them, they are our rascals. Otherwise they have a skiff without us.
  22. Evgtan
    Evgtan 13 October 2015 17: 09 New
    +5
    So be it in the future
  23. ermolai
    ermolai 13 October 2015 17: 15 New
    +4
    Quote: Vladimirets
    I think none of them is ready to fight for our geopolitical interests.

    and I thought Syria was at war, and the Russian Federation was providing air support, and at the same time testing / advertising new weapons. practicing combat skills, and putting someone in a puddle. declare yourself in support of the speech at the UN. there it is, and Juncker is now jumping up and down and shouting: we need to be friends with the Russian Federation, and the FSA has no right to tell us. it’s even among gays that they noticed that the number of planes in Syria was no more than the ukropitheks had before the anti-terrorist operation, and after the birthday fireworks, “Roosevelt” went for urgent repairs. and you think in the east not such nuances will go unnoticed? if the main brute pissed off when scared.
    1. Chak
      Chak 13 October 2015 17: 59 New
      +3
      Interestingly, if Russia provides air support, does it give out New Year's gifts ??? Or fight-it is only on earth ???
      1. avia1991
        avia1991 14 October 2015 08: 41 New
        0
        Quote: ChAK
        Or fight-it is only on earth ???

        "To fight" is not only on the ground. But the definition of "war" presupposes a number of signs. How do you think we fought in Chechnya? Or carried out a counter-terrorist operation?
    2. Vladimirets
      Vladimirets 13 October 2015 18: 04 New
      0
      Quote: ermolai
      Roosevelt snatched up on urgent repairs

      Do you seriously believe that he was scared of ours? request
  24. Chak
    Chak 13 October 2015 17: 21 New
    +6
    The author is right! Russia is waging a war against ISIS. In fact, Russia has been dragged into the war since the 90s. Only the enemy's name was then different, but the owners were the same. The questions in the article are also posed correctly: who are our allies outside Russia, are they ready to support Russia in the fight against a common, by and large, enemy. Or they are only ready to milk Russia, but at the first danger they fold or even go over to the enemy's camp. The next question: do we - the population of Russia - understand the change in the geopolitical situation, the change in the status of Russia, do we support Russia in its striving to become a powerful, independent, prosperous state, or do we prefer the imposed system of "consumerism" - Western values. Who we are - office plankton, party-goers, etc. or citizens of a great power? The article is not alarmist, just everyone should realize for himself who he is, with whom he is, in what environment he is, whether this environment is his friend or enemy. I think we are not going here then to tell stories, but in search of like-minded people. And like-minded people tend to speak the truth in the face.
    1. Chak
      Chak 13 October 2015 18: 02 New
      +3
      Minuscars are always amusing, not bothering to explain their position))) Like, I walked by, I didn’t give a damn and went on ... It’s worth it, you know)))
    2. avia1991
      avia1991 13 October 2015 20: 33 New
      0
      Quote: ChAK
      who are our allies outside of Russia, Are they ready to support Russia in the fight against a common, by and large, enemy. Or they are only ready to milk Russia, but at the first danger they can save or even go over to the camp of the enemy.
      We need them to declare in the international arena of their own importance, and attractiveness as an ally. As for the real allies of Russia - they have long been known! THEIR TWO: ARMY AND Navy OF RUSSIA.
      Experts: do not bother with minusers - your opinion, more precisely, its presence, is more valuable wink than rating. I especially liked this one:
      everyone should realize for himself who he is, with whom he is, in what environment he is, whether this environment is a friend or an enemy. I think we are not here going to get rid of stories, but in search of like-minded people.
      good
  25. Aleksandr21
    Aleksandr21 13 October 2015 17: 31 New
    +7
    The article is interesting, definitely to the author. In Syria, we really are fighting a war against terrorism, and as if some commentators did not want to admit that there is a war going on and Russia is a participant in it. The enemy is terrorism and he does not have a nationality, and the Russian military does not sunbathe there, but works on the orders of the President of the Russian Federation and fulfills the goals and objectives of the General Staff of the Ministry of Defense. To say that we are not fighting is to show no respect for our military, who risk their lives every day. On the topic, the Collective Security Treaty Organization fully agrees with the author, it is time to make a really working organization out of this paper tiger. The problem here I suppose lies in the CSTO documentation, namely, the coordination of all participants for any action, i.e. need to send somewhere peacekeepers? it means that the consent of all the heads of the participants is necessary, someone is against and everything on this system fails, the most effective will be to transfer the control of the CRR to the CSTO Secretary General and the narrow composition of the military, who will be able to correctly manage this, and the system will not work, each president with the exception of the President of the Russian Federation) he will try to shift the responsibility to other members and when it will be necessary to send troops somewhere, this process will be delayed to the last, so the system must be changed, IMHO.
  26. Yak28
    Yak28 13 October 2015 17: 45 New
    +8
    Quote: maiman61
    Please list allies of Russia! Not those who with an outstretched hand always whine: "Give me money!", But those who are fighting shoulder to shoulder with us in Syria!

