Military Review

Project "ZZ". United States, take an example from Russia

65
American intelligence officers warned: in the United States, terrorist acts may occur that the militants of the "Islamic State" will arrange. The warnings of intelligence echoed the American press. Analysts and experts amicably call on Washington to say thanks to Moscow for the Syrian operation and to consolidate in Syria with the Russians. Some even suggest that the White House adopt Russian policy.


Militants of the “Islamic State” may try to organize terrorist attacks in the US, CIA Director John Brennan told 15 in February, giving an interview to CBS television.

"I think they will try to smuggle their people here, the materials they need for this," the CIA head quotes "Lenta.ru".

Terrorists can also count on mercenaries recruited in the United States.

True, Mr. Brennan doubts their success: “I don’t think they will succeed.”

But both the goals and the strategy of the militants are known to him: in his opinion, the terrorists of the ISIS are trying to provoke a conflict between the West and the Muslim world. What for? The task of the militants is to attract new supporters to the ranks of the IG.

Stephen Kinzer article in the American newspaper "The Boston Globe" came out with a photo of Russian bomber'a Su-34. It is a pity that the material is placed only in the heading "Opinion", and does not flaunt on the front page. Abstracts shown by the author, are worthy of reader attention. In addition, Kaynzer is not a simple columnist, but an expert, senior researcher at the Wattson Institute for International Studies at Brown University.

According to the scientist, Moscow has proved: it knows how to make a strategic choice better than the United States. The author proposes to “postpone” a hostile attitude towards Russia aside and move on to cooperation.

You can start with joint work on Syria, because it was here that the United States led an ill-considered policy for five years. The mistake was in upholding a tough position ("Assad must leave"). Because of this, the Syrian opposition was not interested in negotiations for a peaceful transfer of power in Damascus. The author hints that the United States is responsible for the "bloody nightmare" in Syria.

Now chaos and terrorist attacks from Islamist fanatics are threatened by both the United States and Russia. Therefore, the White House should conduct a policy similar to the Russian one, take an example from Russia. Washington should "prevent the fall of the regime of the government of Bashar al-Assad." And the new Syrian government should also include Assad or his supporters, the expert is sure, because the fall of Assad will lead to a “catastrophic vacuum” in power. The United States has already known the sad results of such wars: Iraq and Libya have become a “paradise for terrorists.” And this kind of outcome in Syria will be equally bad for both the United States and Russia.

Therefore, Washington "must recognize" that there is a common interest in resolving the conflict in Syria both for the United States and for the Russian Federation. We need to start cooperating with the Russians.

However, there is a serious hindrance: the very proposal for cooperation with Russia, the author further notes, is “hated” in Washington. Why so? It comes up against the eternal conviction of all those who make up the American establishment that Russia is the “eternal enemy” of America. That is what liberals, conservatives, republicans, and democrats think so. In determining the enemy, they come to a consensus.

Meanwhile, American rulers need to recognize that Russia could be a partner, despite a number of disagreements.

The author takes a retrospective look at history.

In his opinion, in the past, Americans, too, should have followed the course of Russia. For example, in Afghanistan. Moscow supported the government of Najibullah in Afghanistan, and it turned out to be “more honest and progressive” than the rulers who sat on the throne after the overthrow of Najibullah, supported by the Americans.

Later, Russia called on the United States to abandon the idea of ​​invading Iraq and overthrowing Hussein.

The scientist believes that in both Afghanistan and Iraq, the United States made mistakes, and the Russians were right.

For the third time, Moscow did the right thing in Syria.

In the interests of the United States, the expert believes, to maintain power here for B. Assad. There is no alternative: without Assad, the region is threatened with a “caliphate” from the igilovtsy.

The main thing for Washington is not Assad at all, but the weakening of the IS and other Islamist groups. The fight against these militants is the main goal of the current policy of Russia, as well as Iran. And Washington needs to work with them. A complete refusal to cooperate with the Russian Federation is only a “relic of a past era”.

Paul R. Pillar also writes on the topic of US cooperation with Russia in the Syrian region "The National Interest". Pillar - a regular contributor to the journal, invited art. Researcher at the Brookings Institution and Invited Art. Researcher at the Center for Security Studies, Georgetown University.

The expert makes fun of the commonplace clichés of the Cold War era, replicated in the leading American media like the Washington Post. Political commentators do not experience a “lack of confidence,” arguing about the actions of Moscow in Syria. The hawkish journalists categorically declare that the “Putin regime” is not trying to achieve a truce at all, but a victory over the “rebels” supported by the democratic West. Much of this kind of “comments” is simply ripped off from the materials of the Cold War era, the author points out.

But today is not the time of the "cold war." In addition, not all actions can be considered a "zero-sum game." Yes, other goals of Moscow contradict the goals of the United States, but others are neutral with respect to American interests. Finally, we must not forget that the third goals correspond to American interests.

As for Syria directly, a purely military solution is unattainable here, regardless of the success of the government army in the Aleppo area. Even a victory over opposition forces in Aleppo will not mean that the opposition will subside. Putin is perceptive, and he understands this, unlike the authors of the articles in the Washington Post.

