Military Review

Do we need to talk with NATO?

60
When NATO announced in 2014 about the end of all contacts with Russia, the world became tense. No joke, Russia is becoming a real opponent of Europe. Yes, and we tried to explain to the hot-blooded military that the jokes could end very badly. Scare Russia is not worth it. For all the positive things, the Europeans did not understand at all that they were talking to another country. With a country that makes "politics" itself. A country that does not want to be in the wake of someone's politics.




It is clear that Ukraine was just a reason. The main thing was the desire to return the end of 90-x. Return the world to a state where the United States and the EU lived quietly and richly by plundering the former Soviet bloc.

The well-functioning mechanism of relations in the form of the Russia-NATO Council, through the fault of the alliance, was first frozen, and then turned into a fiction. From that moment, more and more in the press, reports began to slip about the "interceptions" of Russian or NATO aircraft near the borders of states. Critical situations at sea began to arise. And ultimately, one of the member states of the block went into direct aggression against the Russian videoconferencing.

The world is getting closer and closer to the moment when one careless movement can become a catalyst for a big war. And this is best understood by the military.

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg declared the following to 8 February in Brussels.

"Now we are exploring the possibility of holding a meeting of the Russia-NATO Council ... We are not striving for confrontation with Russia and for a new cold war, we want to avoid a new cold war."

Washington supported the idea of ​​resuming the activities of the Council. The United States is well aware that Europeans do not want to fight. All NATO declarations are no more than an attempt to "call on the elder brother to intercede." And the power of the armed forces of the participating countries is not as great as foreign media are trying to convince us.

But the main instigator of the desire to again talk with the Russian military as an equal served as Syria. And of course, Erdogan’s completely ill-conceived policy.

The successes of the VKS in Syria have practically shown that it is possible to beat the bandits. Even the bloodless and tired of the 4 year of war, the Syrian army can cope with this. If a little help.

Now many politicians, including such a level as John Kerry or Ban Ki-moon, speak about the breakdown of the negotiations in Geneva due to the fault of Russia. Paradoxically, in some ways they are right. Russia really doesn’t make sense of the negotiations by its actions. The Syrian army is advancing. And it comes constantly. Not fast, but always. And in the preliminary agreements on negotiations there is a clause on the formation of a coalition government in composition proportional to the occupied territory and population.

If Russia's support continues, in two or three months the same people may be in the new government as now. The liberation of territories means the loss of ministerial portfolios for the opponents of Asad or the right to vote in general.

The President of Turkey, as I wrote above, is also trying with might and main to expose NATO. Realizing that Europe today is completely unable to cope with the flow of refugees, Erdogan is directly blackmailing the EU. More recently, the Europeans have agreed on 3-billion compensation for refugees. We give you the money, and you keep the refugees at home. So what?

Appetites are growing. Turkey is demanding double the compensation. And these demands, if not met, are already threatening to break some political career of some European politicians. In particular, Merkel.

According to the treaty, NATO member countries are obliged to help other members in the event of an obvious confrontation with any state. The famous NATO principle of collective self-defense. And now, if you look at the bellicose statements of Erdogan and the movement of his troops along the border, it becomes clear that the collision of the Russian AF with the Turkish Air Force or the AF and ground forces is very likely.

In this regard, yesterday’s statement by the Secretary General of the Alliance on non-intervention by NATO in the hostilities in Syria is very significant. NATO, according to Stoltenberg, under no circumstances interferes in the conflict. And these words were directed not so much to Assad or Putin, as to Erdogan.

But at the same time, we hear constant statements at different sites of the same Stoltenberg about the war crimes of Russia. About the bombing of hospitals, schools, hospitals. Moreover, the general secretary, like John Kerry, does not particularly care about evidence. They are not needed. Suffice it to say.

How do we treat voiced statements? Should I believe the words of those who have more than once brazenly lied?

Be that as it may, but the situation today is such that we must believe. Trust, but verify. The same statement about the non-interference of NATO troops in the conflict gives a chance to Turkey’s refusal to direct aggression in Syria. It is doubtful that the Turkish politicians and the military did not calculate the consequences. As Russia can answer, the Turks are already feeling fully in their pockets. And what can happen with the army, showed missile strikes on positions of ISIS.

