Military Review

Putin's speech at the UN: will the West accept the new brotherhood in arms

42
Putin proposed to create a new anti-Hitler coalition - they beat the fascists together, now we will beat ISIS - and thus overcome the contradictions between the West and Russia. West in thought: the USSR was indispensable for the victory over Hitler, but in Syria, the West still does not consider Russia to be equally indispensable.


In his speech at the previous 69 UN General Assembly in September 2014, Barack Obama named three major threats to the world: Ebola, Russia, ISIS.

Putin's speech at the UN: will the West accept the new brotherhood in armsThis time, Obama did not say anything like that. Noting that in Ukraine, Russia did worse for himself, he called it a partner in the negotiations on the Iranian nuclear program and said it was ready to work together to stop the Syrian conflict.

In this sense, the intermediate task of Russian foreign policy can be considered fulfilled. The whole last year’s task was to change the order: let ISIS be the first, then, so be it, Russia, and then Ebola, because it is a shame to be harmless than the new African contagion. And it is better to let Russia fall out of the first three altogether.

“We propose to be guided not by ambitions, but by common values ​​and common interests, on the basis of international law, to unite efforts ... and create a truly broad international antiterrorist coalition,” the Russian president addressed the meeting. “Like the anti-Hitler coalition, it could unite in its ranks a variety of forces that will resolutely oppose those who, like the Nazis, sow evil and misanthropy.”

In the well-known Dovlatov's memoir, Genis and Weil, driving on the subway under the terrible Harlem with a bottle of whiskey on the floor and a smoking cigarette in their teeth, they came to the conclusion that they, two Russian writers, are the most terrible here. The current task of Russian diplomacy is to prove the opposite: the most terrible here and now is not us, but the others are ISIS.

In essence, Putin proposes to create a new anti-Hitler coalition — an alliance of powers with different values ​​against the evil that is evident above the value barriers. He is even ready to accept in her the thankless role of the most difficult participant, the new Stalin, with whom only the presence of a common terrible threat is reconciled. But even in this role, the West is still hesitant to accept it.

Honesty sentences


Looking from Moscow, it is really difficult to understand why the West refuses to agree on the obvious: to admit that ISIS is worse, and to accept our offer to defeat it together. However, from the West this proposal does not look so obviously convincing.

It is very difficult for Western countries to become brothers by arms with Russia, until the war in eastern Ukraine is guaranteed to end. But, let's say, Ukraine will be forgotten, especially if ISIS continues to grow, and the refugees arrive, as it is now happening. After all, the recipe for reconciliation with the West is simple: peace in Ukraine and war somewhere else is one that we did not start, but we can help finish it.

Anyway, it is not easy for the West to accept the proposal of joint struggle against the “Islamic State”, when the main Russian propagandist compares American President Obama with ISIS leader al-Baghdadi, hardworking, as a structuralist philologist, builds a whole table of regular correspondences. The head of parliament, the fourth person in the state, calls Americans miserable clowns, the head of the Senate says that they spread the Middle Ages and barbarism.

It may seem to us that the statements of our propagandists and politicians for internal use - well, still understand everything? But, firstly, not always for the internal - some are addressed to Europeans and the third world: "You still have nothing, but the Americans are bad, all your troubles are from them, go to us better." We ourselves, if someone from Western politicians says something anti-Russian, are not ready to believe that this is for their own narrow circle: notice and publicly take offense.

Of course, in the case of an alliance against ISIS, we are ready to reduce the degree of confrontation, as Putin did in his UN speech. But after the victory, then, perhaps, everything can return - how many sparrows are stored in the bosom. So it happened after the victory.

There are irreplaceable


The main task of Putin’s speech is to define ISIS as an unconditional evil, the worst enemy of mankind and thus overcome the contradictions between the West and Russia, without in any way changing Russia itself. When the fascists were beaten together, no one forced Stalin to hold free elections, open independent newspapers or at least abolish socialist realism in art. Even the territorial acquisitions of the USSR accepted. The present Russia is not like civilized, freer and closer to the West than the Stalinist USSR. Why not take it?

