Military Review

NATO renewal: Russia instead of Turkey?

116
The inclusion of Turkey into NATO in 1952 was a short-sighted decision, says Sierra Rein, a journalist and doctor of science. In her opinion, the union of the West with Turkey is the same as the deal with the devil. There was no benefit to the alliance from Ankara, but there were plenty of problems: for example, in the 1970s, the alliance went through a crisis period due to Turkey’s invasion of Cyprus. And at the beginning of the XXI century, the Turks showed a clear inclination towards Islamism. So, shouldn't NATO replace Islamist and unpredictable Turkey with an open and understandable Russia?


NATO renewal: Russia instead of Turkey?


Sierra Rain It has Ph.D. in chemistry and regularly publishes articles on the environment, energy, and national security in the press.

Her new article was published in a magazine. "The American Thinker". Publicist is regular contributor to this edition.

When Turkey joined NATO in February 1952, its membership supporters argued that the country was needed by the West as an ally to prevent “Soviet expansion” in the region. But that was a deal with the devil.

Once there was anxiety about the likely "Soviet aggression," notes Rhine, and this "was understandable at the time." True, it is not clear to the extent to take and accept Turkey into NATO. At least in rational terms, this decision cannot be explained. The decision on Turkey’s membership in NATO “was short-sighted and unforgivable.” Ultimately, it gave the West more problems than it did before Ankara was admitted to the alliance.

For many years, Turkey has been a “difficult teenager” in NATO. The Turkish invasion of Cyprus in 1974 caused a real split in the alliance. Greece announced its withdrawal from NATO and returned there only in 1980 year.

In 2012, Syria was hit by a Turkish fighter, “completely deliberately flown into Syria’s airspace,” reminds the journalist. Later in the same year, Turkey launched artillery fire on government facilities in Syria in response to some "Syrian artillery strikes" into Turkey.

A political realist would most likely note that for decades Turkey has been using NATO membership to achieve its own political goals. And "such goals, which, as a rule, do not coincide with the interests of NATO."

Perhaps “NATO’s naivety towards Turkey” could have been forgiven in the 20th century, but later it was impossible not to notice another thing: at the beginning of the 2000s. Turkey began to "clearly signal its commitment to Islamism." If we recall the long and difficult history Turkey, it will become clear: Islamist ideas have always been there demanded. And the one who knew how to take off rose-colored glasses could see everything properly.

Islamists have always been far more terrible and obvious threat to civilization of the West than the Soviets, the author believes.

However, the West preferred to flirt with the Islamists. The latter were “useful idiots” throughout the Cold War and a quarter of a century after it.

The time has come to rectify the situation and take Russia as an ally against the Islamists, including the "Islamic state" and the aforementioned Turkey, the journalist said.

Putin’s Russia has been beating the drum for many years, warning of the Islamist threat. The West, however, seems to be incapable of listening to the Russians.

But here’s the reality: French President Francois Hollande is now asking the United States to leave its differences with Russia and finally begin to fight the terrorist army of the Islamic State with a broad and unified coalition.

As V.Putin correctly noted, the Rhine continues, Turkey is in alliance with the “IG” and is buying oil from terrorists, thereby supporting the “Islamic State”.

“A lot has changed in the last two years,” writes a journalist. - The approach to the former opponents should be reconsidered, since other old “allies” are not at all and have not been from the very beginning. Many in the West admire Putin, and for good reason. His geostrategic vision is clear, his strength is palpable, and he is successful in rebuilding the Russian economy. ” According to Rhine, the Russian society, in particular the military, objectively assess its achievements.

So, the time has come: Turkey should be “withdrawn from NATO”, and Russia should be invited into the alliance. The common interests of the West and Russia are “significantly higher” than the joint interests with the Islamic world, the Rhine sums up.

В "New York Times"Let us add to this, they are already openly writing that Turkey has substituted NATO.

The American edition reminds readers that Turkey, especially when reinforcing R. T. Erdogan’s authoritarian manners, was brutal at the so-called protection of airspace: in the past, the Turks shot down Syrian aircraft.

Now Ankara adheres to its former Islamist goal: Erdogan wants the Syrian President Assad to resign from power, and the Syrian-Turkish border would be an accessible "checkpoint" for Syrian militants, including Islamist terrorists.

Recall also that the emergency summit meeting of NATO, convened at the request of Turkey, did not develop a concrete solution. Secretary General Stoltenberg, who supported the Ankara accusations against Moscow with reference to the "allied information", nevertheless called on Moscow and Ankara to "diplomacy" and "de-escalation." Such a cautious statement indicates that there is no common understanding of the situation at the top of NATO, as well as among members of the alliance who are aware of the danger of a military confrontation with Russia. And if it’s too early to talk about a split in the ranks of NATO, then it’s about time for a rift. And Ankara is responsible for this crack. More precisely, the local “Sultan” is responsible.

Observed and commented on Oleg Chuvakin
- especially for topwar.ru
116 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Vladimirets
    Vladimirets 30 November 2015 06: 25 New
    +8
    No, you’re better off with us. yes
    1. V.ic
      V.ic 30 November 2015 06: 32 New
      48
      Quote: Vladimirets
      No, it’s better you are to us

      Poles (1609), French (1812), Germans (1941) Better not!
      1. DanSabaka
        DanSabaka 30 November 2015 07: 39 New
        18
        We don’t need NATO .....
        1. sergeybulkin
          sergeybulkin 30 November 2015 08: 49 New
          10
          We don’t need NATO ...