And the situation in Europe is such that we need a dialogue. Even the fact that the United States dramatically increased the military budget for its military units in Europe, dictates this need. Not to mention the emergence of new divisions near our borders. Yes, and the US missile defense has not been canceled.

The resumption of the work of the Russia-NATO Council is necessary for everyone. And this is finally understood by both Americans and Europeans. It remains to hope that the Council will start working in the coming days or weeks. The world needs peace.
Author:
60 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. pest
    pest 10 February 2016 06: 43
    51
    The dialogue may be necessary, but you cannot change your line. There is no confidence in this alliance consisting of jackals who are always ready to cling to your back.
    1. sir.jonn
      sir.jonn 10 February 2016 06: 52
      22
      Quote: pest
      The dialogue may be necessary, but you cannot change your line. There is no confidence in this alliance consisting of jackals who are always ready to cling to your back.

      There is no dialogue before changing the rhetoric of the members of the alliance towards the Russian Federation. I understand that they are proud and do not admit mistakes, but at least some of the mongrels inside the alliance are obliged to spank.
      1. sgazeev
        sgazeev 10 February 2016 07: 15
        +2
        Quote: sir.jonn
        Quote: pest
        The dialogue may be necessary, but you cannot change your line. There is no confidence in this alliance consisting of jackals who are always ready to cling to your back.

        There is no dialogue before changing the rhetoric of the members of the alliance towards the Russian Federation. I understand that they are proud and do not admit mistakes, but at least some of the mongrels inside the alliance are obliged to spank.

        Puppets never had pride fool
        1. sir.jonn
          sir.jonn 10 February 2016 07: 20
          +3
          Quote: sgazeev
          Puppets never had pride

          I proudly wrote down (mattress) those who steers, and puppets they belong to mongrels.
          1. domokl
            domokl 10 February 2016 08: 27
            0
            Stupidity. Do you really want a big war? Or do you hope that among all those whom you want to spank, there will be at least one that can give an order to start hostilities?
            There is no doubt in our victory. But do we need losses today? And did our defense industry enterprises completely rebuild on Russian components?
            1. edeligor
              edeligor 10 February 2016 08: 51
              11
              Quote: domokl
              Do you really want a big war?

              Only those who have never encountered it want war. The entire NATO policy towards Russia, the full spectrum of pressure, the so-called "hybrid" war is reduced only to yank Russia, make the population hate the politicians in power and remove them. By the way, they are doing well and the September elections will confirm this. (I don't want to be a prophet)
              Quote: domokl
              There is no doubt in our victory.

              "We'll bang, we'll bang! The whole world is in dust ... But that will come later." GOD FORBID! Do you yourself believe that life is possible in a radioactive desert ?!
              1. 72jora72
                72jora72 10 February 2016 12: 00
                +3
                "We'll bang, we'll bang! The whole world is in dust ...
                ........ if there is no other way out .... yes
            2. sir.jonn
              sir.jonn 10 February 2016 10: 09
              0
              Quote: domokl
              among all those whom you want to spank, there is not at least one capable

              I say that "they themselves should spank their mongrels" ie. put in place or, more simply, if you do not understand reassured. And if these capable of something are capable, then let them understand within the organization, and when they figure it out, then you can start a dialogue.
            3. Misha Honest
              Misha Honest 10 February 2016 10: 39
              +1
              Quote: pest
              Dialogue may need

              What dialogue can be with someone who has already gotten on the rails of war? Remember, let's learn the lessons of the Second World War, how we agreed with Hitler and how it all ended! The only question is, when is it all babahnet and will we have time to prepare?
              Sense to negotiate - if so and so a knife in the back is provided?
              1. Aitvaras
                Aitvaras 10 February 2016 14: 32
                +1
                Totally agree with you. No dialogue is needed. Another "cold war" is underway. In the last "cold", there were no "Soviet-NATO Soviets". In their military doctrines, NATO and Russia, the opponents are clearly designated. This "Council" is a senseless waste of time.
              2. The comment was deleted.
    2. 3news
      3news 10 February 2016 08: 59
      +4
      Quote: pest
      Dialogue may need