We answer is unclear, but the West is clear. The USSR was indispensable for the victory over Hitler, but the West still does not consider Russia to be equally indispensable for the victory over ISIL.

It’s not so easy to prove right away that they are wrong. We keep in mind the Second World War, and they can recall the Afghan one with the same right. How is Russia going to fight with ISIS - how did it fight with Hitler on its territory or how with the mojaheds on a stranger? With what internal stress, how much will it give all the best? The quantitative presence of Russian manpower and equipment in Syria and the surrounding region, inflated by politicians and journalists, because the “Russians are coming” is insignificant compared to the western one. Several dozens of new airplanes and one precisely recorded combat departure — to the beginning of the General Assembly, to show the seriousness of intentions. Newsthat contract soldiers have already refused to go to Syria and are submitting such an order to their commanders at the military prosecutor’s office. Saving Damascus from massacre and plunder is a noble task that Americans don’t offer a clear solution, but where is the proof that Russian soldiers will stand for it to the last? Putin understands: Russia does not look irreplaceable here, and declares as such the Syrian government, for which Russian assistance is indispensable.

Miscellaneous to load


In addition, after joint beating, there is a draft section of the skin of a killed hydra and its further use. In the West, they are well aware that brothers in arms are discussing how to equip the saved world: how will the boundaries go, what spheres of influence will be and who will. In general, Orthodoxy, autocracy, multipolarity.

With the USSR, which was indispensable for the victory over Hitler, they were ready to discuss it, and with Russia, which does not seem so indispensable, until they are ready, they are thinking.

Turkey seems to be much more necessary for the victory over LIH to the West - it is somewhere nearby, it has already fought in those parts and continues, the Islamic State threatens it directly. And she and Russia have different goals. Russia wants to save Assad, and Turkey - to remove.

The main problem of the anti-Igilov coalition is that the participants start fighting with various backward thoughts in their heads. Everyone has to “break ISIS” - as in the Soviet grocery set - its own weight gain. We want to break ISIS, without changing ourselves, to make peace with the West and save Assad. Turkey wants to break ISIS, Assad and Kurds at the same time. Sunni monarchies of the Gulf - break ISIS, drive Shiites behind Mozhi, and at the same time make Syria and Iraq (especially Syria) more religious and Sunni states - stop the unnatural rule of secular dictators and heretics as inappropriate to the spiritual traditions of the Arab people. The Americans want to smash ISIS and overthrow Assad, but they absolutely do not want to smash the Kurds and Shiites, who now need to defeat ISIS no less than Turkey and the Gulf monarchies, and they do not want a religious state in Syria and Iraq. Europeans want to defeat ISIS and stop the invasion of refugees, while many in Europe no longer care about who will maintain order on the ground - some new government or a secular old-fashioned dictator like those who were overthrown by the “Arab spring”: the Egyptian al-Sisi all accepted. Officially, most European politicians for replacing Assad with something democratic and popularly elected, but unofficially, many are ready to consider options.

The West, the Arab monarchies and Turkey never want to save Assad - for them it is part of the problem, and for Russia and the Shiites, I would add Middle Eastern Christians who are not very much considered as allies because of their relative small number, it is part of the solution Problems.

Here begins the Western view, which is incomprehensible to us. It is quite difficult for Western politicians to sell Putin’s proposal to his own public opinion, voter, and press. How to explain why we are against some Islamists with other Islamists, among which, sometimes, headless al-Qaeda flashes with a drooping body, and when we overthrow Assad, who will rule Syria? It is much easier and clearer to sell to the voter the defense of Europe against Russia, especially after Russia confirmed some of the worst fears about itself.