          We do not need NATO, of course. But of two evils, they choose the lesser. Although I strongly doubt that even if, suppose we were accepted, we would not have been full members, and the states with England would constantly put pressure on the Russian Federation, and then they would still be kicked out, the Americans and others need an enemy, the enemy is not a real one. " theoretical "so that defense spending is to be credited to.
          1. pettabyte
            pettabyte 1 December 2015 00: 01 New
            0
            Quote: sergeybulkin
            Although I strongly doubt that even if, for example, we were to be accepted, we would not be full members


            Considering that NATO is actually "Anti USSR" (and then "AntiRF"), then yes.
            Not, there is still China and India, but it is unlikely.

            Well, given that all agreements with the West over the past 25 years are either unprofitable, or are carried out selectively by Western countries, then it is fucking.
            1. Talgat
              Talgat 1 December 2015 02: 20 New
              +1
              Russia in NATO and under the West is the dream of Russian liberals (the school of Academician Likhachev, etc.) Gorbach and Eltsin openly went to this. Loss of sovereignty, fragmentation of the USSR - and then further on to Russia (because NATO and the West, like any predator, cannot "digest" prey without first tearing it apart)

              And further, the scenarios are also unambiguous, to use a torn, weakened, but "very democratized" Russia as a battering ram and a buffer against the MAIN COMPETITOR of the Western world and the FRS in the 21st century - CHINA (like now they use the Square against the obstinate RF)

              Read Gumilyov, Mack Kinder, etc. - this is geopolitics - and Russia in NATO is simply mortally dangerous.
              It was about alliances with European countries that the tsar said the very phrase that there are no allies except the army and navy. There are no allies in the west and will never be

              Russia (and Belarus, as a matter of fact part of Russia) clearly needs to integrate with us, with Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, another part of the great steppe (Tatars, Bashkirs and Altai) is part of Russia itself - thus a new Union will be reborn, in place of the Golden Horde, the tsarist Russia and the USSR.

              And be friends with China and Iran. And also to bring internal policy in line with external - from the outside everything seems to be correct - while inside while the liberals headed by Medvedev Dvorkovich Shuvalov, oligarchs, etc., are "rampaging"
      2. Cheshire
        Cheshire 30 November 2015 07: 40 New
        14
        So, the time has come: Turkey should be "withdrawn from NATO", and Russia should be invited to the alliance.

        They just want Russia to do the dirty work for them - it knows how well in Syria. Nothing personal just business. Although this Rhine gives the impression of sane logic with signs.
        The common interests of the West with Russia are “significantly higher” than common interests with the Islamic world, the Rhine summarizes.

        What about the Saudis? "The master has appointed me the main wife!"
        1. The comment was deleted.
        2. bulvas
          bulvas 30 November 2015 07: 56 New
          19
          Nevertheless, the EU decided to allocate Turkey’s money, and cancel visas

          It won’t reach where the terrorists come from.

          Not only Russians slowly harness

          And the fact that Russia will not come up with NATO in order to powder our brains with us.

          It looks like a carrot in front of a donkey.

          This suggests that they will look for any means to stop Russia.




          1. Throw
            Throw 30 November 2015 08: 23 New
            11
            We do not need to join NATO.
            We need NATO.
            In pieces.
            In the cold.
            am
            1. mirag2
              mirag2 30 November 2015 08: 35 New
              +5
              NATO renewal: Russia instead of Turkey?
              -Friends, this is speculation, and empty delusion. And there are different points of view, in different countries. If Venediktov is "ashamed of Russia" in our country, it does not mean that our foreign policy will change. In the same way, Felgenhauer or El-Murid do not reflect the present state of affairs and trends in the foreign policy of the Russian Federation.
              1. mirag2
                mirag2 30 November 2015 08: 52 New
                +3
                American Thinker (American thinker) -Internet publishing.
                From the explanation of the position of the publication:
                ... There are no restrictions on topics appearing on American Thinker. National security in all its dimensions - strategic, economic, diplomatic, military, is basic. The right to existence and survival of the state of Israel is of great importance to us. Business, science, technology, medicine, management, economics and in their practical and ethical aspects is also an important component of American culture ...
                1. Belousov
                  Belousov 30 November 2015 12: 08 New
                  +2
                  Quote: mirag2
                  The right to existence and survival of the state of Israel is of great importance to us.

                  Well then, it’s clear where the ears grow from.
                2. The comment was deleted.
          2. Egoza
            Egoza 30 November 2015 11: 19 New
            +4
            Quote: bulvas
            Nevertheless, the EU decided to allocate Turkey’s money, and cancel visas

            nu-nu! But they did not take this into account ... history was taught poorly ... although so far there is unverified data, but "there is something in this."
            Turkey squeezes the ring around Syria, and with the support of the United States, dares to attack Russia. According to unverified data, which should be treated with caution, anonymous sources say - "Russia is going to terminate the Kars and Moscow Treaties, as a result of which Turkey may lose up to 30% of its territories."


            The Moscow Treaty (1921) is a Russian-Turkish treaty of "friendship and brotherhood", signed on March 16 and 1921 in Moscow between the government of the Turkish Grand National Assembly and the government of the RSFSR. In accordance with the agreement, the Armenian cities of Kars and Ardagan departed to Turkey. Mount Ararat also appeared in Turkey.

            According to the Treaty, Russia prolongs it every 25 years, and now the time is right for the next signing of the Treaty, which Russia may not legally do. In this case, Turkey will be forced to return vast territories.
            It is worth recalling that these lands in Turkey are still deserted after the Armenian Genocide 1853 -1923gg, since Turkey always considered the possibility of returning the territories occupied at the beginning of the century, and therefore there was no investment involved and there was no modern infrastructure.
            http://novorus.info/news/analytics/42947-putin-mozhet-lishit-turciyu-30-ee-terri
            toriy.html
            1. veksha50
              veksha50 30 November 2015 12: 15 New
              +1
              Quote: Egoza
              According to the Treaty, Russia prolongs it every 25 years, and now the time is right for the next signing of the Treaty, which Russia may not legally do. In this case Turkey will be forced to return vast territories.