      No dialogue is needed and it cannot be at all. The recognition by Russia of NATO and communication with its structures is the official recognition of the protection of the United States at the state level. While the Warsaw Treaty was in place, that made sense. Today we must urgently refuse this.
    3. Nicola Bari
      Nicola Bari 10 February 2016 09: 09
      +6
      In principle, there is no point in negotiating with the Europeans - they always "throw" everyone, or try to "throw". Not negotiable.

      My history textbook described how they had dealt with Jan Hus at one time, since then - since childhood I don’t really trust them.

      In 1414, Hus was summoned to the Council of Constance, with the goal of uniting the Roman Catholic Church and ending the Great Western Schism, which by this time had already led to tripartism. Moreover, the emperor Sigismund promised Gus personal security. However, when Gus arrived in Konstanz and received a letter of protection, it turned out that Sigismund gave him the usual road letter. In the presence of Pope (subsequently recognized as anti-Pope) John XXIII and members of the Council, Hus was charged with heresy and organizing the expulsion of Germans from Prague University. Jan Hus arrived in Konstanz in November 1414, and in December he was arrested and imprisoned in one of the rooms of the palace. When some friends of Hus accused the Council of violating the law and the imperial oath of safety for Hus, the pope replied that he personally did not promise anyone and was not bound by the promise made by the emperor. When the emperor Sigismund was reminded of his promise, he refused to intervene and defend Hus.
      On July 6, 1415, Jan Hus, who refused to renounce his “delusions”, was burnt at the stake by the sentence of the cathedral.


      Actually, it is Gus who is the author of "Oh, holy simplicity!" Addressed to an old woman who threw a bundle of brushwood into his fire.
    4. The comment was deleted.
    5. Nicola Bari
      Nicola Bari 10 February 2016 09: 17
      +1
      Europeans cannot be trusted, by word of mouth. Everywhere they "throw" or try. I realized this for the first time, having read in a history textbook about how they dealt with Jan Hus.

      In 1414, Hus was summoned to the Council of Constance, with the goal of uniting the Roman Catholic Church and ending the Great Western Schism, which by this time had already led to tripartism. Moreover, the emperor Sigismund promised Gus personal security. However, when Gus arrived in Konstanz and received a letter of protection, it turned out that Sigismund gave him the usual road letter. In the presence of Pope (subsequently recognized as anti-Pope) John XXIII and members of the Council, Hus was charged with heresy and organizing the expulsion of Germans from Prague University. Jan Hus arrived in Konstanz in November 1414, and in December he was arrested and imprisoned in one of the rooms of the palace. When some friends of Hus accused the Council of violating the law and the imperial oath of safety for Hus, the pope replied that he personally did not promise anyone and was not bound by the promise made by the emperor. When the emperor Sigismund was reminded of his promise, he refused to intervene and defend Hus.
      On July 6, 1415, Jan Hus, who refused to renounce his “delusions”, was burnt at the stake by the sentence of the cathedral.


      Actually, on that day Jan Hus said "Oh, holy simplicity!" addressed to the old woman E, who threw brushwood at his feet.

      Now there is no such thing in modern history textbooks, but in vain: too much begins from such a book.
      1. Fat
        Fat 10 February 2016 13: 44
        +2
        Quote: Nicola Bari
        Actually, on that day Jan Hus said "Oh, holy simplicity!" addressed to the old woman E, who threw brushwood at his feet.

        "(Shuisky) Holy simplicity! It makes it clear: “I see you through and through. You are one with the others! ” Meanwhile, whatever I say, it will take everything for the truth ”(A.K. Tolstoy).