Forgiveness and reward


The West is not sure that Russia is irreplaceable, but this does not mean that it considers it useless. Not the fact that carefully cutting out of international relations along the contour of Russia and its president, will be able to quickly cope with LIH, and peace in Ukraine will be stronger. Putin’s speech as a program for his own actions will not be accepted. But what they will try to negotiate at the meeting will be pondered seriously.

In the end, the idea that the reason for ISIL in Asad, which politicians, journalists and human rights organizations repeat, cannot even be convincing for them themselves: ISIS originated in Iraq, where there is no Assad, and from there came to Syria.

Vladimir Putin’s foreign policy, at least in that it offers the West in its UN speeches, cannot be denied consistency. “Terrorism today represents a major danger to the rights and freedoms of mankind, the sustainable development of states and peoples. The UN and the Security Council should be the main coordinating center ... in the fight against terror as the ideological heir of Nazism. Russia intends to increase its participation both in the international crisis response and in promoting development and progress, ”he said in a speech at the 60, the jubilee UN General Assembly in 2005. “The threats and challenges that Russia faces are the common enemy of free nations. Terrorism is considered especially dangerous and insidious ... Putting a reliable barrier to this evil is our common task, ”this is from the speech of the still unfamiliar to the world of Putin at the General Assembly, the Millennium Summit in 2000. The style of speeches is different (the speechwriters have changed since then), but the central thesis remained. At first it was pronounced in the context of the Chechen war, then Beslan and 11 of September, now Ukraine and Syria.

General task data has not changed for many years, not from Putin’s time, but even from the end of Yeltsin’s time. Russia needs to prove that there are worse things in the world than she, and her all-beloved allies, for example, terrorists are worse.

When Vladimir Putin returned to power in 2011, it was not clear why. The answers from the time of the castling and the election campaign did not sound very convincing. Events in Ukraine helped to give a convincing answer: in order to protect their own people, to resist the previously unseen invasion of our historical space. This answer helped to find a place in national history in the spirit of the classical rulers of the past: he defeated enemies, expanded the borders of the state. But there is still world history.

Sooner or later - they say about the year 2018 - he leaves. I do not want to leave the destroyer of world order, who almost had to leave the post under external pressure, almost an outcast in the eyes of the West, but the creator of a coalition of people of goodwill, the winner of ISIS, the new Hitler. For the victory over LIH, if it happens, the world is ready to forgive a lot. It remains to convince us that we are irreplaceable in the camp of future winners.
Author:
Originator:
http://vpk-news.ru/articles/27518
42 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Sasha 19871987
    Sasha 19871987 14 October 2015 14: 59 New
    +4
    all the same, it’s glorious that we have such a president ... for most current politicians do not have enough eggs and courage, and what they say in the West is not so important, they like the type of Gorbachev (destroyer of the USSR) or the struggle of an alcoholic (weak-willed puppet of the West)
    1. Vyacheslav 64
      Vyacheslav 64 14 October 2015 15: 03 New
      +4
      The NATO will not accept our proposals. Exclusivity does not allow them.
      1. Reserve officer
        Reserve officer 14 October 2015 15: 23 New
        +10
        "Putin proposed creating a new anti-Hitler coalition - they beat the Nazis together, now we will beat ISIS"

        Our "brothers in arms" opened a second front not because of the desire for joint action, but because of fears that all of Europe would fall under the protectorate of the USSR. They took part in the war in the last stages, and the first in line stood for the distribution of the fruits of victory. I think the same thing will happen now. The Brothers in Arms will join at the last moment so as not to lose their influence in the Middle East.
      2. KazaK Bo
        KazaK Bo 14 October 2015 15: 40 New
        +2
        Vyacheslav 64
        The NATO will not accept our proposals. Exclusivity does not allow them.