              Hmm ... To this I can only say, like you: "Nu-nu" ...

              Nobody will return anything, and there will be no war over this Kars and Mount Ararat ...
            2. sergeybulkin
              sergeybulkin 30 November 2015 12: 26 New
              +1
              In accordance with the agreement, the Armenian cities of Kars and Ardagan departed to Turkey. Mount Ararat also appeared in Turkey.

              Armenian cities! And it was part of Armenia, it means Armenia could (theoretically) claim its rights to! Its former! territories, we need another hot zone near our borders, Armenia and look at NATO will be accepted together with Georgia ( laughing lol Georgia lol fellow ) The territory is more like a stone desert why do we need it ... recourse
              1. Karlos
                Karlos 30 November 2015 13: 18 New
                +4
                There is an arbitration award of the Lygia of Nations (UN) on the Armenian-Turkish border, with the obligatory access of Armenia to the sea. The United States, Britain, France, and Russia signed this decision. The decision has no statute of limitations; it is binding. Naturally, everything depends on the powers.
            3. bulvas
              bulvas 30 November 2015 12: 29 New
              0
              Quote: Egoza
              Quote: bulvas

              Nevertheless, the EU decided to allocate money to Turkey, and visas - to abolish the nu-nu! But they did not take this into account ... history was taught poorly ... although so far there is unverified data, but "there is something in this."



              Dear Elena (Egoza), what is the connection with my study of history?
              As for visas and money from the EU, this is still a foreseeable future.



              1. Egoza
                Egoza 30 November 2015 12: 44 New
                +2
                Quote: bulvas
                what is the connection with my study of history?
                As for visas and money from the EU, this is still a foreseeable future.

                Firstly, to study history, I didn’t mean you, but those who were going to cancel the visa. And secondly, does it make sense to invest in a country and cancel visas if a pretty piece is chopped off from this country? and it is still unknown which neighbors will receive.
                1. bulvas
                  bulvas 30 November 2015 13: 12 New
                  +3
                  Quote: Egoza
                  First, to study history, I had in mind those who were going to cancel their visas. And secondly, does it make sense to invest in a country and cancel visas if a pretty piece is chopped off from this country? and it is still unknown which neighbors will receive.



                  Agree

                  It is becoming increasingly difficult to believe that the EU has some sane plan to combat the influx of migrants

                  It would seem that help the Russian Federation cleanse Syria of bandits, invest these billions of euros in rebuilding the country, creating jobs - migration will stop and people will go back.

                  And so, invest in the creation of refugee camps?

                  The future hotbed of terrorism and new waves of migration in the EU?

                  A future black hole for pouring humanitarian aid there?

                  Who runs it all?

                2. The comment was deleted.
            4. The comment was deleted.
            5. Ze Kot
              Ze Kot 30 November 2015 13: 45 New
              +1
              Quote: Egoza
              In accordance with the agreement, the Armenian cities of Kars and Ardagan departed to Turkey. Mount Ararat also appeared in Turkey.

              According to the Treaty, Russia prolongs it every 25 years, and now the time is right for the next signing of the Treaty, which Russia may not legally do



              And what side is Russia to Armenian cities and territories? wink
        3. The comment was deleted.
        4. The comment was deleted.
        5. The comment was deleted.
      3. Gardamir
        Gardamir 30 November 2015 15: 44 New
        0
        Poles (1610), French (1812), Germans (1914)
        exactly 102 years. Who is 2016?
        1. voffchik7691
          voffchik7691 30 November 2015 21: 37 New
          0
          Yes, not a good trend! History teaches us that it teaches nothing!
    2. ImPerts
      ImPerts 30 November 2015 06: 34 New
      +6
      That's it.
      Better to us, to Kolyma hi
      1. veksha50
        veksha50 30 November 2015 12: 17 New
        0
        Quote: ImPerts
        Better to us, to Kolyma



        All the Turks, or what ??? They will eat, even the whole reindeer under the root will be taken out ...

        PS But actually - how many almost free builders (only for feeding) would be ... It was possible in Kolyma to build such an infrastructure ...
    3. Andrey Yuryevich
      Andrey Yuryevich 30 November 2015 06: 41 New
      +5
      NATO renewal: Russia instead of Turkey?
      cognitive dissonance damn ... what
      1. Vladimirets
        Vladimirets 30 November 2015 06: 44 New
        13
        Quote: Andrey Yurievich
        cognitive dissonance damn ...

        Estimate, Ukraine joins NATO, and there .. op-pa! Already Russia. laughing
        1. hydrox
          hydrox 30 November 2015 07: 41 New
          +2
          Quote: Vladimirets
          Estimate, Ukraine joins NATO, and there .. op-pa! Already Russia.


          To hobble with NATO is the same as not to wash your hands when leaving the toilet, because you still have to take a shower and brush your teeth, and even take your laundry ...
        2. cniza
          cniza 30 November 2015 07: 49 New
          +6
          Quote: Vladimirets
          Quote: Andrey Yurievich
          cognitive dissonance damn ...

          Estimate, Ukraine joins NATO, and there .. op-pa! Already Russia. laughing



          A terrible, nightmare dream for Ukraine, let them sleep peacefully, this will never happen.
        3. Zoldat_A
          Zoldat_A 30 November 2015 07: 59 New
          +3
          Quote: Vladimirets
          Estimate, Ukraine joins NATO, and there .. op-pa! Already Russia.

          Have you heard how fires are extinguished by oncoming fire? That is why Russia needs to join NATO! laughing The Baltic states and Eastern Europe will immediately run away from it, Ukraine will cease to ask there. And the United States will look at the meaninglessness of the organization and dissolve it themselves ...

