Military Review

Caucasus: Turkey and the United States seek to kindle the flames of old conflicts

Caucasus: Turkey and the United States seek to kindle the flames of old conflicts

After the failure of its policy in Syria, associated with the courageous resistance of the Syrian people and the effective assistance of the Russian aerospace forces, Turkey and the United States are now trying in every way to exacerbate the situation in the Caucasus and unleash armed conflicts there. Of course, the first of them was Nagorno-Karabakh. However, there are other hot spots where blood can be shed thanks to the peacekeepers from Washington and Ankara.

So, the fiercest since 1994, the battles in Nagorno-Karabakh again attracted world attention to the conflict, which seriously aggravates the international situation and makes it much less stable and predictable against the background of the events in Syria and Iraq.

Karabakh knot

Alexander Markarov, a well-known Armenian political scientist, deputy vice-rector of Yerevan State University, director of the branch of the Institute of CIS countries, sees the situation as follows:

- How unexpected was such a worsening of the situation in Nagorno-Karabakh?

- Since 2014, Azerbaijan has increased pressure on the border. The intensity of their violation of the cease-fire regime has increased significantly compared with the preceding period. I predicted that the situation would only get worse. Everyone understood that there would be more violations, but no one thought that this would be possible in such a volume, as we now see.

Azerbaijan often violated the cease-fire after any international meetings. The meeting in Washington gave reason to think that something might happen this time. This has already happened: remember Clinton's visit to the region, the meeting of the presidents - held and failed. But those were incidents, and here there was a full-scale offensive undertaken along the entire contact line. Prior to that, large-caliber machine guns and mortars went into action, and here the whole range of weapons was involved. This is not expected.

- In your opinion, what was the decision of Azerbaijan agreed upon? Did the external factor have an impact?

- The fact that the first shot was made by the Azerbaijani side is beyond doubt. This is their initiative. This is also indicated by some of their sites and the statement of the ambassador to Russia, Polad Bulbul oglu.

But outside support is another matter. Definitely, Azerbaijan feels Turkey’s support: not only moral and material, but also in terms of human resources. There is information that Turkish instructors are present, and their role is clearly visible. But, on the other hand, it is necessary to understand that there are also internal reasons that pushed Azerbaijan to take this step.

- Do you mean a difficult situation in the economy?

- The situation in the economy of Azerbaijan is worsening, inflation is rising, the rate of manat is falling, revenues are falling due to the reduced flow of petrodollars. It has become impossible to carry out projects about which so much has been said: this is both a railway and pipelines for which there is no necessary amount of gas. The problems in the economy are only growing, and now investors are leaving Azerbaijan: they understand that the peak has already passed. Now 75% of revenues and 90% of Azerbaijan’s exports are oil and gas. There is no need to talk about any diversification of the economy, so they simply have nowhere to wait for additional income. European sports, Eurovision - it's all worth a lot of money. And the purchase of weapons? For this, too, need billions, but they are no longer ...

- Let's go back to the external factors. How did Europe respond?

- Pay attention to what the OSCE says. They not only insist on the resumption of peaceful dialogue, but appeal to both sides to cease fire. That is, there is no support for Azerbaijani rhetoric. I will note that Azerbaijan has not been in contact with the OSCE for about six months, it does not hold meetings.

And one more thing to say. The attack on the NKR was committed immediately after the completion of the Washington summit before the weekend. That is, world leaders either go on a weekend at such a moment, or are on the road. Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan was on the way. It is very possible that such a time was not chosen by chance. But in general, Turkey supports Azerbaijan, while all other countries maintain, at least, a positive neutrality towards Armenia. And all statements are intended to encourage return to the negotiating table.

- What can you say about the position of Turkey? It is believed that the Erdogan regime is trying to organize a certain northern front against Russia.

- This is unlikely. What could be the northern front ?! Erdogan himself did everything to have his own northern front with the Kurds. The situation there has deteriorated dramatically. Yes, some Russian experts pedal the aspect that there is a union of Azerbaijan and Turkey, directed against Russia. But least of all, Azerbaijan needs to be with Turkey against Russia. Azerbaijan is trying to maintain, if not positive, then at least neutral relations with Russia. There are many questions on which they would like to cooperate with Russia. I think that to say that Turkey is setting up Azerbaijan against Russia is wrong.

- Could you comment on the information that the ISIL fighters are taking part in the hostilities from Azerbaijan? This was reported on more than one site ...