        La la la la about "exclusivity" - this is to distract from the main thing!
        Instead of joining NATO in a new alliance, because if you create such an alliance, it means RECOGNIZING THE RIGHT OF RUSSIA TO WHAT WE HAVE OUR INTERESTS IN MANY REGIONS OF THE WORLD, FIRST TIME, IN THE AREAS OF OIL AND GAS DEPOSITS! And recognizing this means recognizing our right to develop deposits.
        Could go for it "gray cardinals", that is. the true leaders of Western politics, led by the United States, are transnational monopolies ??? The answer is NEVER! They will never share their profits with anyone!
        Russia has learned to expose these LA-LA-LA - for yet another propaganda sensational statement - OUR SPECIFIC, PORO SPECIALLY GROUNDED OFFER, OFFER and ... THE NEXT PROPAGANDIST BUBBLE OF THE WEST LOOKS! And the fact that AMERS is now not condemned in the West’s media for their refusal of an alliance with the Russian Federation does not mean that the world is on their side. Another thing is scary - WESTERN MEDIA IS SILENT AND DO NOT REPORT ABOUT SUPPORT OF THE US REFUSED from, at least, a temporary UNION WITH THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION!
        1. BilliBoms09
          BilliBoms09 14 October 2015 16: 32 New
          +1
          in essence, Putin is proposing the creation of a new anti-Hitler coalition - an alliance of powers with different values ​​against the obvious over value barriers of evil. He is even ready to accept in her the ungrateful role of the most difficult participant, the new Stalin, with whom only the presence of a common terrible threat reconciles. But even in this role, the West is still hesitant to accept it.
          The government of the USSR several times proposed an anti-fascist coalition to Western countries. Stalin was ignored and Germany captured all of Europe, then Stalin and the USSR became needed and good. Until the Islamists seize the whole of Europe and blow up the US attacks, Russia will be bad.
      3. antoXa
        antoXa 14 October 2015 17: 31 New
        0
        Yes, it’s not even a matter of exclusivity, tell me why do the states destroy ISIS at all ???
      4. Asadullah
        Asadullah 14 October 2015 20: 57 New
        0
        NATO will not accept our proposals


        So the rhetorical sentence. More like a warning, who is not with us is against us. It is one thing to restrain Russia with pathological flatulence; it is another thing to designate oneself as a specific goal. I think this is what Uncle Vova voiced.
      5. skifd
        skifd 14 October 2015 22: 12 New
        +1
        Quote: Vyacheslav 64
        The NATO will not accept our proposals. Exclusivity does not allow them.


        How can they accept them if they themselves do not “reflect” what is happening ??? wassat
    2. MIKHALYCH1
      MIKHALYCH1 14 October 2015 15: 04 New
      +2
      Putin calls, but realizes that they themselves will have to, as usual ... Russia has such a fate! All damn wait .. well, well
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. gjv
        gjv 14 October 2015 15: 08 New
        0
        Prostitutes will take a brotherhood in arms ?!
        Arrogant Saxons will continue to be obscene (anal). Definitely!
        1. Alexander Romanov
          Alexander Romanov 14 October 2015 15: 11 New
          0
          Quote: gjv
          Prostitutes will take a brotherhood in arms ?!

          Already accepted, fled and once again accepted.
          Moscow regrets that the United States refused to support a statement in the UN Security Council condemning mortar shelling by fighters of the Russian embassy in Damascus, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said.
          http://vz.ru/news/2015/10/14/772349.html
          1. lelikas
            lelikas 14 October 2015 16: 10 New
            0
            Quote: Alexander Romanov
            Moscow regrets that the United States refused to support a statement in the UN Security Council condemning mortar shelling by fighters of the Russian embassy in Damascus, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said.