          Of course, America may try to create some kind of duplicate organization, but this is like today's attempts to revive Soviet organizations (pioneers, Komsomol), stupidly crossing out the words "Soviet" and "socialism". The old ideology is not pleasant, but the new one is not invented, there is nothing to base it on. This is how the dead-born organizations of careerists turn out. So it would be with NATO's double ...
          1. Throw
            Throw 30 November 2015 08: 40 New
            +3
            Oncoming fire here - strong blocs with our majority role, BRICS, CSTO, TC, etc., and not go under the NATO troops ruled on Wall Street ...
            1. Ze Kot
              Ze Kot 1 December 2015 10: 00 New
              0
              Quote: Lance
              Oncoming fire here - strong blocs with our majority role, BRICS, CSTO, TC, etc., and not go under the NATO troops ruled on Wall Street ...



              Something I did not hear the votes of the CSTO members in the situation with the downed plane ...
        4. veksha50
          veksha50 30 November 2015 12: 18 New
          +1
          Quote: Vladimirets
          Estimate, Ukraine joins NATO, and there .. op-pa! Already Russia



          It’s better to pretend to fantasize that Ukraine will soon have no place to enter except for cow cakes ...
    4. iliitchitch
      iliitchitch 30 November 2015 06: 45 New
      +2
      Quote: Vladimirets
      No, you’re better off with us.


      Dude and Volodin always +, write correctly. And as for Europe - where to go, to whom to surrender, that’s the whole philosophy ... There is a place beyond the Ural Stone - wilcomm. We will not break the ridge, but we will bend. If you can’t work, you will die out like a mammoth.
    5. Junior, I
      Junior, I 30 November 2015 07: 01 New
      0
      Keep your friends close and your enemies even closer!
    6. sa-zz
      sa-zz 30 November 2015 07: 07 New
      +2
      Let the goat into the garden, and hire the wolf in the shepherds.
    7. GSH-18
      GSH-18 30 November 2015 08: 14 New
      0
      Joining the ranks is not necessary. But to create a certain system of closer interaction will be useful in today's difficult conditions. At least for the time of the destruction of daishas.
    8. ZU-23
      ZU-23 30 November 2015 08: 42 New
      +3
      Oh yes this is nonsense, someone blurted out about Russia in NATO. Now, on the news, they showed how this Turkish Oglu attends a climate conference and feels more confident and needed than Putin, everyone around him curls like a hero, so it's time not to feed on the illusions that someone is looking in our peaceful direction, they are all terrorists, except some Slavic states.
      1. Shark Lover
        Shark Lover 30 November 2015 12: 17 New
        +1
        I was a deputy, I will not name nationality, but from there, close, so to speak to .. mmm, to the Turks, a cross. So the one when he does it hard, the next day and the whole week an important one came in, in a white shirt and suit, with all of them independent, proud, smart speeches pushed and stupid, just to keep an eye on. When I was at work, without any scrutiny, I was chastising a little, affectionately, sweating like a horse, I fawned, his face was red, my eyes were running. But all this is one on one. The mentality seems to be like that. By the way, now this deputy is already delivering pies to the forwarding agent, he got sick.
    9. Skif83
      Skif83 30 November 2015 13: 45 New
      +2
      Well, I do not!
      To hell they are not needed here!
      In general, discussing such articles is ridiculous. What is only this:
      Sierra Rhine holds a Ph.D. in chemistry
      .
      What is it like?
      It’s cleaner than a state-run cook.
      Why NATO Turkey, it is understandable, we need control over the Bosphorus and Dardanelles, and influence on the Islamic world. THAT they (NATO) indirectly and have this control.
      But it seems that this control is largely virtual, the Tureks will never want to completely lose their influence in the region.
      But Russia is not interested in NATO, do not meddle in us, and everything will be the status quo.
  2. Same lech
    Same lech 30 November 2015 06: 27 New
    0
    Such a cautious statement indicates that at the top of NATO, as well as members of the alliance, who are aware of the danger of a military confrontation with Russia, there is no common understanding of the situation.
    Thus, it becomes clear that NATO is not a monolithic structure and also has its weaknesses despite the fact that it has grown to the size of a fat pig.
    How with such fat on their belly they are going to fight with the wolves is not clear to me.
    1. Tatar 174
      Tatar 174 30 November 2015 06: 54 New
      +2
      Quote: The same LYOKHA
      Thus, it becomes clear that NATO is not a monolithic structure and also has its weaknesses despite the fact that it has grown to the size of a fat pig.

      Well, how can it be monolithic? She was never monolithic. NATO was created by the United States when Europe was weak after WWII and the United States simply took advantage of this moment, everywhere deployed its bases and troops there, and where did Europe go? So they are still suffering dictates, and dictates are becoming stronger and stronger, while Europeans are suffering and suffering, and they don’t see any clearance. Enlightenment for Europe will appear in Syria, now it is, it can be said, created there.
      1. hydrox
        hydrox 30 November 2015 07: 51 New
        0
        Quote: Tatar 174
        She was never monolithic.


        So the point is in the staffing and organizational structure :: the member states surrender their aircraft under the command of NATO, as it were, for rent, for disposal and use, but not for possession. And NATO can dispose of these troops (by the way, of variable composition for different operations and for different periods) ONLY in agreement with the member countries and if a member does not want to speak out against Russia, for example, then he will be forced to surrender his forces under NATO in operations against Russia no one can.
        This is the reason for the weakness of NATs.
        But there is no unanimity in the NATO General Council and never will be.
  3. parusnik
    parusnik 30 November 2015 06: 27 New
    12
    Regarding Cyprus ... Turkey continues to occupy Northern Cyprus..and sanctions .. for 40 years now no one has been declaring and no one is demanding the withdrawal of Turkish troops ...
  4. venaya
    venaya 30 November 2015 06: 30 New
    0
    There was no benefit to Ankara from the alliance, but there were enough problems