    Russia has no allies and did not have. It is enough to recall the USSR, where Russia built infrastructure in these wonderful republics, taught literacy, even invented the alphabet for Asians, Russia defended them in different years, as well as take the Warsaw Pact countries that the USSR rebuilt after the war. But suddenly Russia became weak and sick, the USSR collapsed and what we see. The Warsaw Pact is now NATO, the fraternal republics began to survive the Russians as one, and play their favorite game together with eastern Europe, who will shower Russia more with mud from the mouth. Sincerely with Russia now only Syria can be friends, and then because they now need it
  27. v.yegorov
    v.yegorov 13 October 2015 18: 36 New
    +5

    The open war of the Russian Federation in Syria is just a statement of the fact that Russia is ready to create pre-war alliances. Which, incidentally, immediately changed reality. So, launches of cruise missiles of the Caspian flotilla can and should be considered the day of the formation of a real military alliance between Moscow, Tehran and Baghdad

    And not only. This is an application for lifting from the "karachek" to a more proud posture, for example, half hunched over. But I hope there will be both shoulder straightening and protrusion
    breasts.
    A key task for Russia will be the verification of all its military alliances, which were concluded in peacetime. And the main tests are waiting for the CSTO, which includes Kazakhstan, Belarus, Kyrgyzstan, Armenia and Tajikistan.

    The author here very clearly posed the question - do we have allies, or so,
    for furniture? I'm afraid the answer will be traditional, there are two of them - the Army and the Navy.
    A review of all military alliances that the Russian Federation has tried to conclude since 1991 should be carried out as soon as possible. Because the army of the Russian Federation should protect only those frontiers that are recognized as the territory of historical Russia - not that which was formed from the privatized RSFSR, but that Russia, which was the Russian Empire, the Soviet Union, and now transformed into the Eurasian Union.

    The article is very piercing and truthful. And asks more questions than gives answers. Questions about our future.
  28. Aland
    Aland 13 October 2015 19: 18 New
    +5
    Here prevail two points of view to fight or not to fight.
    Do you think we have a choice?
    Or our ancestors had it.
    The clan Slavs lives while Russia exists.
    Name at least 100 years for 7524 years from SM when Russia lived peacefully,
    and it depends on us what we leave to our descendants and whether they will be.
    1. Vanko
      Vanko 13 October 2015 20: 46 New
      +1
      Quote: Aland

      Do you think we have a choice?

      There is always a choice. You can fight, but you can then fight back. And there was a different choice in our history. They chose Putin - he is fighting. Would choose someone else - who knows ...
      Quote: Aland

      The clan Slavs lives while Russia exists.

      Never visited the idea that the Russians and the Slavs are slightly different concepts? Czechs and Bulgarians, for example, Slavs, but for some reason not Russians.

      Quote: Aland

      Name at least 100 years for 7524 years from SM when Russia lived peacefully,
      and it depends on us what we leave to our descendants and whether they will be.

      Well, here you are deeply dug. Call at least one war older than the birth of Christ drinks

      I don’t put a minus, it makes no sense.
      1. avia1991
        avia1991 13 October 2015 22: 36 New
        0
        Quote: Vanko
        Call at least one war older than the birth of Christ

        And your sarcasm is completely out of place: Do you read Yuri Nikitin? Start with "Three from the Forest" .. and then you will understand how much we were NOT told about Russia in history lessons belay .
        laughing
        PS By the way, here's about it:
        Never visited the idea that the Russians and the Slavs are slightly different concepts?
        And you were not visited by the idea that the Slavs exist precisely now, as nations, because Russia has always stood up for them and defended it? Or did you study ANOTHER History?
  29. DOMINO100
    DOMINO100 13 October 2015 19: 34 New
    +1
    An Nusra Leader Destroyed in Daraa Province
  30. Vanko
    Vanko 13 October 2015 19: 59 New
    +1
    Quote: Sergey-8848
    The article is the idea that I am already at war and that we are already at the forefront of my head and my family. Despite all the "ALARM" in the article, no one was scared. Well, okay, and away we go, so what.


    This is what I call the Russian mentality. hi

    Rushed so raced, cho. good Touching us personally, we will respond as best we can angry
  31. avia1991
    avia1991 13 October 2015 20: 00 New
    +1
    An ambiguous article .. but the author argues, in my opinion, is quite sensible. Although here with this, for example, statement:
    Today you refused to stand shoulder to shoulder with the Russian army, and tomorrow the Russian army refused to defend you.
    I would argue: many times in History there were such conditions when Russia undertook to protect / release those who were not members of its military alliance. AND considering our today's rhetoric, according to the principle "we love and respect everyone", I have no doubt that the CSTO countries, having refused to support Russia today, can count on Russia to help if need arises. And then, to declare:
    CSTO allies are forced to decide here and now in relation to the actual alliance of Moscow, Tehran, Baghdad and Damascus
    we need to show more clearly HOW ISIS can threaten these our allies today. So far, everything is only at the level of statements, allegations, but the real threats have not yet reached Astana and Bishkek, they do not know the level of terror familiar to Russians there.
  32. Vanko
    Vanko 13 October 2015 20: 08 New
    +1
    [/ quote] Iran. Persia. [/ Quote]

    An Apple. Apple jam

    Iran is Persia fellow
  33. Vanko
    Vanko 13 October 2015 20: 57 New
    +2
    Quote: avia1991
    I would argue: many times in history there were such conditions when Russia undertook to protect / release those who were not part of its military alliance. And given our rhetoric today, according to the principle of "we all love and respect," I have no doubt that the CSTO countries, having refused to support Russia today, can count on Russia to help if the need arises.