        Nobody has yet said "to believe", "to negotiate", we are talking about a dialogue ie. "cultural conversation".
        And what about jumping on opposite sides of the stream, showing your teeth, making grimaces, throwing poop and spitting, waving sticks, as all normal primates do, better?
        To believe, not to believe ... IMHO It is impossible to take a word at all to anyone, especially politicians. But you can talk about "confidence-building measures". At least mutually agree that it is not necessary to jump up - it is useless and very tiring ... It is possible to agree that it is not necessary to wave with sticks either, she can escape from her hands and hit the enemy on the forehead, then the enemy will be able to push the weapon in reverse and not even miss, and the action is very tiring ...
      2. 933454818
        933454818 10 February 2016 18: 58
        0
        A. Bushkov gives the following characteristics of the Hussite movement and the figures of their leader. Noting that it is completely unimportant what Jan Hus or Martin Luther sincerely desired, since it is not intentions that are important, but the result, he writes:
        “We studied from history textbooks, where the 'reactionary and bloodthirsty papacy' was unconditionally stigmatized, opposing the 'progressive' Hussites. Meanwhile, the Hussites who seized power in the Czech Republic were a rather creepy company. First of all, because long before Lenin they adopted one of the main principles of Bolshevism: a true Bolshevik can determine for himself what is good and what is bad, who is good and who is bad. This is not an exaggeration - one of the English historians in their hearts called the first Protestants "the Bolsheviks of that time." Here is what is written in the "Chronicle of Lawrence of Brzezova" about some of the ideas of the Hussites for the reconstruction of life:
        “... so as not to be allowed, under pain of established punishments, to drink any drinks in the tavern ...
        ... so that they don’t wear luxurious clothes and prevent others from wearing too precious against the Lord God precious, such as: silver belts, fasteners and all sorts of jewelry and jewelry that have pride ...
        ... so as not to endure and not to punish any obvious sinner ...
        ... so that neither in crafts nor in the market ... the manufacture of all sorts of useless and vain things ... "
        ... Who was supposed to determine which thing is "vain and useless", and who is considered "an obvious sinner" Anyone - provided that he belongs to the "true righteous" ...
        The most radical wing of the Hussites - the Taborites and Chasniks - demanded the establishment of such an order of things in which any city dweller (if he, of course, is among the righteous inhabitants) would have the right to kill without any ceremony any of his neighbors, in the opinion of the "respectable", It is not superfluous to mention that there were also Adamites who longed for the community of women and the right to walk naked ... In the end, the radicals blamed themselves so much that the Hussites themselves had to cut them a little ...
        True, after that, the Hussites began to make armed sorties outside the Czech Republic - to benefit their neighbors with their teachings. But those who did not want such innovations at all began to resist - and the reflection of the Hussite aggression just came to be called subsequently “punitive expeditions of Catholics” [2, pp. 78-79].
        A. Bushkov "Russia, which did not exist"
    6. Tambov Wolf
      Tambov Wolf 10 February 2016 13: 40
      0
      What dialogue? It’s necessary to achieve all in Syria. Who is stronger is right. That will do the new government. In general, the winner writes history.
  2. Dmitry Potapov
    Dmitry Potapov 10 February 2016 06: 46
    +6
    Yes, because looking at the kneading made by our VKS in Syria, no one wants to get into it, even the USA
    1. Nyrobsky
      Nyrobsky 10 February 2016 10: 32
      +2
      Quote: Dmitry Potapov
      Yes, because looking at the kneading made by our VKS in Syria, no one wants to get into it, even the USA

      They don’t want to get there, but apparently it’s necessary.
      Too many participants, forces and interests are concentrated in this point of the planet. If today the question of "Assad's departure immediately, or his departure for some time" is considered fundamental for the United States and Russia - and consensus would be possible, would come to some kind of agreement, then Saud and Qatar, which pumped huge money into the project of the collapse of Syria and do not want to get out just without getting what they wanted. They have already made a statement that they will send their troops to Syria to participate in a dry operation, to which Iran promised to return their troops in coffins to them, but they are not NATO members.
      But if Turkey gets into it, it will undoubtedly get on the ears. If NATO remains aloof, then for other NATO members this will be a signal that this organization of props and the principle of mutual protection do not work for everyone, which will seriously undermine the credibility of the bloc and possibly provoke the beginning of its collapse.
      So they have to get in.
      I don’t believe that everyone will agree tomorrow and scatter peacefully in their huts.
      1. Shark Lover
        Shark Lover 10 February 2016 11: 44
        0
        Quote: Nyrobsky
        If NATO remains aloof, then for other NATO members this will be a signal that this organization of props and the principle of mutual protection do not work for everyone, which will seriously undermine the credibility of the bloc and possibly provoke the beginning of its collapse.