    The opinion of the doctor of philosophy is amusing, it is a pity that little is feasible for many reasons, although the idea is worth developing, perhaps in some other way.
  5. izya top
    izya top 30 November 2015 06: 37 New
    +6
    Russia in nature and the Amer’s general in glavnyuk? Nothing beguiled, dreamers? fool
  6. UNAUTHORIZED
    UNAUTHORIZED 30 November 2015 06: 42 New
    0
    As long as there is Russia, NATO will indulge Turkey, well, maybe they will scold it in a whisper.
  7. theadenter
    theadenter 30 November 2015 06: 42 New
    +1
    No NATO. We will not dance to the tune of those who have significant weight in this alliance.
  8. Good cat
    Good cat 30 November 2015 06: 49 New
    +8
    NATO is an organization created against Russia, so no one will pay attention to such articles and attention!
    1. Sirocco
      Sirocco 30 November 2015 07: 17 New
      +4
      Quote: Good cat
      NATO is an organization created against Russia,

      Right at the bull's eye, and an article in a series of dull attention, calculated on the fact that we will blur in tenderness. Once praised, then they are preparing some sort of dirty trick.
      But in fact, it is not necessary with such friends and enemies.
      I think that the easiest thing politically and militarily is the fight against Daesh. But the most difficult thing is to force the EU and the US to fight with their overgrown offspring, which will drive their parents under the table.
  9. inkass_98
    inkass_98 30 November 2015 06: 54 New
    +3
    If Russia joins NATO (which is ridiculous in itself, an oxymoron, to put it mildly, turns out), then what will the States do there?
    1. cniza
      cniza 30 November 2015 07: 52 New
      +2
      Quote: inkass_98
      If Russia joins NATO (which is ridiculous in itself, an oxymoron, to put it mildly, turns out), then what will the States do there?



      Here, and the United States into oblivion.
  10. Voltsky
    Voltsky 30 November 2015 06: 57 New
    0
    it would be interesting to look at proto-ukrov if Russia joins NATO + the EU :) Russia will never be in NATO, it is physically stupidly impossible, in NATO and Russia only 5.45 caliber is common :)
    1. Rostovchanin
      Rostovchanin 30 November 2015 07: 14 New
      +2
      it would be interesting to look at proto-ukrov if Russia joins NATO + the EU :) Russia will never be in NATO, it is physically stupidly impossible, in NATO and Russia only 5.45 caliber is common :)

      Caliber NATO 5,56 x 45
  11. Fei_Wong
    Fei_Wong 30 November 2015 06: 58 New
    +1
    Quote: sanya.vorodis
    "Yes, really ..." ©
    "... has a Ph.D. in CHEMISTRY ..." !!! belay wassat

    "COOKER !!!" ©

    Nothing funny, dragging. You are in vain to sneer. If you are not aware of the terminology of the Western education system, these are your problems. "Doctor of Philosophy" (Ph.D) on the Western table of ranks corresponds to the domestic "candidate of sciences". Please study: https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_Philosophy
  12. aszzz888
    aszzz888 30 November 2015 07: 00 New
    0
    Never Russia to be in NATO. This is nonsense!
    Neither do they need us, nor do we need them. Too different concepts and tasks for us, and NOTs.
    And to dream, S. Rain, is not forbidden, and therefore there is a good saying: Fools are rich in thoughts! laughing
  13. rassel0889
    rassel0889 30 November 2015 07: 03 New
    +1
    In NATO, only when the United States leaves there)) or else sit at the same table with them ... fuuuu.
    And if, without jokes, the world follows the path of globalization at a steady pace, we all live on the same planet and dividing it into closed borders is a crime against humanity. wassat IMHO.