            Of course they won’t support them — yesterday they promised the victims — they promised, they threw off the weapons from the planes — they threw them off — and the oppa mines flew not to the protected base, but to the embassy — how could they regret it if they remembered they managed to get into a Chinese missile.
    3. marlin1203
      marlin1203 14 October 2015 16: 09 New
      +1
      Well, the West needs an enemy, it needs a "horror story", otherwise there is no one to be friends with. We have been assigned to this role, only we are commensurate in scale with the "world evil". A trifle, but nice ... laughing
      1. unsinkable
        unsinkable 14 October 2015 17: 11 New
        +2
        Quote: marlin1203
        We were assigned to this role,

        They didn’t appoint us. Russia was, is and will always be a horror story for the West. In the literal sense of the word. They are afraid that we will destroy their vile world. This happened historically due to the independence, rebellion and invincibility of the Russian state. We would only normal rulers, like now.
        1. Dembel77
          Dembel77 14 October 2015 19: 36 New
          0
          Putin's speech at the UN: will the West accept the new brotherhood in arms
          I think no. But not because we entered Syria or Ukraine cannot forgive us. And because the West cannot forgive Putin for his independent and consistent foreign policy, aimed primarily at establishing equal relations between the leading states of the world. Well, they just do not want to let us into the international arena, apparently it is necessary that Russia, for every trifle, ask Uncle Sam for permission.
  2. sl22277
    sl22277 14 October 2015 15: 08 New
    0
    Putin at the UN assembly and deservedly gave a good kick to the United States, which they had been begging for a long time with his pomp on "Let us arm the moderate opposition in Syria!" “Instead of the triumph of democracy and progress, we see violence, poverty and social catastrophe - no one cares closely for human rights, including the right to life,” Putin said.
  3. sisa29
    sisa29 14 October 2015 15: 08 New
    +3
    It’s hard now, but who remembers the times of Gorbachev and Yeltsin, I think I would love to see Vladimir Vladimirovich at the head of the country for another twenty years
    1. VseDoFeNi
      VseDoFeNi 14 October 2015 15: 15 New
      +3
      Quote: sisa29
      It’s hard now, but who remembers the times of Gorbachev and Yeltsin, I think I would love to see Vladimir Vladimirovich at the head of the country for another twenty years

      Yes, at least a hundred and twenty. Better than an apple riffraff and other pseudo-patriots.
    2. Mareman Vasilich
      Mareman Vasilich 14 October 2015 15: 27 New
      +6
      We won’t stand this much, comrade. Putin is a product of his time. If in foreign policy he and Lavrov behave more or less acceptable, then in domestic politics it is completely seamy. Maybe the hands do not reach? Putin is good because there is no one else for want of a better one. The country has many critical problems that cannot be delayed. But judging by the current reforms and decrees, they are only exacerbated. The reason is oligarchy, the fifth column and the greed and impunity of the bureaucracy. May God grant him to bet on the citizens of his country, and not on the oligarchs and their looted capital.
      1. Gardamir
        Gardamir 14 October 2015 16: 30 New
        +1
        If in foreign policy it is more or less acceptable, then in domestic politics it’s completely seamed
        Imagine you have a wife like all men, she doesn’t wash at home. does not stroke, does not cook, does not sleep with you, but you are proud that everyone likes her. So Putin, the successes in foreign policy are more than dubious, but in the internal collapse of education and medicine, the destruction of culture, but everyone is proud of some abstract things.
        1. Mareman Vasilich
          Mareman Vasilich 14 October 2015 17: 06 New
          +2
          This is it.
        2. Vanko
          Vanko 14 October 2015 19: 40 New
          +2
          Quote: Gardamir
          If in foreign policy it is more or less acceptable, then in domestic politics it’s completely seamed
          Imagine you have a wife like all men, she doesn’t wash at home. does not stroke, does not cook, does not sleep with you, but you are proud that everyone likes her. So is Putin


          Well, and who likes Russia in the west? To nobody. They just can’t do anything, otherwise they would have strangled them for a long time.
          We save the world not out of philanthropy, but because we want to live.
          And as a result: we live - everyone else lives. Otherwise, all kirdyk.
      2. EvgNik
        EvgNik 14 October 2015 17: 18 New
        +1
        Quote: Mareman Vasilich
        God bless him to bet on the citizens of his country

        Putin relied on foreign policy. It seems that he has shoved the internal problems onto Medvedev, who is not the right person to solve something. But the fact is that the next candidate is not being watched by Putin.
      3. navigator
        navigator 15 October 2015 00: 19 New
        0
        Mareman Vasilich "We cannot stand so much, comrade. Putin is a product of his time."