The author’s conclusion: Russia in Syria is “very interested” in reaching an agreement on a peaceful settlement.

At the end of the article, the expert practically repeats the theses of Stephen Kainser, whose material was discussed above.

Paul Pillar is convinced that the interests of Washington are connected with the termination of the conflict in Syria, but the "schedule" of the departure of President Assad is not decisive. Much more important than the notorious withdrawal is the cessation of war, which allowed the IS to strengthen. And here the interests of Washington and Moscow fully converge.

A potential US presidential candidate, Donald Trump, is also ready to cooperate with Russia on the Syrian issue.

At the debates shown by the TV channel CBS NewsIn which potential Republican candidates participated, Donald Trump brought an avalanche of criticism on his rival Jeb Bush, who had previously tried to criticize Trump’s microphone.


Trump vs Bush


An anchorman asked Bush a question about Washington’s possible cooperation with Moscow. Jeb Bush used the question to criticize Trump’s position, recalling that he was a supporter of working together with Moscow to defeat IS and to peacefully resolve the conflict in Syria. According to D. Bush, Putin is not going to be an ally of the United States at all, and Russia is by no means aimed at IS. Russia is fighting with rebel groups that have been trained by the United States and which the United States supports. Bush does not believe in the “positive role” of Moscow in the region.

As we see, Bush simply repeated popular cliches, similar to those replicated in the Washington Post.

In turn, Donald Trump said into the microphone that he likes Putin’s actions, but Jeb Bush is mistaken. Bush is not right in discussing Assad’s “departure” from power. Trump said so in his expressive manner: “Jeb, you are mistaken.”

He further advised Jeb to fight the IG together with Russia, Iran and Syria (including Assad). This combined force destroys "IG". And only then you can decide what to do next.

According to Trump, two wars cannot be fought at the same time. The US has already broken firewood in the Middle East, spending huge amounts of money and supporting armed people in Syria, "without the slightest idea who they are."

* * *


So, in today's press of the USA, and at the same time in the election campaign, there are two opposite slogans: 1) Russia and the USA not on the way, the “cold war” resumed, in Syria Putin beats the “rebels” supported by America; 2) The United States and Russia should beat the IG together, since the terrorists threaten both states equally, and there is every reason to consolidate forces.

If the first point of view is held by “hawks” (whatever they are, whether they are Democrats, Republicans), then the second point of view is characteristic of those analysts and experts who are able to think objectively, moving away from the cold days of the Cold War.
Author:
65 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Rostislav
    Rostislav 15 February 2016 09: 25 New
    +4
    It sometimes happens that the states are sometimes defeated by the mind and reasonable politicians come to power. Wait and see.
    1. Coconut Tima
      Coconut Tima 15 February 2016 09: 32 New
      31
      Quote: Rostislav
      It sometimes happens that the states are sometimes defeated by the mind and reasonable politicians come to power. Wait and see.

      There was one - Kennedy, and they shot him
      1. Allech28-2
        Allech28-2 15 February 2016 09: 34 New
        15
        Quote: Tim Coconuts
        It sometimes happens that the states are sometimes defeated by the mind and reasonable politicians come to power. Wait and see.

        No, it doesn’t.
        Quote: Tim Coconuts

        There was one - Kennedy, and they shot him

        Found a normal ... belay I almost unleashed a nuclear war ..
        1. cniza
          cniza 15 February 2016 09: 41 New
          +7
          Sooner or later, the Americans will have to negotiate with us and speak on our side.
          1. Allech28-2
            Allech28-2 15 February 2016 09: 43 New
            +3
            Quote: cniza
            Sooner or later, the Americans will have to negotiate with us and speak on our side.

            laughing Have to agree, but here:
            Quote: cniza
            speak on our side.

            It belay .....
            1. cniza
              cniza 15 February 2016 10: 11 New
              +5
              Quote: Alleh28-2
              Quote: cniza
              speak on our side.

              It belay .....


              It is on our side that they will have to do this, that is sound logic, and sooner or later it will win in America. What will happen after the common enemy is defeated is the second question.
              1. Allech28-2
                Allech28-2 15 February 2016 10: 17 New
                +3
                Quote: cniza

                It is on our side that they will have to do this, that is sound logic, and sooner or later it will win in America. What will happen after the common enemy is defeated is the second question.

                Oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooh
                Quote: cniza
                sound logic

                Quote: cniza
                What will happen after the common enemy is defeated is the second question.

                And who are we
                Quote: cniza
                common enemy

                voice
                1. cniza
                  cniza 15 February 2016 10: 44 New
                  +4
                  Quote: Alleh28-2
                  [voice


                  The brainchild of US intelligence and others is ISIS, but Americans don’t need it ... then practice for yourself, and time will judge us.
                  1. Allech28-2
                    Allech28-2 15 February 2016 10: 50 New
                    +1
                    Quote: cniza
                    The brainchild of US intelligence and others is ISIS, but Americans don’t need it ... then practice for yourself, and time will judge us.