    It's not about the friendliness of the states surrounding Russia. The point is the flight time of missiles. Therefore, for example, Lukashenko can afford some liberties in his statements about Russia, knowing full well that we will not go anywhere and will cover him with his air defense.
    1. avia1991
      avia1991 13 October 2015 22: 27 New
      0
      Quote: Vanko
      The point is the flight time of missiles. Therefore, for example, Lukashenko can afford some liberties in statements about Russia

      Regarding the Old Man: I think the Kremlin tolerates him for one simple reason: there is no other suitable one.
      However, it would be naive to think that the Kremlin is very worried about the approach of NATO from Belarus: the Belarusians are not good, and they did not buckle under the Germans during the war! They are precisely the fraternal people on whom we can count. And when Father tries to seriously flirt with NATO, he will end his career in a matter of days - along with life! Moreover, "due to completely natural reasons" wassat
      So, as long as he is calmly sitting "on a leash", he can speak out against Russia, as much as he can - the situation will not change, just as the dependence of the Belarusian economy on the Russian one will not change either. The West will not tolerate such behavior, which Lukashenka allows himself in relation to the Kremlin, in relation to the EU leaders, and Batka's methods of government ... for example, are SLIGHTLY different from democratic ones. Therefore, on the one hand, there is no need to be afraid of the "Maidan" in Minsk, on the other hand, no one, outside the Kremlin, really needs Batka ..
  34. Mikhalych 70
    Mikhalych 70 13 October 2015 21: 03 New
    0
    It sounds blasphemous, but friends from the CSTO somehow need to be checked "in action." But it seems that if tomorrow it will be announced that a certain combined CSTO contingent will be involved in carrying out any mission, the local "elites" will instantly demonstrate their not frail stock of tires. And the local leaders will immediately have no time for Syria, the Collective Security Treaty Organization and the dispatch of a contingent. To sit and prevent another revolution, well, let's say, "New Year trees". Therefore, one must rely only on the falcons of Kozhugetich, Fradkov's dervishes, Lavrov's wisdom and the Dark One's fortune.
  35. Kupez4
    Kupez4 13 October 2015 21: 27 New
    0
    How else? Exactly the only way !!!
  36. Vlad5307
    Vlad5307 13 October 2015 21: 44 New
    +1
    Quote: ksv1973
    If Russia decided to speak out loud and harshly, it means she has every reason for that!

    And not only the foundations, but also the vital necessity. Both economic and geopolitical! Yes, the encirclement by the NATO bloc must somehow be broken through, but sitting exactly on the priest cannot do this. There was apparently nowhere to retreat. Europe is being prepared with might and main for a new world meat grinder, and if you do not cool some of the hot heads of the SGA Euroassals and show the peoples of Europe what this may result in, and do not raise their protests against NATO's preparations for a war with Russia, then the worst will turn out. We do not have propaganda for the ideas of peace, so we are not heard in the West, but everyone believes in their "free" media, which distract them from the main thing by throwing refugees, bugger parades and other gum! am
  37. Seneca
    Seneca 13 October 2015 23: 28 New
    0
    Can anyone list all our allies ... if the third world happens tomorrow? I have more than one does not work out.
    1. Vanko
      Vanko 14 October 2015 14: 40 New
      +1
      Quote: Seneca
      Can anyone list all our allies ... if the third world happens tomorrow? I have more than one does not work out.


      How does it not work out? belay What about the fleet? fellow
  38. green20181
    green20181 13 October 2015 23: 35 New
    0
    Everything is fine in the text, but the last paragraph is not in context. The author, an attempt to raise the question of the competence of the use of force by one state at the request of another, has nothing to do with union obligations. And do not create a panic. Who do you work for?
  39. Zomanus
    Zomanus 14 October 2015 07: 18 New
    0
    Good article. At least in terms of the fact that now we really will see who is with us and who came to sit clean. If the IS claims that those who are friends with Russia will be attacked, how many countries will refuse to cooperate with us? But such statements can be made after a couple of terrorist attacks in the SCO and CSTO member countries. Here's the article and makes you think about with whom we will enter the next world war. And where will the borders with enemy states lie.
  40. vladimirw
    vladimirw 14 October 2015 12: 51 New
    0
    And with its borders, accordingly, one also has to decide: either defend recognized borders or expand existing ones. There is no need for a third. This is the true meaning of the outbreak of war in Syria.
    I like it