    I believe that sooner or later mankind will realize this ... and the borders will remain only on paper as in Europe, only this will be an all-planetary alliance. But unfortunately, an understanding of human nature gives me reason to think that we are more likely to kill each other and the planet and send it there, rather than unite.
  14. Hyperboreas
    Hyperboreas 30 November 2015 07: 04 New
    +1
    People, what are you talking about? Remember why NATO was created !!!!!!!!!!!
  15. Per se.
    Per se. 30 November 2015 07: 09 New
    +1
    In the New York Times, we add to this, they openly write that Turkey set up NATO.
    The New York Times writes a lot of things, but if anyone substitutes the same Turkey, the whole of Europe, it is the United States itself. Probably, one must be a very naive person, believing that Turkey could independently decide to attack a Russian Air Force aircraft. Just like François Hollande "independently", at one time, decided not to supply two helicopter carriers already paid for by Russia. The same can be said about Frau Merkel, who got involved in sanctions against Russia. The Americans need a regional war, and on the one hand, Bandera Dill is ideal for it, with our unsolved problems in the former Ukraine. This is Crimea, that Poroshenko vows to return, and whose departure to Russia is not recognized by the West, these are also problems in Donbass. All this can blaze. Secondly, this is Syria, where Russia intervened, after the obvious or depicted insolvency of the United States, it will cope with ISIS, which the United States created, and, in one way or another, is still being protected. We were in no hurry to help Assad in time; we complied with the requirements for sanctions, without supplying the much-needed weapons. When it came almost to the point, the militants had already reached the Damascus areas, we, in fact, responded to the US arguments that the fight against ISIS is a common cause, that a coalition is needed, and got involved in the war. The brazen provocation of Turkey, the eternal historical enemy of Russia, has brought the situation to the brink of war. However, it is not necessary to exclude the Turks from NATO, it is enough for Turkey to find a reason to consider Russia an aggressor, just to see a threat to its security. Everything, it will be possible to put on the obscure convention on the straits, and to restrict the passage of our ships, our grouping in Syria will be cut off from the Black Sea, as well as the Black Sea Fleet will be blocked. If Turkey is excluded from NATO altogether, this can be considered a direct incitement to a conflict with Russia. Poroshenko and Erdogan, two problems, which are not at all ridiculous, given that Ukrupia is actively being prepared for war, and the Turkish fleet does not look weak at all, like the Turkish army. There is no reason for optimism that the Turks will be trampled on from NATO, as well as the story, who invite us to NATO (the WTO is enough here to understand that this is no better than an open war, there will be quiet disarmament and destruction of Russia's independence).
    1. igorka357
      igorka357 30 November 2015 09: 07 New
      +2
      The straits are straits, and it was necessary to blurt out someone, and ... now all and sundry "experts" have worked it out! The Turkish army may not be ridiculous, but Porosenkov's army ... yes, I beg you .. laughing ! Remember 08.08.08 five days ... but the Georgian army was not even the current dill, all the weapons are brand new, L / C full set, fully instructed by amers, and .... and five days .. soldier ! Skethe Ossetians also played a significant role, and Donbass will do no less, if not more, so with a direct order to capture Cueva-Kukueva, and a maximum of a week or two .. as all of Ukraine will become part of Russia and the people of Ukraine may breathe a sigh of relief ! Well, of course, Turkey will have to tinker with it, and it’s purely because of the Air Force and Navy, but the Navy can be lowered right from the Crimea, the ground forces are not so strong! And do not forget the Turkish military did not forget the Erdogash’s poddyanki, not the fact that a stupid coup will not happen, no one else has rotted the Turkish military like Erdogan! Generals can do a lot in BV, and betray and overthrow, and this is not uncommon !!! But to be honest, it seems like they give me a gray cardinal in Turkey !!!
      1. Per se.
        Per se. 30 November 2015 13: 45 New
        0
        Quote: igorka357
        The Turkish army may not be ridiculous, but the Poroshenko army ... yes, I beg you ..
        And you remember how the Hitlerite Wehrmacht began, how the Germans rolled plywood tanks, it was funny to many then in the same France, which in 1940 was crushed by not Guderian's plywood tanks at all. Hitler would never have come to power, and even more so he would not have gained strength, if it had not been allowed to him by those who needed the antipode of communism, the antipode of the Soviet Union. Now from Dill, babbling is more terrible, wanting to make anti-Russians out of Russians, from Dill the antipode of Russia. What is now happening near the borders of Crimea and in the Donbass does not clearly indicate a stabilization of the situation, and does not inspire optimism for a quiet life. The Turks do not have to get involved in a war with Russia; it is enough for them to help some "moderate opposition". Our bourgeois themselves are not in a hurry to break ends with Tucy, building nuclear power plants at their own expense for the Turks, about 3 billion have already been invested, and in the calculation 20. Speak about the "gray cardinals", because the United States has all of Europe a puppet. And in vain you are comparing the Georgian army with the Ukrop army, the potential is different, all the more, the army of the former Ukraine can be made in such a way, where everything will be even newer than the Georgians had. With the straits, everything is far from so simple, you shouldn't be talking about "experts". Actually, Turkey was not to a small extent also taken into NATO because of the straits at one time. If the situation aggravates, and even more so the threat of Turkey itself, even within the framework of the convention, Turkey can close the straits for warships of other countries (in our case, for Russia). If we took threats more seriously, did everything in a timely manner, there would now be no problems either with Ukraine or in Syria.
  16. Vladimir71
    Vladimir71 30 November 2015 07: 10 New
    +2
    Many banners and coats of arms in the "old world" are decorated with the severed head of a Turk. It's time to return to this tradition and for the company and the heads of the most zealous NATO members to add ...
  17. Peacemaker
    Peacemaker 30 November 2015 07: 13 New
    +2
    Correctly! To join NATO, excluding Turkey and the United States from there, with the goal of the alliance to proclaim a confrontation with America, as the main accomplice of terrorism.
  18. Taygerus
    Taygerus 30 November 2015 07: 14 New
    +2
    yes no, we’ll somehow live without NATO, and it’s not very bad
  19. 1536
    1536 30 November 2015 07: 15 New
    +2
    Ukrainians, of course, dream of stealing all the NATO capters and warehouses, because they sleep and see themselves in this alliance. And why do we need this very NATO. Let self-dissolve and deal with the end.
  20. viktor561
    viktor561 30 November 2015 07: 19 New
    +1
    The author writes - "Islamists have always been a much more terrible and obvious threat to civilization in the West" - but what about tolerance ?? belay
  21. rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 30 November 2015 07: 19 New
    +1
    Western alliance with Turkey is the same as a deal with the devil

    Then, according to the laws of the genre, the time should come when the Evil One demands the fulfillment of another part of the contract. But I would better call Turkey’s entry into NATO a deal to the detriment of common sense, but with an eye to use against Russia for many years. Which was observed from 1952 to the present.
  22. mamont5
    mamont5 30 November 2015 07: 21 New
    +2
    Quote: Vladimirets
    No, you’re better off with us. yes

    Only if Russia becomes the leader of NATO.
  23. Alexdark
    Alexdark 30 November 2015 07: 30 New
    +2
    Breyadtina. With the same success, it would be possible for the USSR to side with Hitler Germany. Join the ranks of the Reich. This is called a drain, a loss. Absurd!
    1. Riv
      Riv 30 November 2015 07: 35 New
      0
      What scares you? That pizza in Manhattan would cost eight Reichsmarks, or that London would be renamed Zhukovo?
  24. Chulman
    Chulman 30 November 2015 07: 32 New
    +2
    Quote: Vladimirets
    Quote: Andrey Yurievich
    cognitive dissonance damn ...