                    What is that supposed to mean? wassat
                    Quote: cniza
                    but the Americans don't need him

                    And why then did? stop You contradict yourself ..
                    1. cniza
                      cniza 15 February 2016 10: 57 New
                      +3
                      I told you ... the US special services and politicians are not Americans - the layman, when they, inside their well-fed world, will take them for Faberge ... then think for yourself. smile
                      1. Allech28-2
                        Allech28-2 15 February 2016 11: 26 New
                        +3
                        Quote: cniza
                        I told you ... the US special services and politicians are not Americans - the layman, that's when they, inside their well-fed world, will take them for Faberge ... then think for yourself

                        You have a romantic. Do you believe in shit democracy? In Europe, too, they don’t want to accept migrants, but only who will ask the people?
                      2. cniza
                        cniza 15 February 2016 11: 39 New
                        +4
                        What kind of democracy, what kind of romantic - only pragmatic calculation and nothing personal ... think.
                      3. Allech28-2
                        Allech28-2 15 February 2016 11: 47 New
                        0
                        Quote: cniza
                        What kind of democracy, what kind of romantic - only pragmatic calculation and nothing personal ... think.

                        Sorry for the directness ... repeat Then why are you grinding? Otherwise, I just can’t name it. People have come up with some kind of .. request
                      4. cniza
                        cniza 15 February 2016 11: 56 New
                        +4
                        Where did you find the word people in my posts? So sorry ... read and think.
                      5. Allech28-2
                        Allech28-2 15 February 2016 12: 06 New
                        +1
                        Quote: cniza
                        Where did you find the word people in my posts? So sorry ... read and think.

                        Quote: cniza
                        I answered you ... US special services and politicians are not Americans - the layman

                        Enough? Although apparently not (judging by the posts ..
                        Quote: cniza
                        I told you ... the US special services and politicians are not Americans - the layman, that's when they, inside their well-fed world, will take them for Faberge ... further themselves think.

                        1
                        Quote: cniza
                        What kind of democracy, what kind of romantic - only pragmatic calculation and nothing personal ...think.

                        2
                        Quote: cniza
                        Where did you find the word people in my posts? So sorry ... read and think.

                        3 Eco stuck with you ... No.
                      6. cniza
                        cniza 15 February 2016 12: 09 New
                        +3
                        Quote: Volka
                        the Yankees are not yet ripe for a "meeting of the coalition in Yalta", but the understanding that a "meeting on the Elbe" on Syria is inevitable is already present ...


                        Here is a man thinking.
                        You shouldn’t have called me a shit smile , and so everything is in order ... success to you.
                      7. Allech28-2
                        Allech28-2 15 February 2016 12: 18 New
                        +2
                        Quote: cniza
                        and so everything is in order ... success to you.

                        And good luck to you ..
                      8. The comment was deleted.
                    2. The comment was deleted.
            2. The comment was deleted.
          2. Allech28-2
            Allech28-2 15 February 2016 11: 26 New
            0
            Quote: cniza
            I told you ... the US special services and politicians are not Americans - the layman, that's when they, inside their well-fed world, will take them for Faberge ... then think for yourself

            You have a romantic. Do you believe in shit democracy? In Europe, too, they don’t want to accept migrants, but only who will ask the people?
        2. The comment was deleted.
  2. Volzhanin
    Volzhanin 15 February 2016 20: 56 New
    0
    Just a second, the Americans themselves created this "common" enemy.
    Maybe he mutated a little, but not to the extent that they could not control him.
  • alexng
    alexng 15 February 2016 20: 37 New
    0
    Quote: cniza
    Sooner or later, the Americans will have to negotiate with us and speak on our side.


    Nafig-nafig we are such friends. The USA woman is the same Banderites only more modernized in tailcoats, and in the "bowler hat" the same garbage as in the Banderlog.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • guzik007
    guzik007 15 February 2016 09: 56 New
    +2
    Found a normal ... belay I almost started a nuclear war ..
    -------------------------------------------------- -----------
    You are mistaken, dear, abnormal it was just from our side. But Kennedy was smart enough, even compromising her authority, to find the strength to come to an agreement. Maybe for this they banged.
    1. Allech28-2
      Allech28-2 15 February 2016 10: 02 New
      +6
      Quote: guzik007
      You are mistaken, dear. it was just on our side. But Kennedy was smart enough, even compromising her authority, to find the strength to come to an agreement. Maybe for this they banged.

      Ohhhh ... Liberalism prevailed. When the American nuclear weapons were under our noses, that is, in Turkey and Western Europe, we placed a couple of missiles in Cuba quickly became aggressors. Learn the story. Sit down two! That's just the result of this demarche we managed to agree on the withdrawal rockets in turkey wink You remind me of the Secretary General of one organization ... wink The troops are moving towards Russia and everything is wailing: "Oh, what an aggressor this Russia is!"
      1. andj61
        andj61 15 February 2016 11: 47 New
        +3
        Quote: Alleh28-2
        That's just the result of this demarche was able to agree on the removal of missiles in Turkey