        What time, such is the product, comrade. Deserve the best, will be the best. Each nation is worthy of its ruler.

        “If in foreign policy he and Lavrov behave more or less acceptable, then in domestic politics he’s full of seams. Can’t his hands reach? Putin is good because there is no one else for lack of a better one. There are many critical problems in the country that cannot be solved tighten. "

        You don’t want to try it yourself? It’s easy to steer the country from the couch.

        "But judging by the current reforms and decrees, they are only exacerbated. The reason is the oligarchy, the fifth column and the greed and impunity of the bureaucracy. God bless him to rely on the citizens of his country, and not on the oligarchs and their looted capital."

        It’s true that all the troubles are from the oligarchs, the greedy, unpunished bureaucratic apparatus. But didn’t you try not to give in the beak? Then there will be nothing to take.
  4. Lena Alena
    Lena Alena 14 October 2015 15: 16 New
    0
    "Noting that in Ukraine, Russia has done worse than anything else for herself, he called her a negotiating partner" (Obama)
    They don’t even imagine what future their partners are preparing for them. HPP in action ...
  5. arane
    arane 14 October 2015 15: 18 New
    +5
    The article is very controversial! In my opinion, all conclusions and provisions are based on a fundamental error, such as everything from mutual insults and insults, Putin’s desire to leave white and fluffy in the eyes of the West. Crap dog!
    Decisions are made not by possessed McCain, but by very cold and calculating people! A cold calculation excludes feelings from both sides!
    Everything is much deeper and at the same time easier!
  6. Rezident007
    Rezident007 14 October 2015 15: 18 New
    +1
    THE WORLD REACHED THAT THE PRESERVATION OF EUROPEAN CIVILIZATION IS POSSIBLE ONLY TOGETHER WITH RUSSIA (YES AND IN THE PRINCIPLE OF CHRISTIANITY AND THE WHITE RACE)! Without Russia, the population of Europe in two or three generations will be Muslim mestizos (at least more than half) ... I am not a racist, this is an objective opinion ..
  7. Flinky
    Flinky 14 October 2015 15: 25 New
    0
    Yes to this west. It will destroy itself in 2-3 generations.
  8. Tatar 174
    Tatar 174 14 October 2015 15: 27 New
    +2
    Most of the problem is that the Americans themselves are sitting on their mainland and do not want to see or hear about anyone’s grief and about nothing at all. This does not concern them, and all the other Pentagon and Obama use it there. Now, God forbid, the Americans themselves would be affected by the same thing as the Syrians or Libyans, if there would have been a different world at once ...
  9. Tambov Wolf
    Tambov Wolf 14 October 2015 15: 39 New
    +2
    Yes, brother-in-arms — England, America, Estonia, Poland, and other bestiality. Yes, such brothers do not have time to blink an eye, they will stick their knives in all parts and begin to eat. God save us from such a “brotherhood.” I hope that we have enough brains the powers that be with such little brothers on the same field do not sit in a shit.
  10. Mikhail Krapivin
    Mikhail Krapivin 14 October 2015 15: 41 New
    +1
    The Americans were offended by the comments of our politicians :) Yesterday the debates of the democrats were there, so there was nothing said about Russia, and mostly in the key - to bend, punish, force, shoot down ... And as our clowns called them, so immediately offense! :)
    1. Rurikovich
      Rurikovich 14 October 2015 16: 23 New
      0
      Well Duc clowns, they are clowns in Africa ... lol Well take offense at the obvious ... request
  11. VadimSt
    VadimSt 14 October 2015 16: 21 New
    +1
    Honestly, the Western coalition and its nonsense are already so tired that I want to send everyone to ..., strictly in the Russian alphabet, from "A" to "I"!
  12. DobryAAH
    DobryAAH 14 October 2015 16: 36 New
    0
    Yeah, they’ll cut off their own tail ...
  13. EvgNik
    EvgNik 14 October 2015 17: 26 New
    +1
    Who and what does the author want to convince? Absolutely incomprehensible. In the West they will not read it, in Russia if only the first 10 lines. Waste paper.
  14. Alexey Lobanov
    Alexey Lobanov 14 October 2015 17: 38 New
    +2
    Alexander Baunov - journalist, publicist, philologist, former diplomat. He is the chief editor of Carnegie.ru (Carnegie Moscow Center).
    Suddenly, everyone began to understand inconsistencies and substitutions in the article, right ?! laughing
    1. Alexey Lobanov
      Alexey Lobanov 14 October 2015 22: 24 New
      0
      I apologize for answering myself (uncultured), but the following information is important for understanding the essence of the article:
      "The main source of funding for a number of such organizations
      (listed below) are USA, UK and NATO: either
      directly or through private foundations associated with governments and
      intelligence services of these countries. Most active in financing
      The MacArthur Foundation
      Carnegie Corporation (including the Carnegie Center NGO), National Endowment for Democracy
      (NED), Open Society Institute (OSI). "
      - "REPORT
      Methods and technologies of foreign and Russian activities
      research centers as well as research structures and
      Universities receiving funding from foreign sources:
      analysis and generalization
      February 2014"