    Estimate, Ukraine joins NATO, and there .. op-pa! Already Russia. laughing

    Ahiret !!!!!!!! laughing
  25. AID.S
    AID.S 30 November 2015 07: 36 New
    +1
    The old bike, if Russia goes into NATO, then according to Copenhagen itself .. And hypothetically, Russia can become a NATO member only as a result of a change in the political course of the leadership to a pro-Western one, with complete surrender of independence (remember the damned Yeltsin), according to the looming version of Montenegro.
  26. Al_oriso
    Al_oriso 30 November 2015 07: 38 New
    +2
    I hope Russia will not be offered this, and if they do, it will be a refusal.
    Otherwise, again they will simply crush us with the majority.
    Russia itself creates blocks (BRICS, SCO) and it decides with whom.
  27. Riv
    Riv 30 November 2015 07: 42 New
    +1
    Is Russia in NATO? But what about the hegemony of the States? Now the alliance is managed, in fact, from one headquarters - and so is strong. All kinds of Estonia, Poland and other shells do not solve anything and do not change anything. But accepting Russia there means, firstly: separation of command, and secondly: the impossibility of further expansion of the alliance, because Russia will block such attempts in the future. Goodbye, Georgian dreams ...
    One more nuance: does Russia need it? Today you can troll Erdogan S-400 without consequences, but in NATO he will be "our son of a bitch." The game may not be worth the candle.
  28. Bayonet
    Bayonet 30 November 2015 07: 45 New
    +2
    "Ankara was no use to the alliance ..."
    Well, of course, the geostrategic location, control of the straits, a powerful fleet in the Black and Mediterranean Seas, about 70 different military facilities are located on its territory, including several large bases. For example, Incirlik Air Force Base, the easternmost base of the United States Air Force Command in Europe. The "Cuban Missile Crisis" was preceded by the deployment of medium-range Jupiter missiles in Turkey in 1961 by the United States, which directly threatened cities in the western part of the Soviet Union, reaching Moscow and major industrial centers.
    So the alliance from Ankara was and is useful. hi
  29. U-96
    U-96 30 November 2015 08: 00 New
    +5
    Quote: Andrew Y.
    NATO renewal: Russia instead of Turkey?
    cognitive dissonance damn ... what

    No, Yurich, this is the view of the chemist-philosopher: Sierra Rhine holds a Ph.D. in chemistry I’m even afraid to imagine how a pizza delivery man with the degree of doctor of ichthyology would express himself on a subject ...
  30. Fox
    Fox 30 November 2015 08: 04 New
    +1
    article plus ... and it would be better for a woman to do chemistry. well, not that.
  31. loha
    loha 30 November 2015 08: 07 New
    +2
    Invite a bear to a dog pack created to hunt a bear.
  32. shinobi
    shinobi 30 November 2015 08: 24 New
    +1
    Is Russia in NATO? No, solve your own problems yourself. And we will help if we need to.
  33. dimon-media
    dimon-media 30 November 2015 08: 31 New
    +1
    NATO will lose its meaning when Russia enters it. Since Russia and NATO, led by the United States, are two centers of power, opposite pluses. Russian entry is impossible.
  34. Alekst
    Alekst 30 November 2015 08: 50 New
    +2
    Sierra Rein has a Ph.D. in chemistry .... what is it? who would explain
    1. Zymran
      Zymran 30 November 2015 09: 31 New
      +1
      Quote: Alekst
      Sierra Rein has a Ph.D. in chemistry .... what is it? who would explain


      In our opinion - Ph.D. in chemistry.
    2. sharp-lad
      sharp-lad 1 December 2015 01: 43 New
      0
      While some chemists, she talks to others teeth! laughing
  35. shura7782
    shura7782 30 November 2015 08: 57 New
    +1
    Russia is in NATO, now this is out of the question. This question was worked out. GDP has been covering this possibility for a long time. Even a change in the political system did not change the attitude towards Russia. We are still being examined how the Russian Empire is located within the pre-revolutionary borders. And Turkey could have been expelled from the bloc for a long time, because of the invasion of Cyprus. As you can see, if it is beneficial to them, there are no principles. There are always explanations. If the United States gave the go-ahead to intercept the SU-24, then what is the question.
  36. kos2910
    kos2910 30 November 2015 09: 01 New
    0
    They are not stupid people at all, then NATO will not be needed at all ... Is there really such a fantasy? (cool car moderator substitutes words, only the meaning immediately changes)
  37. Vikings
    Vikings 30 November 2015 09: 03 New
    0
    Quote: Vladimirets
    No, you’re better off with us. : Yes:

    Enough konfrashka is enough! They know that Russia will immediately occupy the dominant
    position in the block, and will force home-made demagogues out of the ocean
  38. Styx
    Styx 30 November 2015 09: 18 New
    0
    Well damn it and jokes early in the morning, already invigorates! Nafig nafig this graph
  39. SPB 1221
    SPB 1221 30 November 2015 09: 25 New
    0
    I absolutely do not want my country to be a member of any NATO, there are already enough members there!
    Moreover, every day I am more and more convinced that those who are members of NATO with full confidence can be called the most real members! One of the meanings of the word member is a part of the body (more often about limbs).
  40. Wolka
    Wolka 30 November 2015 09: 43 New
    0
    Russia in NATO is hard to believe in it, but NATO, although confused by the latest events, will still not refuse the Turks, well, someone has to do the dirty work in the world, because NATO will always have such bastards in stock, good the turn is always to line up with noticeable constancy, these are Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Poland, and other scratches of World War II, and now Ukraine ...
  41. RONIN-HS
    RONIN-HS 30 November 2015 09: 47 New
    0
    They all went crazy there!