        Actually, the removal of missiles from Turkey is the result of Kennedy’s unofficial agreement with Khrushchev, if the USSR wouldn’t have been removed — in advance! - missiles from Cuba, American missiles would remain in Turkey.
        In the case of Cuba, it turned out to infringe on the interests of the United States in their "backyard." And it was Khrushchev who then put the world on the brink of nuclear war. At the same time, the United States significantly surpassed the USSR in strategic nuclear potential. But Kennedy considered that Cuba was not a sufficient reason even for a victorious nuclear war if, as a result of this war, one third to half of the US population would be destroyed. And Kennedy took the first step - he sent a letter to Khrushchev to resolve the crisis. Realizing the real balance of forces, Khrushchev went to resolve the conflict.
        And the American missiles that threatened the USSR still remained - in Italy, exactly the same PGM-19 Jupiter, in England PGM-17 Thor, since Kennedy flatly refused to take them into account under this gentleman's agreement.
        But then a nuclear war could break out at the grassroots level. The world was much closer to nuclear confrontation than previously thought. So, not so long ago, the memories of participants in those events became public. It is possible that only the common sense of the senior on board the Soviet submarine B-59 (project 641) Vasily Arkhipov prevented a full-scale conflict - the captain of the boat was ready to use nuclear weapons. And then neither Kennedy nor Khrushchev could do anything with these already ...
        1. Allech28-2
          Allech28-2 15 February 2016 11: 51 New
          +1
          Quote: andj61
          Actually, the removal of missiles from Turkey is the result of Kennedy’s unofficial agreement with Khrushchev, if the USSR wouldn’t have been removed — in advance! - missiles from Cuba, American missiles would remain in Turkey.

          И
          Quote: andj61
          Quote: Alleh28-2
          That's just the result of this demarche was able to agree on the removal of missiles in Turkey

          What is the difference? Why are you all smoking today? request Stop reading the wiki. It fogs the brain (apparently)
          1. andj61
            andj61 15 February 2016 15: 36 New
            0
            Quote: Alleh28-2
            What is the difference? Why are you all smoking today? Stop reading the wiki. It fogs the brain (apparently)

            Unlike you, I do not smoke and I do not advise you. In addition, you do not remember - apparently from this smoke - that you yourself write. It was argued that Kennedy almost unleashed a nuclear war - and this, to put it mildly, is not so. Kennedy, despite the superior power of the United States, did not allow this war, although it could have taken place, since the decision-making was actually "lowered" to a lower level.
            In addition, having already read your pearls in discussions with VO users, I was convinced that you are a simple troll, and not even of a very high level - and nothing more. Verbally blaming, scolding, dousing with mud - is that all you can do? No other arguments?
            1. Allech28-2
              Allech28-2 15 February 2016 19: 13 New
              0
              Quote: andj61
              In addition, having already read your pearls in discussions with VO users, I was convinced that you are a simple troll, and not even of a very high level - and nothing more. Verbally blaming, scolding, dousing with mud - is that all you can do? No other arguments?

              And this is more like hysteria and gossip on the bench. Low mister "Marshal" ...
              Quote: andj61
              what you write yourself. It was claimed that Kennedy almost started a nuclear war - and this, to put it mildly, is not so.

              Well, yes, the rockets themselves jumped to the borders of the USSR themselves, and the minke whales just watched and clicked their tongues in displeasure .. Still say that you don’t smoke ..
              Quote: andj61
              Kennedy, despite the superior power of the United States, did not allow this war, although it could have taken place,

              So there was none;
              Quote: andj61
              despite superior power
              Otherwise, they would have attacked necessarily. There are a lot of examples in history. Your idols understand only the language of power and nothing more.
    2. The comment was deleted.
  • EvgNik
    EvgNik 15 February 2016 09: 58 New
    +2
    Quote: Tim Coconuts
    There was one - Kennedy, and they shot him

    Do you think it’s normal only because you shot it? And shoot, for example, Obama? And he will become a dove of peace?
    1. Coconut Tima
      Coconut Tima 15 February 2016 10: 07 New
      +5
      Quote: EvgNik
      Quote: Tim Coconuts
      There was one - Kennedy, and they shot him

      Do you think it’s normal only because you shot it? And shoot, for example, Obama? And he will become a dove of peace?

      Having a 20-fold superiority in nuclear weapons (6000 warheads in the USA, and about 300 in the USSR) and a huge advantage in the means of delivery of this nuclear weapons, Kennedy agreed with Khrushchev
      1. Allech28-2
        Allech28-2 15 February 2016 10: 12 New
        +1
        Quote: Tim Coconuts
        Having a 20-fold superiority in nuclear weapons (6000 warheads in the USA, and about 300 in the USSR) and a huge advantage in the means of delivery of this nuclear weapons, Kennedy agreed with Khrushchev

        Do not aggravate Twaricz. laughing Give a blunder, so have the courage to confess. After all, everyone knows perfectly well that 300 (the numbers are clearly underestimated) is quite enough to arrange (as your unloved character said) "Kuzkin's mother" hi
    2. Allech28-2
      Allech28-2 15 February 2016 10: 27 New
      +4
      Quote: EvgNik
      Do you think it’s normal only because you shot it? And shoot, for example, Obama? And he will become a dove of peace?