        They have actually given gave such a signal, only from another structure, the IMF. Amend the law, allow credit to the bankrupt country, even if it does not reach bankruptcy, even if they change their minds to lend, the word was pulled out. The sensible politician will understand, since they changed the rules, why not change in another case? What is NATO, what is the IMF's head is one-USA (United Gang of Aggressors)
  3. aszzz888
    aszzz888 10 February 2016 06: 46
    +6
    And these requirements, if they are not fulfilled, already threaten to break the political career of some European politicians. In particular, Merkel.


    The Führer is already like a rotten jelly! From her one stink and nasty stickiness! Ready to lie down under anyone! laughing
    1. sgazeev
      sgazeev 10 February 2016 07: 20
      +2
      Quote: aszzz888
      And these requirements, if they are not fulfilled, already threaten to break the political career of some European politicians. In particular, Merkel.


      The Führer is already like a rotten jelly! From her one stink and nasty stickiness! Ready to lie down under anyone! laughing
  4. Hooks
    Hooks 10 February 2016 07: 00
    +5
    Talking about it is always useful, as S. Lavrov seems to have expressed himself (by the way, Happy Diplomatic Worker Day!). And to give the last word is holy!
  5. Senior manager
    Senior manager 10 February 2016 07: 11
    +2
    It is always useful to speak, and even more so to sign binding documents. But always remember that partners are highly AMORAL subjects with Triple standards. Only parity negotiations. Who remembers- "Severomorets be vigilant".
  6. parusnik
    parusnik 10 February 2016 07: 12
    +4
    Everyone needs to resume the work of the Russia-NATO Council. .. But not in the form of a monologue of NATO, and twisting the arms of Russia .. as it was recently ..
    1. domokl
      domokl 10 February 2016 08: 29
      -6
      And who is talking about the monologue? Secretary General is almost begging Russia to start negotiations.
      1. Mikhail Krapivin
        Mikhail Krapivin 10 February 2016 09: 57
        +2
        As soon as the situation is evened out, the pleading tone will change into a threatening moment. Passed more than once.
      2. Victor Demchenko
        Victor Demchenko 10 February 2016 18: 20
        0
        you know Roman, but in my opinion, I personally have never seen reports that NATO is begging us for something. here are the promises to deploy troops in Ukraine - that was, and the promise to spoil our life in the Black Sea too. so do not wishful thinking ... and yet: you always wrote messages very balanced and strictly speaking at a very high level of analytics, and today ... negative
        1. domokl
          domokl 10 February 2016 19: 20
          0
          bully judging by the text, an appeal to me ... And why did I become a novel? laughing
  7. rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 10 February 2016 07: 12
    +4
    We are not striving for confrontation with Russia and for a new "cold war," we want to avoid a new "cold war."

    When the matter is heading towards a possible armed conflict between one of the NATO countries and Russia, it is somehow not even decent to talk about not wanting a "cold war". And if you listen to what this Secretary General said earlier, you get the impression that they are just trying to lull our vigilance. But this is meant for fools and it cannot blindly blind the eyes of Russia.
  8. EvgNik
    EvgNik 10 February 2016 07: 14
    11
    More recently, Europeans have agreed on a 3 billion compensation for refugees

    Appetites are growing. Turkey requires double compensation.

    Today it was announced - Turkey demands (note, demands) 30 lard. Otherwise it will send refugees to Europe by buses. Europe can say thank you to Merkel.
    1. rotmistr60
      rotmistr60 10 February 2016 07: 55
      +3
      Europe can say thank you to Merkel.