      That's it. laughing
  15. anderles66
    anderles66 14 October 2015 17: 47 New
    +2
    Honestly, a series of passages leaves no desire to delve into the text
    It’s not easy for the West to accept the proposal for a joint fight with the Islamic State when the main Russian propagandist compares US President Obama to the leader of ISIS
    Wonderful! I don’t even know who the author means, but personally Obama put ISIS and Russia on a par. What are the tears to pour now?
    Of course, in the event of an alliance against ISIS, we are ready to reduce the degree of confrontation,
    So I want to swear sweetly. "We" is who, excuse me? Again, someone reads the thoughts of Putin and others? It would be necessary to treat the head.
    How is Russia going to fight ISIS - how did it fight Hitler on its territory or how with Mujahideen on someone else's?
    Here is a pancake analyte of the highest level. I have a few questions. And the United States in World War II on whose territory they fought? Well, offhand. Really on your own? But in Vietnam, napalm and agent orange are an example of how to or not? Well, I won’t ask about Yugoslavia and Iraq.
    1. Stinger
      Stinger 14 October 2015 18: 35 New
      +1
      I agree. Ordinary attic philosopher. Mows under Confucius.
  16. cniza
    cniza 14 October 2015 18: 37 New
    +3
    Quote: Mareman Vasilich

    The reason is oligarchy, the fifth column and the greed and impunity of the bureaucracy. May God grant him to bet on the citizens of his country, and not on the oligarchs and their looted capital.



    If in the near future we will not get rid of all this, and especially impunity, difficult times await us.
  17. Vanko
    Vanko 14 October 2015 19: 41 New
    +1
    The news is that contract soldiers are already refusing to go to Syria and are filing for their commanders with the military prosecutor for such an order. Salvation of Damascus from massacre and plunder is a noble task, the Americans do not offer a clear solution to it, but where is the evidence that Russian soldiers will stand up to it to the last?

    belay Cho really?
  18. staryivoin
    staryivoin 14 October 2015 20: 27 New
    +1
    Question to Obama: How many more inhabitants of the Earth need to be destroyed ???

    The whole world remembers and knows how many died during the crash of MH-17. Newspapers a year and a half ago say different things. Further, I cite information purely from our information sites, which are not distinguished by the “loyalty” of today's Russian authorities, simply because these sites and the newspapers they publish consider themselves “free”.