      The idea of ​​Great Martyrdom is alive laughing And now you can call him a dove without any stretch. How many people do he have on our heads ... al, not a single dove dreamed of. repeat
      1. Fat
        Fat 15 February 2016 14: 23 New
        +2
        I support! The fact that Ronald Reagan was "unfinished" did not prevent him from contributing to the end of the Cold War. yes
    3. The comment was deleted.
  • Sasha_Sar
    Sasha_Sar 15 February 2016 10: 36 New
    +1
    Roosevelt forgotten.
    1. Allech28-2
      Allech28-2 15 February 2016 10: 42 New
      0
      Quote: Sasha_Sar
      Roosevelt forgotten.

      What did you forget? He seems to be that ... recourse
  • nemez
    nemez 15 February 2016 11: 56 New
    0
    was the only Roosevelt
  • vovanpain
    vovanpain 15 February 2016 09: 35 New
    15
    Quote: Rostislav
    It sometimes happens that the states are sometimes defeated by the mind and reasonable politicians come to power. Wait and see.

    Unfortunately, hawks win there, even if Trump wins the presidential election, his rhetoric may change, because Wall Streets rules everything.
    1. Allech28-2
      Allech28-2 15 February 2016 09: 38 New
      +3
      Quote: vovanpain

      Unfortunately, hawks win there, even if Trump wins the presidential election, his rhetoric may change, because Wall Streets rules everything.

      Great koment. Just a word can take it away. Everything will change 100%.
      1. Kunar
        Kunar 15 February 2016 09: 59 New
        +3
        Exactly. As one maydanuty politician said: "Promise anything! We'll hang up later ..." Nothing new ....
  • Tra-ta-ta
    Tra-ta-ta 15 February 2016 09: 41 New
    0
    It happens..
    It happens that the wife dies with the wife, and lives with the widow ..! request
  • Blondy
    Blondy 15 February 2016 10: 05 New
    0
    I wonder if the bandits are trained in the United States, what should they give them indulgence for?
  • 222222
    222222 15 February 2016 11: 42 New
    0
    With America, everything is clear. The election battle ..
    another interesting !!
    1. Why the delegation to Munich was headed by Russian Prime Minister DA Medvedev
    2. Why did the prime minister speak on strategic policy issues? This is his patrimony
    3. What follows from this:
    -prepares for the president’s chair ????
    -or a new position? which one? not on Lavrov’s chair? hi
    ((The 52nd Munich Security Conference opened on Friday, February 12, ... The premiere for Medvedev ... Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev and Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov spoke at the Munich Security Conference on Saturday. Message from the Russian delegation at the main expert European platform was as follows: Russia is ready to continue a tough confrontation with the West, but it will only make it worse. The first proof of this thesis will be Syria ... "")))))
    1. ML-334
      ML-334 15 February 2016 13: 05 New
      +2
      Similarly, recently, the "iPhone" has been locked up with a.k.a.
    2. Fat
      Fat 15 February 2016 14: 38 New
      +4
      Quote: 222222
      1. Why the delegation to Munich was headed by Russian Prime Minister DA Medvedev
      2. Why did the prime minister speak on strategic policy issues? This is his patrimony
      3. What follows from this:

      1 This means that on party of ministers the president has nothing to do. This EBN loved to paint in Davos
      2 What other presidents spoke on strategic issues?
      3 It follows from this that VVP ignored the gathering of chatterboxes and sent the prime minister to take the rap and "sound".
      The Munich Conference was founded in 1963 in the format of a meeting of representatives of the defense departments of NATO member countries.
  • APASUS
    APASUS 15 February 2016 19: 30 New
    +1
    Quote: Rostislav
    It sometimes happens that the states are sometimes defeated by the mind and reasonable politicians come to power. Wait and see.

    Trump is an analogue of Zhirinovsky. I don’t think that he will become a friend or at least not an enemy of Russia. You should pay less attention to these statements, this is an election and a promise does not mean fulfillment at all. The United States has Obama and what has he not said before, but now "our peacemaker" again seems to be planning a war?
  • Dam
    Dam 15 February 2016 09: 25 New
    +7
    Damn, that you burned all morons mattress!
    1. Dazdranagon
      Dazdranagon 15 February 2016 09: 32 New
      +6
      Quote: Damm
      Damn, that you burned all morons mattress!
      - eh, the comment is not informative, but I agree with you! laughing
      1. Thrall
        Thrall 15 February 2016 09: 39 New
        +4
        And, in my opinion, the author responsibly reacted to his comment and did an excellent job with the goal smile
      2. cap
        cap 15 February 2016 09: 53 New
        +3
        Quote: Dazdranagon
        Quote: Damm
        Damn, that you burned all morons mattress!
        - eh, the comment is not informative, but I agree with you! laughing


        - but short and clear as a diagnosis and method of treatment laughing
        1. tol100v
          tol100v 15 February 2016 10: 11 New
          0
          Quote: cap
          h and treatment method