      Especially for its deflections during the last visit to Turkey. And she did not forget to blame Russia and smiled at Erdogan. Turkey, in monetary matters, goes head to head with Ukraine.
      1. Fat
        Fat 10 February 2016 14: 09
        +1
        Quote: rotmistr60
        Turkey, in monetary matters, goes head to head with Ukraine.

        Well, the Ukrainian government cannot be outdone ... And Erdogan demands money for "honest work" in the refugee problem + overhead costs - such a "normal" business, IMHO it is necessary to advise the Ukrainians, let the "refugees" be accommodated, then Europe will give them money. .. maybe if he wants ...
  9. avva2012
    avva2012 10 February 2016 07: 30
    +9
    Of course, it is necessary to talk. Strangle the "partners" in your arms.
    1. Grabberxnumx
      Grabberxnumx 10 February 2016 15: 29
      +1
      Better an old TT ..soldier
      And that is, some come to a shootout with knives! wink
      1. sharp-lad
        sharp-lad 11 February 2016 03: 15
        0
        And there are those that jump on a saber with a bare heel! lol
  10. dFG
    dFG 10 February 2016 07: 37
    +7
    There is no point in talking with NATO in the old format: all agreements were mandatory only for the Russian Federation, as a result, US tanks are already in the Baltic states. We need to speak in a new way to everyone to promise everything and to do only what is beneficial to the Russian Federation and nothing else.
  11. Alexandr2637
    Alexandr2637 10 February 2016 08: 02
    +2
    How do we feel about voiced statements? Is it worth believing the words of those who have repeatedly brazenly lied?

    I hope everyone remembers about 1941.
  12. Volzhanin
    Volzhanin 10 February 2016 08: 09
    +4
    If America is surrounded by nuclear charges around the perimeter, any negotiations will be more than successful for us. Otherwise, a constructive dialogue is hardly expected.
    1. domokl
      domokl 10 February 2016 08: 33
      -1
      soldier Arms race again? Can we stand it? Sanctions have greatly undermined our production. including in the field of defense. We must say while you can ...
      As a Russian soldier, I remember well the old saying-Or chest in crosses, or head in the bushes. But as an officer, I also remember that in addition to performing combat missions, I will be obliged to retain personnel and equipment. There are many dead heroes, but the living ones perform tasks ...
      1. Mikhail Krapivin
        Mikhail Krapivin 10 February 2016 09: 55
        +3
        And there are no options. Either that, or on the knee-elbow, and a kind black gentleman will even allow you to use Vaseline so that it is not very painful.
      2. Fat
        Fat 10 February 2016 14: 15
        +3
        Quote: domokl
        As a Russian soldier, I remember well the old saying-Or chest in crosses, or head in the bushes. But as an officer, I also remember that in addition to performing combat missions, I will be obliged to retain personnel and equipment. There are many dead heroes, but the living ones perform tasks ...

        Those who put you minuses either moral ___, or self-confident slow-witted, or both. I'm with you
  13. Seraphimamur
    Seraphimamur 10 February 2016 08: 43
    +3
    Why not talk? Talk, bend your line and do your thing and breed a la la la. Somewhere like that.
  14. 33 Watcher
    33 Watcher 10 February 2016 08: 48
    +3
    You can say something, so, chat ... Send sometimes ... The main thing is not to sign laughing
  15. Million
    Million 10 February 2016 08: 53
    +2
    Dialogue is possible only on equal terms and should take into account the interests of both parties.
  16. Yurmix
    Yurmix 10 February 2016 09: 34
    +1
    The resumption of the work of the Russia-NATO Council is necessary for everyone. And this is finally understood by both Americans and Europeans. It remains to hope that the Council will start working in the coming days or weeks. The world needs peace.


    Sobsno what can we talk about, what kind of understanding? Did they get their sight overnight and remove all missile defense in geyrope? or removed from the military doctrine of "enemy number 1" Russia. Everything that has already been done will not return to normal, but adding Sweden and Finland to NATO is now on the agenda of these creatures. What they can offer in return in order to talk about something, there is no such thing, they have only lawlessness and we are a great country, which means what was yours will become ours. Excuse the overseas gentlemen, we cannot help in this matter, for we have a concept of the Motherland and honor.
  17. A-Sim
    A-Sim 10 February 2016 09: 51
    +1
    We are not striving for confrontation with Russia and for a new "cold war," we want to avoid a new "cold war."