    NATO was created against the USSR. As well as other blocks: SenTO, for example.
    You have to be a complete idiot to offer such a thing - Russia to NATO, can even lather a rope for themselves ... Nerds "dogs" ... fool
    1. rudolff
      rudolff 30 November 2015 10: 35 New
      +1
      RONIN-HS: "You have to be a complete idiot to offer this - Russia to NATO ..."
      Well then, according to your logic, Stalin and Khrushchev and Yeltsin and Putin were idiots. The question of the entry of the USSR and Russia into NATO was discussed repeatedly and at the highest level. And in the 54th year, notes on joining NATO were filed officially. And not only from the USSR, but also from Belarus and Ukraine.
  42. provincial
    provincial 30 November 2015 09: 59 New
    +1
    So there was this proposal at EBN, even Pasha did not conduct big military games with NATO soldiers. It’s true after NATO’s answer that for them we’ve made a very big joke.
  43. runway
    runway 30 November 2015 09: 59 New
    0
    It is clear that the title of the article is such a marketing ploy - to lay the intrigue in other words.
    Russia has always been and will be the number one adversary for NATO.
    But what about Erdogan and Turkey? No news here. Even after all the hype in supporting ISIS in Turkey and gaining economic benefits for the Erdogan family personally due to the smuggling of oil from the territories captured by bandits. NATO and its political leadership knew about this and was silent - because this is their son of a bitch.
    Now, NATO, through France, is probing Russia's ability to stay in Syria. NATO's mission is to oust Russia from Syria.
  44. dchegrinec
    dchegrinec 30 November 2015 10: 42 New
    0
    NATO was not created in order to fight, but in order to scam. And to fight only with dystrophics. They are even afraid to touch a country with several regional nuclear weapons. And Russia has more than a thousand and they pretend that they are not afraid? Complete stupidity! They just change diapers and make their face look like they have constipation by blowing a vein on their forehead. And at night they cannot fall asleep as it is scary. We need to act as we started and want to. And Turkey needs to be taught a lesson specifically. She just completely overwhelmed.
  45. Nyrobsky
    Nyrobsky 30 November 2015 10: 50 New
    0
    Utopia)))
    The NATO bloc was created in opposition to the USSR (Russia). Changing the format to include Russia in its composition casts doubt on the need for its existence.
  46. Aitvaras
    Aitvaras 30 November 2015 11: 05 New
    -1
    The author clearly suffers from "Manilovism". Now NATO is considering abolishing the Russia-NATO commission and some countries are proposing to revise the provisions of the 1997 treaty on preventing the construction of NATO bases near the border with Russia. Now there can be no talk of improving relations between Russia and NATO. The positions of the two sides are based on mutually unacceptable concepts. Russia - on the theory of the times of Tsarist Russia and the USSR about "buffer" states. NATO on the modern theory of the 21st century. In Europe, the majority of residents are not interested in who owns the border territories between France and Germany, Austria or Italy, etc., although hundreds of years during these lands they fought among themselves. Europe has already been ill with "childhood buffer diseases."
    1. iov
      iov 30 November 2015 14: 51 New
      0
      And what did it give them ???! The EU is bursting at the seams ... as for me: so some civilization ... Except £, perhaps ... it will gradually come to an end if it is not turned off its path .... And this some is not Russian. ..so here;)
  47. 16112014nk
    16112014nk 30 November 2015 11: 17 New
    0
    Quote: sergeybulkin
    the states with England would constantly put pressure on the Russian Federation, and then they would still be kicked out anyway,

    They kick the cat off. Simply, the arrogant Saxons would create such conditions that Russia itself left. But Russia in NATO is a fantasy.
  48. X Y Z
    X Y Z 30 November 2015 11: 23 New
    +1
    Our entry into NATO is impossible. NATO is a criminal organization that has established itself exclusively as an instrument of US geopolitical claims. It is clear that their claims are fundamentally at odds with our vision of the world order. NATO's crimes have been proven and confirmed by many documents. Our very big mistake is that we are trying to "make friends" without conflict with our "partners" and make little use of these facts. And in what capacity could we be in this organization?
  49. Reptiloid
    Reptiloid 30 November 2015 11: 25 New
    0
    Quote: sergeybulkin
    We don’t need NATO ...

    We do not need NATO, of course. But of two evils, they choose the lesser. Although I strongly doubt that even if, suppose we were accepted, we would not have been full members, and the states with England would constantly put pressure on the Russian Federation, and then they would still be kicked out, the Americans and others need an enemy, the enemy is not a real one. " theoretical "so that defense spending is to be credited to.


    I think it would be the same rake as "PERESTROIKA" - promises with the aim of total total destruction !!!!!!!!!!! Only not the USSR, but Russia. And also the further theft of our inventions ...
    It turns out that the author thinks: can Russia “lead?” Is there a new Tagged One?
  50. veksha50
    veksha50 30 November 2015 11: 40 New
    +1
    "So is it possible to replace Islamist and unpredictable Turkey with an open and understandable Russia in NATO?"...

    "Fig - fig" - I hope our boyars in the State Duma will shout this way, if such a question suddenly arises ...

    To involve Russia in NATO, if it is in no way possible to involve it in the war, it means to tie her hands and feet ... The purpose of this "entry" will be only one - to subjugate Russia at any cost ... As they say, if you do not you can defeat the enemy in open combat - pretend to be his friend for a while, and then shoot him in the back with a knife ... This is how they want to do ...

    But in general, the problems of Islamism did not arise yesterday, but for some reason only Russia and its president Putin see it, and it’s hard for the rest to get through ... France probably got through the ass, and staffers, until the devil begins on their territory will not come to their senses ...

    But we do not need such friends ... We are enemies in life, and such an assessment of our "friendship" could appear only as a result of the actions not of the USSR-Russia, but of the West ...

    There was the USSR, the communists in power - we were enemies ... the CPSU left, the USSR - fell apart, we now have the same wild system as in the west - and, however, we still remain enemies ... Actually, not us, people, and our territory and subsoil ...

    We don't need their blocs-alliances-coalitions ... Over the past couple of years, all the i's have been dotted ...