- I know the following information. The Azerbaijani special forces, which was destroyed in Karabakh, were not dressed in the uniform of the Azerbaijani army. It was a summer uniform that people wear in Syria now. It has been suggested that these were ISIS fighters. The Azerbaijani side also said that it was not their people. But now it is simply impossible to confirm anything.

- There is talk of a certain third force, which, they say, arranged everything.

“No third force could have fought all along the front line.” These are quite obvious things.

- Could you give a forecast for the further development of events around Nagorno-Karabakh?

- If we talk about the most realistic forecast for the future, then we need to state that there will be more such events. Maybe they will not be not so intensely armed clashes, but will definitely continue in various sectors. The international community will call for the mind to prevail. But this, first of all, concerns Azerbaijan, and it will play on the contradictions that exist. Europe needs Azerbaijan because it is a potential source of gas. For the United States, it is an opportunity to counteract Russia's interests in the region. For Turkey, it is an ally. Therefore, collisions will occur in the future.

There is a scenario in which the NKR armed forces will go ahead and do what Grachev did not allow to do in due time - they will advance into the depth of Azerbaijan and will force him to recognize the independence of NKR.

And the third scenario is war. But, I believe that this is unlikely, since it will not be allowed to unleash. Moreover, for Azerbaijan such a war is a very expensive pleasure. The flow of refugees, infrastructure problems, instability ... A conditional colonel Huseynov may appear if necessary at any time.

- It is known that opposition parties in Armenia not only criticize the ruling party, but also, it happens, quite strongly oppose it. What is the attitude of the political parties of Armenia to the events in Karabakh? Are they one or different?

- The answer is very simple: they all occupy the same position. We already observed such a picture in Armenia in 2014, when shelling on the border with Azerbaijan was. Then the opposition declared that it was ready to go there and defend the border. And now everyone is also speaking in a united front. It was the appeal of ex-President Levon Ter-Petrosyan, who has a significant influence on most of the opposition, that we don’t see who belongs to which party - all are united in their desire to protect the country and the people. You can say this: there is no fifth column in Armenia. Except for a few facebookies ...

Chairman of the Constitutional Right Union party, member of the National Assembly of the Republic of Armenia Hayk Babukhanyan shared his point of view on events in the Caucasus:

- Azerbaijan is a terrorist state similar to ISIS. It is no coincidence that thousands of people from Azerbaijan are fighting in the ranks of ISIS. Moreover, the similarity is not only in terrorist actions against Christian Armenians, but also against their own national minorities and their own dissidents. With the same cruelty as that of the ISIS, Aliyev shoots the civilian population of the Armenian border villages. And even in destruction historical monuments of Azerbaijan and ISIS have the same handwriting.
It is no coincidence that Azerbaijan is supported by its elder brother, Turkey, and Aliyev and Erdogan are kicking each other. For Turkey, Azebaidzhan is as much an ally as ISIS, and for dictator Erdogan, dictator Aliyev is a soul mate. Aliyev must be prosecuted as a war criminal. Instead of today's fascist Azerbaijan, a democratic state should be formed under the control of the international community, as a completely different one - a democratic Germany - was created instead of fascist Germany. Democratic Azerbaijan recognizes and will live in peace not only with the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic, but also with the Talysh Republic and other peoples who are fighting for the realization of the right to live freely, and not under the yoke of the Aliyev criminal clique. Only then will peace be established in our region.
Moreover, the task of fighting the Azerbaijani terrorist regime lies on the shoulders not only of the Armenian army, but of all progressive humanity. Moreover, healthy forces in Azerbaijan must rebel against the fascist regime, because it is to keep their power and untold wealth that Aliyev sends 18-year-old boys to die.
As for the Armenian army, it fulfills its mission of fighting the terrorist state and destroys the invaders. The battle zone was littered with the corpses of Azerbaijani soldiers, the remains tanks and helicopters after their choked offensive. The Republic of Armenia and the NKR have every right in the event that Azerbaijan violates the 1994 signed armistice, go on the counteroffensive, block the oil and gas pipelines through which the terrorist state of Azerbaijan, like ISIS, sells oil through Turkey, buying a deadly weapon.

"Circassian Question" as a way to ignite the flames of the new war in the Caucasus

It is obvious that the situation in the Caucasus is heating up, and this cannot be attributed to external intervention.
In the Caucasus, people lived for hundreds and thousands of years, between which many clashes happened throughout this time. These processes were especially aggravated in the XIX-XX centuries, when Western countries, first of all, Great Britain, began to actively intervene in political processes here.