          The method of treatment is the most important thing! It remains to appoint a "dosage"!
      3. Dam
        Dam 15 February 2016 10: 48 New
        +1
        Sorry pent. In the evening I listened to these megadebates from a psychiatric clinic. It is simply amazing how the oligarchy contributed to the degradation of people. They are in power are stupid, insane, but absolutely controllable figures. And it makes no difference who will win in the end
  • Siga77
    Siga77 15 February 2016 09: 37 New
    +2
    I think if Trump wins, it will be very difficult for mattresses to turn in the direction of cooperation with Russia. Trump simply can not be allowed to do this (because so much money has already swelled into the confrontation with us).
  • Mareman Vasilich
    Mareman Vasilich 15 February 2016 09: 39 New
    +2
    American intelligence officers are probably not aware that their opinions are of no interest to anyone, and especially Anglo-Saxon capital, because the aggression in Syria is organized by them and in their interests. USA, it is, a tool.
  • Thunderbolt
    Thunderbolt 15 February 2016 09: 42 New
    +6
    The policy of "total supremacy" in the United States hardly depends on who is sitting in the White House - a Republican or a Democrat. As a rule, American concessions and readiness for dialogue then turn sideways. And so it was under the powerful USSR. And now you need to weigh seventy-seven times, before taking on any international obligations or getting involved in power games with an uncertain result, especially since the economic bloc is not capable of intelligible reforms, and with a dying economy it is difficult for allies to have a consistent policy and to pursue.
    1. garpastum75
      garpastum75 15 February 2016 10: 22 New
      0
      So "unleashing chaos with a bloody tinge" in Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Irka, Libya, Syria - they didn't have to think 70 times, but here, please !?
    2. nemez
      nemez 15 February 2016 12: 06 New
      -1
      the economy doesn’t fade away, see rBC even more often then tomorrow you’ll believe that it’s time to sit down on bread and water. and as defenders we stick ANYONE, including mattresses. hardly anyone will go to a nuclear war, we have clearly written: in case threats to our sovereignty are allowed to use yao. so the mattresses vomit and swallow.
  • vladimirvn
    vladimirvn 15 February 2016 09: 43 New
    +2
    And from the states you can take advantage of it. Arrogance, but arrogance, you only need to bring down from them and then talk on equal terms. And this is possible only after the states get a good slap in the face.
    1. garpastum75
      garpastum75 15 February 2016 10: 24 New
      0
      I agree. Opleuhi on the impudent Turkish erysipelas .....
  • Telemon
    Telemon 15 February 2016 09: 52 New
    +9
    [i] The author throws a retrospective look into history [/ i] - I have about the "aggression" of Russia, the USSR, Russia:
    [i] The results of Russia's “aggressions” - half of Europe and part of Asia received statehood from the hands of Russia (USSR).
    - Finland in 1802 and 1918 (until 1802, it never had its own state).
    - Latvia 1918 (till 1918 city never had their own state).
    - In Estonia, the 1918 (up to 1918 city never had their own state).
    - Lithuania restored statehood in 1918 thanks also to Russia.
    - Poland restored with the help of Russia twice, in 1918 and 1944. The division of Poland between the USSR and Germany is only a short episode!
    - Romania was born as a result of the Russian-Turkish wars, and became sovereign by the will of Russia in 1877-1878.
    - Moldova as a state was born in the USSR.
    - Bulgaria as a state was born as a result of the victory of Russian weapons in the Russian-Turkish war of 1877-1878, which had this as its purpose.
    As a thank you, the state of Bulgaria in two world wars participated in the anti-Russian coalitions. Now Bulgaria is a member of NATO, and US bases are located on its territory. After 1945, not a single Russian soldier was on its territory.
    - Serbia as a sovereign state, too, was born as a result of this war.
    - Azerbaijan as the state took shape for the first time only in the USSR.
    - Armenia remained physically and reborn as a state only in the USSR.
    - Georgia was physically preserved and revived as a state only as part of the USSR.
    - Turkmenistan never had statehood and formed it only as part of the USSR.
    - Kyrgyzstan never had statehood and formed it only as part of the USSR.
    - Kazakhstan never had statehood and formed it only as part of the USSR.
    - Mongolia never had statehood and formed it only with the help of the USSR.
    - Belarus and Ukraine also first gained statehood as a consequence of the Great October Revolution as part of the USSR. And in 1991, complete independence.
    But you can still take into account the role of Russia-USSR in the birth and formation of such states as the PRC, Vietnam, North Korea, India, Greece, the Turks recaptured Russia back in 1821, Algeria, Cuba, Israel, Angola, Mozambique, etc.
    Here is some kind of strange "aggression" on the part of Russia. I will add from the comment of Dmitry Marchenko:
    - the independence of Switzerland, conquered from France by Suvorov 217 years ago, since then has never (!) never fought;
    - the liberation of Austria from the Third Reich of 1945;
    - the liberation of Czechoslovakia from the Third Reich of 1945;
    - the position of Catherine II in 1780 with the creation of the League of Armed Neutrality and the actual support of the North American United States contributed to the defeat of England and the independence of the United States;
    - twice in the last two centuries, Russia has granted independence to most European countries, grinding the armies of the dictators Napoleon and Hitler;
    - Stalin's position in negotiations with the United States and Britain gave Germany the opportunity to maintain statehood after the defeat of the Third Reich in 1945;
    - Gorbachev’s position allowed Germany to reunite without problems in 1990;
    - without the help of the USSR, Egypt could not have survived and consolidated its independence in the war with Israel, Britain, France in 1956-57, in 1967 the intervention of the USSR stopped the Israeli war with Egypt, actually saved the Arabs from defeat in two wars in the years 1967-74;
    - Angola gained its independence by 1975 only thanks to the USSR;
    [/ I]