    As it turned out, they need more time to prepare for the "hot war."
  18. Mikhail Krapivin
    Mikhail Krapivin 10 February 2016 09: 53
    +5
    There can be only one dialogue - we live as we want, without disturbing you, you live as you want, without disturbing us. Do you want to go in women's skirts - please. Do you want your women to be protected by Arabs - for health. Want to lick Erdogan in the ass - you will not hear bad words. But then you slam your mouth and do not comment on every action of Russia, as a harbinger of the Apocalypse.
  19. engineer
    engineer 10 February 2016 10: 25
    +3
    the only policy. which has benefited Russia in relations with the West, it is' armed neutrality since the days of kings and emperors. any alliances and agreements on cooperation have always been harmful to Russia. this must be clearly remembered.
    1. Cap.Morgan
      Cap.Morgan 10 February 2016 18: 20
      0
      Our troops repeatedly entered the European capitals. We were not only in London and Rome. Although in the Italian seas, a Russian soldier was washing his boots.
      In this case, we have always been in alliance with any major European powers.
      Europe has never been united. An alliance with one part against another is the key to success.
  20. Crown
    Crown 10 February 2016 10: 48
    +1
    The meaning of signing contracts, we have already passed it
  21. Conscience
    Conscience 10 February 2016 11: 21
    0
    what are we talking about? - trust on their terms?
    only the children don’t know that their truth is always turned upside down - trusting them is more valuable to themselves ... but it’s better to say differently - trusting them, not respecting yourself.
  22. vladimirvn
    vladimirvn 10 February 2016 11: 43
    +1
    They still hoo what they can. laughing
    "Merkel is furious at the words of the Pope about the" barren grandmother "
    Recall that the incident occurred back in 2014. In his annual speech to the European Parliament, Pope Francis compared today's Europe to a sterile woman who cannot bear a child in any way, she is exhausted, exhausted and increasingly resembles a "grandmother" devoid of sensitivity. The pontiff also sharply criticized the entire European community. "Http://oko-planet.su/politik/newsday/309615-merkel-v-beshenstve
    -ot-slov-papy-rimskogo-pro-besplodnuyu-babushku.html
  23. partizan86
    partizan86 10 February 2016 11: 43
    +2
    Hotline must be, so that one of the parties did not suspect the other in a complete loss of understanding and preparation for war. Of course, it is necessary to prepare for any situations and to stockpile modern weapons, but at the very least for a collision in neutral territory with someone else’s hands. Such countries as the USA, Russia and China should never fight with each other head-on, because the result is obvious to all. Both in our country and in the West this is well understood by all these military and political games, intimidating people with threats of invasion, everything is more for the public, for the sake of raising the political rating, for getting money out of the budget, for creating a basis for establishing more appropriate legislation for leaders. Ultimately for the sake of money and power. All performances for the people, in order to distract from other problems. But here, as if not to beat, and even not only the people can believe. Americans and ours mostly outplay, I do not take Europe into account, they have not grown. But all this is still at the level of small politicians who are not worthy of special attention, although it remains there. Here the Chinese in such a plan behave more wisely and with restraint, do not climb anywhere.
  24. triglav
    triglav 10 February 2016 12: 30
    0
    We will do well without this Council. And if we return the dialogue, then on our terms: equal rights, and our word is the last.
  25. Valery 1966
    Valery 1966 10 February 2016 12: 37
    0
    It's time to stop paying attention to NATO, and bend your own. Themselves come to agree, where are they without 1/8 of the land?
  26. uskrabut
    uskrabut 10 February 2016 14: 24
    +2
    Finally, overseas they realized that Russia could not do without taking Russia's interests into account. There are so many weapons on both sides that there will be nothing left of the planet in the event of a global conflict. Therefore, they will talk, albeit with the insolence inherent in the Anglo-Saxons and impudently, but they will, and will agree, if Russia stands firmly in its position. We need to learn pragmatism from them: if you want this from us, then give it to us, and nothing else.
  27. mikh-korsakov
    mikh-korsakov 10 February 2016 15: 13
    0
    I quote: And the situation in Europe is such that we need a dialogue. Even the fact that the United States dramatically increased the military budget for its military units in Europe, dictates this need. Not to mention the emergence of new divisions near our borders. Yes, and the US missile defense has not been canceled. request Do not understand. Based on the fact that the United States has strengthened its position in Europe, it follows that if negotiations begin, our positions in the negotiations will weaken. Therefore, it is worth writing that we are forced to negotiate now and in the future it will be even more difficult for us to defend our positions, but our opponents also understand this very well, which is why they strengthen their positions. Therefore, it is unclear WHY IT IS NECESSARY, and so we are forced to conduct negotiations from the position of WEAKNESS, and not strength.
  28. Kibl
    Kibl 10 February 2016 17: 37
    +1
    A productive conversation is possible only with a normal, sane person. But if the interlocutor is clearly not friendly with his head, does not conduct a normal dialogue, but only hisses and sputters at your address, then you need to invite a psychiatrist to the conversation! The doctor will not help, shoot like a mad dog!
  29. Cap.Morgan
    Cap.Morgan 10 February 2016 18: 09
    +1
    If Europe cannot deal with such a trifle as refugees (just cordons at the border, active work of the police and concentration camps), how will they fight? I can’t imagine that people who were frightened to disperse the Sabbath in Cologne would send bombers, tank columns, destroyer squadrons to combat raids ....
  30. Cap.Morgan
    Cap.Morgan 10 February 2016 18: 14
    +2
    Gromyko, recalls Ambassador Grinevsky, deduced the three golden rules of diplomacy of superpowers.