It was she who, starting the first decades of the XIX century, strongly supported the Caucasian mountain tribes in their actions against Russia and armed them. Moreover, such a policy aimed at tearing the Caucasus away from Russia continued even during the Second World War: for example, Great Britain and France were preparing to inflict aviation attacks from the territory of Turkey on the Caucasian oil fields in 1940, and only Hitler's invasion of France prevented the implementation of these plans.

By the way, the Nazi dictator himself made great efforts to incite ethnic hatred among all Soviet peoples, including in the Caucasus. Here, German reconnaissance and sabotage groups purposefully landed, the main task of which was to form and organize combat operations of units of nationalists and traitors against the Red Army, which was reflected in numerous documents of the NKVD and SMERSH.

During the second half of the 20th and early 21st centuries, the United States actively intervened in the political processes in the Caucasus. Practically all the conflicts that took place during this period are connected with their direct participation: what is the cost of the 08.08.08 war, unleashed by the American stalemate Mikhail Saakashvili against South Ossetia?

Currently, the United States, relying mainly on Turkey, traditionally continuing the policy of weakening Russia's influence on Kavkaz in every possible way, is trying in every possible way to aggravate the long-standing Caucasian conflicts. One of them is the so-called "Circassian question".

The so-called "Circassian genocide" artificially inflamed from the outside is connected with the events of the second half of the 19th century, when in the struggle of the Russian Empire against mountain tribes, partially engaged in robberies and banditry, besides actively supported by the United Kingdom and Great Britain, some Circassians were forced to emigrate, and part formed the current republic of Adygea within the Russian Federation.

A loyal US ally in the Caucasus, Georgia, and the so-called Circassian Cultural Center, led by Merab Chuhua, funded by the Jamestown Foundation, play a special role in the implementation of the US-Turkish plan to use the Circassians for their aggressive purposes.

Gulnara Inandzh, Director of the Ethnoglobus International Online Information and Analytical Center ( (Baku, Azerbaijan) considers:

- The Circassian theme in the world political arena appeared after the collapse of the Soviet Union. At this stage of development, Circassian nationalism is not aggressive and does not turn into a military plane. Circassian organizations in Russia itself, as well as the diaspora and their patrons, are still trying to make this issue a subject of interest for international human rights organizations. Officially, the Circassian Diaspora is under the patronage of European and international organizations. Unofficially, the United States, some countries of Europe, Israel and Turkey are the catalyst for Circassian nationalism.

Before the Russian conquest, the Circassians were part of the Ottoman Empire. And belonging to the Sunni sense of Islam allowed them to easily adapt and hold high positions, to feel comfortable. This process has continued in modern Turkey.

This factor allows Ankara to actively participate in the Circassian issue. The theme of independent Circassia is also supported by influential Circassians in Turkey. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, ethnic Circassians began to appear in the North Caucasus as part of business structures, NGOs and educational institutions, including in the republics where Adygs live. Strengthening Turkey in its former historical possessions can strengthen Circassian separatism and prepare the ground for ousting Moscow from the North Caucasus. The feeding of Circassian nationalism is one of the elements of the plan for the secession of the North Caucasus from Russia. Therefore, Russia prohibited entry into the country for Turkish businessmen and their participation in regional business, expelled Turkish entrepreneurs from the North Caucasus (mainly ethnic Circassians), closed Turkish lyceums. But the fact that Circassian nationalism became the subject of manipulations in the West, and Israel’s activity in this matter, forced Moscow to give free rein to Turkey’s actions, as it’s less an aggressive player.

In addition, Russia hoped to neutralize the Circassian ambitions for independence by recognizing Abkhazia. This, indeed, slightly reduced the fervor, but there was no complete failure. At the same time, the Kremlin succeeded in bringing discord to the Circassian diaspora on the issue of independence. The fact of recognizing independence of Abkhazia intensified the differences, as part of the Circassians in Russia and in the diaspora believe that Circassians living in Russia should have their autonomy, to which they are demanding to join the original Circassian lands that are now within other Caucasian republics and regions.

Middle Eastern events in the foreground of the political scene eclipse the Circassian theme, which, at the moment, is still at the initial stage of its development. The Circassian question will begin to have a serious impact on Russia a little later.

Peoples who do not have their own statehood are subject to external influences and manipulations, their ethnic feelings are exposed. They cultivate and mythologize the heroic fragments of their history. The Caucasian peoples prefer not to open themselves to the world, but to live apart. The lack of historical experience of statehood is fraught with a repetition of the problems that the region faced during the Chechen wars at the end of the last century. (ALP).