    [/ I]
    ,
    Well, something like that, http://politobzor.net/show-81640-moya-grazhdanskaya-poziciya.html
    Americans spit on each other, forgetting about their own country ... Wang was right ...
  • with
    with 15 February 2016 09: 54 New
    +6
    The United States is a project "sharpened" for the management of the world by the capital elites (only about 300 "respected" families have almost bought the whole world), it is not without reason that they "extend their jurisdiction over the entire globe." This car can only be broken. What kind of screw or tongue is "good" or "bad" does not affect the operation of the machine. The USA must be destroyed, otherwise the planet Earth will not see peace. What kind of world they are planning, just watch their film industry, there are "feds" and "rebels", chaos and instability, good Naglo-Saxon guys run the show with an ugly paradigm, I'm "good", so I'm right.
  • Damask
    Damask 15 February 2016 09: 58 New
    0
    It has long been clear that phasington in this region needs chaos and anarchy, and Assad prevents this.
  • Tolstoevsky
    Tolstoevsky 15 February 2016 10: 01 New
    0
    “There can be only one thing worse than enmity with Anglo-Saxon - friendship with him” (C)
  • with
    with 15 February 2016 10: 02 New
    0
    So the den of democracy has a debt to the destroyed third world, to the destroyed and crippled people without a roof over their heads, whose whole fault is "lack of democracy!"
  • Pvi1206
    Pvi1206 15 February 2016 10: 09 New
    0
    The fact that in the United States there are two opposing opinions regarding the role of Russia in Syria is already good. The ice has broken ...
    1. aleksey980
      aleksey980 15 February 2016 17: 45 New
      0
      Quote: Pvi1206
      The fact that in the United States there are two opposing opinions regarding the role of Russia in Syria is already good. The ice has broken ...

      I think that this is not so.
      Rather, they check the public mood based on the ratings of these balabol.
  • askort154
    askort154 15 February 2016 10: 16 New
    +2
    Enough, there have already been "kissing" Gorbachev with Reagan and Yeltsin with Clinton, in the end - we are at a broken trough. The Americans are scared that Russia can occupy the niche left after the USSR, therefore they will oppose this in every possible way. Our 7500 nuclear warheads alone are a cold shower for their "exclusivity." They won't go anywhere, they will have to find a common language with us. The main thing is that we
    no need to pass. Conversation only on equal terms, as in nuclear warheads, we have 7500, they have 7260.
  • RUSOIVAN
    RUSOIVAN 15 February 2016 10: 17 New
    0
    I recall: "Boris, you're wrong!" Maybe they will all end the same?)))
  • Bosk
    Bosk 15 February 2016 10: 26 New
    0
    America, in principle, is not against an alliance with Russia, but at the same time it wants to be "THE MAIN!" and that the allies at the same time were not as partners, but as ... at best, as vassals. It is a pity for the European Union, because the very idea of ​​the European Union as a "third" force was not even bad at all, but in the end it turned out what happened - not force, but "ballast" ...
  • Dyagilev
    Dyagilev 15 February 2016 10: 31 New
    0
    The secret is simple and obvious: if someone does not want peace, but it is not clear who, then, cherchez la Juifs. There are objective fears that Assad will sing with Iran and this will be a big problem. Who will guarantee that this will not happen, he will win the war.
  • Kir1984
    Kir1984 15 February 2016 10: 35 New
    +1
    Quote: Telemont
    - the position of Catherine II in 1780 with the creation of the League of Armed Neutrality and the actual support of the North American United States contributed to the defeat of England and the independence of the United States;

    she is all the same in vain laughing as time has shown.
    In correspondence with some Americans, I can say that they are perfectly normal people, outgoing, interesting. Although sometimes they look for subtexts where they are not. But here they have politicians ... MDA.
  • VP
    VP 15 February 2016 10: 48 New
    0
    An article for the American press is not in trend, therefore, it will be perceived as the usual fronting of a journalist trying to attract attention.
    Well, regarding the discussion of candidates, it should be added that the studio took a much warmer position of Bush rather than Trump.
    The situation now is exactly that - in the United States there is a frenzied chernukha on everything that concerns Russia. And the mentality of Americans in such cases is “I myself am not an expert, so I will believe those who are experts, why should I bother with too much.”
    Well, the position of the American "experts" is understandable and predictable.
    The Washington Post and the New York Times are the main media monsters that have a powerful influence on the minds of the local plebs and form their point of view.
  • uge.garik
    uge.garik 15 February 2016 10: 52 New
    0
    So this is a pre-election divorce - promise everything and everyone, the main thing is that they choose ... although all these dolls go under the same puppeteer, so there is not a great difference who will be elected - a little dumber, a little blacker, and maybe a woman ... the final one, until they destroy it .., but otherwise "in no way" ...
  • thinker
    thinker 15 February 2016 11: 14 New
    0
    Quote: EvgNik
    Quote: Tim Coconuts
    There was one - Kennedy, and they shot him

    Do you think it’s normal only because you shot it? And shoot, for example, Obama? And he will become a dove of peace?