    “According to updated data, among the dead 193 citizen of the Netherlands (including a passenger who also had American citizenship), 44 Malaysian (including two babies), 27 Australians, 12 Indonesians (including one baby), 10 British citizens, 4 - Germany, 4 - Belgium, 3 Filipinos, one citizen of Canada and New Zealand ”- these are the lines of the site mk.ru.
    FREEDOM is a very beautiful WORD. Obviously, it fascinates some Russian journalists (I say this only because the concept of freedom of speech today exists only in RUSSIA). Everything that we see today in the “democratically free media” is financed from the outside and according to the polls of VTsIOM it is not very welcomed by Russian citizens. This is clearly shown by our journalists, who today are denied WEST entry into the territory of "democratic countries". We see that we are Russians (and this concept today includes not only people of Russian nationality but also representatives of other nations and nationalities of today's RUSSIA) are not allowed into EUROPE, which has taken and raised TOLERANCE, DEMOCRACY, FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND THE RIGHT TO HAVE YOUR OPINION a united Europe striving for unification has ceased not only to understand, but even to try to do it. Today's EUROPE is increasingly trying to comply with the norms of the "transatlantic partnership" within the NATO bloc.
    The Dutch commission, which spent almost 1,5 on the investigation, could not prove anything. The Western world at the same time refused to create a tribunal for the collapse of MH-17. So, what is next??? 280 people died. “The whole world” in January 2015 of the year cried for the victims of “CHARLEY”. This did not please us either, but we Russians understand that this is a legitimate result of the modern policy of the European authorities.


    Europe is trying with bulging eyes to show its readiness to fight world terrorism (after all, the main fighters are ahead of the column - about 12 people died, and where is that column in memory of those who died in Ukraine on Independence Square, in the burned House of Trade Unions in Odessa who died in the "boilers" of the Armed Forces of Armed Forces of Ukraine) and at the same time, Europe creates the conditions for him (TERRORISM) to be most comfortable within this "struggle". The whole intelligent world understands under whose leadership this counter-terrorist operation is going. But at the same time, the whole world saw that after the legitimate operations of the Russian Aerospace Forces, which were agreed upon by the framework of international documents, that the fight against ISIS and international terrorism did not “be rejected by our Western partners”, it went a little faster.
    For all that, the language is very itchy to ask the Nobel Peacemaker a question
    MR. BARAK OBAMA, HOW MUCH AND ON WHICH CONTINENT IS IT NECESSARY TO DESTROY PEOPLE THAT THE “FIGHT AGAINST TERRORISM” BALL WAS COMPLETED ???
  19. voronbel53
    voronbel53 14 October 2015 20: 28 New
    +2
    The muddy article, especially “liked” the end of the article, - concluded the journalist: - “For the victory over ISIS, if it happens, the world is ready to forgive a lot. It remains to be convinced that we are not interchangeable in the camp of future winners.” It turns out that we will do all the rough work with ISIS, and then we will be ready to forgive some sins and let them go to the camp, and as whom ?, striped attendants? The author of us all omitted below the plinth - well, that’s the view from behind the hill and the author too. In my opinion, one does not have to expect anything else from the Western world ...
  20. vovanpain
    vovanpain 14 October 2015 20: 40 New
    +8
    It remains to be convinced that we are not interchangeable in the camp of future winners.
    http://topwar.ru/uploads/images/2015/596/ycou467.jpg Это вот этот что ли победитель?
  21. Denis Skiff
    Denis Skiff 14 October 2015 20: 51 New
    0
    First accept. Then he will shoot in the back.
  22. Erg
    Erg 14 October 2015 21: 30 New
    +1
    In his speech at the previous 69 UN General Assembly in September 2014, Barack Obama named three major threats to the world: Ebola, Russia, ISIS.
    The states themselves created an ebola and threw it into Africa, they themselves invented a threat from Russia, ISIS gave birth and financed themselves ... And yes - I forgot the banana to mention the main threat to the world - this is the United States (more precisely, a gang of bankers using the states as the world gendarme )
  23. Myth
    Myth 15 October 2015 01: 16 New
    0
    Peace? Forgive? Us?