    The first one. Demand as much as possible and feel free to inquire. Demand what has never belonged to you.

    The second one. Present ultimatums. Do not spare the threats, but as a way out of this situation, offer negotiations. In the West there will always be people who peck at it.

    The third. Having begun negotiations, do not yield a single step. They themselves will offer you part of what you requested. But then do not agree, and squeeze more. They will go for it. That's when you get half or two-thirds of what you did not have, then you can consider yourself a diplomat.
  31. potalevl
    potalevl 10 February 2016 19: 03
    0
    It is not possible to conduct a dialogue with an opponent who does not want to communicate with you, stating that all your proposals are unacceptable.
  32. japs
    japs 10 February 2016 19: 15
    +3
    To start a conversation with the alliance, first of all, the operation in Syria should be completed with appropriate results. Naturally, having expelled ISIS from Syria. Closing the border between Turkey and Syria is essentially a solution to the issue of migrants. If you check nat. the composition of migrants in the EU, it will be clear that they are not Syrians. Under the Syrians, Albanians, Kosovars, Pakistanis, even Moroccans mow down. We all remember information about the defeated and plundered Syrian state. certification offices. Passports from there.
    The French are surprised that the date of birth of the Syrians is indicated on February 31.
    Etc.
  33. TOR2
    TOR2 10 February 2016 19: 24
    +1
    What kind of dialogue can we talk about when the West gladly picks up any chimera, if only it would be anti-Russian. A dialogue will be possible only when NATO runs into somewhere complete, such as mattresses in Vietnam.
  34. 31rus
    31rus 10 February 2016 21: 05
    +1
    Dear, well, why not, talking is better than fighting, but one big BUT, now all this fuss has one goal, to expose Russia in advance unacceptable conditions, for one or a group of problems, then blame Russia for anything, to the flesh Aiding terrorism, this is what NATO is trying to achieve. Of course, there are many common serious topics, such as terrorism, the fight against money laundering, drug trafficking, arms trade, people, etc., but this is more through the Ministry of Internal Affairs and special services
  35. sharp-lad
    sharp-lad 11 February 2016 03: 17
    -1
    If there is advice, then it is pointless to talk only with the Pentagon, with Europe.