    And you compare the speech of Obama and Kennedy. The conclusion is obvious.
    I am aware that the achievement of peace is less impressive than the desire for war, and often the words of a person seeking peace are completely ignored. But we are not faced with a more important task.
    Speech D.F. Kennedy at American University. June 10, 1963
    http://www.coldwar.ru/kennedy/university.php
  • DMB_95
    DMB_95 15 February 2016 11: 29 New
    0
    Quote: EvgNik
    Quote: Tim Coconuts
    There was one - Kennedy, and they shot him

    And shoot, for example, Obama? And he will become a dove of peace?

    Not. He will become a Nobel Peace Prize laureate posthumously. And maybe a steamer, because the aircraft carrier is unlikely to be named after him. negative
  • hobot
    hobot 15 February 2016 11: 40 New
    +1
    In the United States, the president does the will of the people.
    The will of the people forms the State Department.
    So who cares who they choose?
  • Stinger
    Stinger 15 February 2016 11: 42 New
    0
    There will be no terrorist attacks there. The case is going to unite ISIS with the States. The habits are the same.
    1. cniza
      cniza 15 February 2016 11: 47 New
      +3
      Quote: Stinger
      There will be no terrorist attacks there. The case is going to unite ISIS with the States. The habits are the same.


      You are strong.
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. taram taramych
      taram taramych 15 February 2016 17: 25 New
      0
      So they will rule, America will be frightened by the ISIS people, but the "Old World", the Maghreb and further everywhere, with mattresses. They don't seem to care, they fool "peppers", they do not need reasons. They want it so!
  • Wolka
    Wolka 15 February 2016 11: 52 New
    +1
    the Yankees are not yet ripe for a "meeting of the coalition in Yalta", but the understanding that a "meeting on the Elbe" on Syria is inevitable is already present ...
  • skrabplus.ru
    skrabplus.ru 15 February 2016 12: 17 New
    +1
    Trump will definitely score points for "2) the US and Russia should beat IS together"
    because in the event of the third war, the Americans will not be able to sit out and the "ordinary citizens of the SS", eating another hamburger, begin to catch up with it: they will lose more than the Russians. For what?
    Meanwhile, Trump is gaining supporters ... If you want to kill 2 birds with one stone - vote for Trump!
  • Diviz
    Diviz 15 February 2016 16: 21 New
    0
    What can one trump do if even the Hawaiian brains from Texas are inserted.
  • taram taramych
    taram taramych 15 February 2016 17: 05 New
    0
    Quote: Rostislav
    It happens that the states sometimes win the mind

    It was during the "Cuban missile crisis". But corporations dashingly knocked Kenedy off and that's it. Since then, there have been only guilders. Accordingly, the "mind" there is peculiar.
    But what about the corporation?
  • Fei_Wong
    Fei_Wong 15 February 2016 17: 47 New
    0
    There are many words from all sides, but things are still there. Russia is driven into a corner, and continues to be driven.
  • Valery 1966
    Valery 1966 15 February 2016 18: 25 New
    0
    September 11th did not teach them anything. Again they created igil, and again they will receive from them.
  • Aristide
    Aristide 15 February 2016 18: 26 New
    0
    The reasoning is correct, but who reads it in America? Russia has repeatedly and constantly offers cooperation in the fight against IS. The Americans, and after them the European states, repeat like a mantra that Russia is wrong and they are not on their way with it in the Syrian issue. To what hatred for Russia drives the brains of the leaders of the US and EU. They generally do not perceive the sober and logical approach of Russia in the fight against IS !!! Even the "arrival" of refugees from the Middle East, Western Europeans associate with the Russian bombing of "civilians" in Syria. Allegedly, it is precisely the "peaceful" men of military age who are fleeing from Russian strikes and want to hide on the chest of a "good" old European woman, and at the same time "make" European women happy. European tolerance, how long will you last?
  • rus-5819
    rus-5819 15 February 2016 19: 52 New
    0
    Islamic State Militants May Attempt Terrorist Attacks in US
    Of course: - "Daddy, you gave birth to us, gave us drink, fed us, dressed us, (armed), and now, bad (Russian-Syrian) boys offend us. That's why I’ll put my pants in your pants for that!"

    Russia is the "eternal enemy" of America. This is what liberals, conservatives, republicans, and democrats think.
    The eternal opponents of the Pope of Rome and the Patriarch of All Russia have found a consensus. Maybe a hundred or two of sane liberals, conservatives, Republicans and Democrats will also "turn on their brains"?
  • Combatant uncle
    Combatant uncle 15 February 2016 22: 10 New
    0
    According to Amerov, a blow was certainly made, but he is honest. The problem is how to break through their press to the heart of the average man.
  • Anatoliy Kotov
    Anatoliy Kotov 16 February 2016 05: 43 New
    +1
    Hello. The arguments are correct, but who reads them in America?
  • orca77
    orca77 16 February 2016 09: 55 New
    +1
    I sometimes have bad feelings that our and the American leadership are playing a good-bad investigator. And Europe is being pulled under this business. Form markets for the future. Not that I would be convinced of this, but from time to time thoughts slip through.