The provocative activities of Merab Chuhua in the interests of the United States and Turkey, and not the entire Circassian people, cause extreme outrage among many Circassian public and political figures. Abubekir Murzakanov (OD "Adyghe Khekuzh - Cherkessia"), Ibrahim Yaganov (OD "Khase"), Ruslan Kesh (OD "Cherkessky Soyuz") and others made a joint statement, which states:

- ... We express our concern about the personal position of the director of the Circassian Center M. Chuhua. In his statements and projects, he presents the Circassian problematics as part of a certain pan-Caucasian project, which leads our problem to a completely different direction.

From his speeches it is clear that he focuses on certain general Caucasian affairs (in his understanding), Vainakhs and other problems. It seems that Circassian affairs are not interested in him.

There are also big questions about the actions of some young employees of the center who, on behalf of the Circassian Cultural Center, participate in questionable events discrediting the Circassian national movement and the Center's activities. We believe that they were obliged to receive an appropriate assessment from the leadership of the Circassian Cultural Center.

We demand from the leadership of the Circassian Cultural Center to continue to avoid pan-Caucasian oriented policies in their understanding, leading to nothing good for Georgian-Circassian relations. Otherwise, this may lead to the devaluation of all the efforts of the Georgian state, undertaken in relation to the Circassians, and provoke undesirable processes in the diaspora. (Caucasian knot).

It is clear that within the framework of its struggle for the lost place of the world's only world superpower, the United States is trying to stir up as many conflicts as possible near the borders of Russia, in order to weaken it as a country defending international law, formed after World War II. One of these regions is the Caucasus.

However, his people must remember that in the eyes of the United States and its allies, they are only a consumable item and only a means to an end, that is, to weaken or even collapse the Russian Federation, which has always provided durable peace and prosperity to the peoples living in its territory.

Caucasian nations should not become pawns in a game alien to them.
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. ALABAY45
    ALABAY45 April 26 2016 18: 28
    That's why it's always like this ?! How, some kind of conflict, just the Caucasus ?! Why not Yakutia, not Khanty-Mansi Autonomous Okrug, not Yamal, the Urals, the Far East ?! Here, either, the "curators" did not calculate the strength of the squares, or, alas, they were counting on the mentality of "hot" Caucasians ?! It's good that for now, between the Caucasus and the rest of Russia, Moscow is puffing up, in the settlement ... Someday, patience will burst! The rest of Russia, of course ... wink
    1. Vladimirets
      Vladimirets April 26 2016 18: 38
      Quote: ALABAY45
      why not Yakutia, not Khanty-Mansi Autonomous Okrug, not Yamal, the Urals, the Far East ?! Here, either the "curators" have not calculated the strength of the squares, or, alas, they are counting on the mentality of the "hot" Caucasians ?!

      History is taught not only from us, and if in all the USA history is taught to the masses very generally and mainly their own, then specialists and analysts of the corresponding services know it well. In general, a reasonably balanced comment from an Armenian on the NKR problem surprised me.
    2. Samaritan
      Samaritan April 26 2016 18: 48
      I understand that they are far away from the USA, they basically don't care, but Turkey is right there, moreover, it has long been in the livers of all neighbors, is Erdogan really that stupid ???
      Not for the American loot same ?!
      1. DMB_95
        DMB_95 April 26 2016 19: 00
        And we need to support the Kurds, so that the Turks do not seem like honey. And work closely with Shiite Iran. Then both Turks and Azerbaijanis will think more about their southern borders, and not about the North Caucasus. And they will go into Armenia less often.
        1. The comment was deleted.
        2. Knizhnik
          Knizhnik April 27 2016 08: 51
          Azerbaijanis "Think of the North Caucasus"? Do you think you are writing? Do not go into the Kalash row of our friendship, if you don't understand at all.

          "To meddle in Armenia" is a pearl that deserves a separate applause. Azerbaijan does not and cannot have territorial claims against Armenia, there is only a demand to liberate the territories, the fact of occupation of which is recognized by the world community.
          1. DMB_95
            DMB_95 April 27 2016 09: 33
            Quote: Knizhnik
            Azerbaijanis "Think of the North Caucasus"? Do you think you are writing? Do not go into the Kalash row of our friendship, if you don't understand at all.

            "To meddle in Armenia" is a pearl that deserves a separate applause. Azerbaijan does not and cannot have territorial claims against Armenia, there is only a demand to liberate the territories, the fact of occupation of which is recognized by the world community.

            Do not exaggerate the importance of your Azerbaijan. What I wrote is primarily related to Turkey. Its geopolitical ambitions extend to Armenia, the North Caucasus, and Crimea. Turkey is our enemy, and does not hide it. And if I. Aliyev chooses Turkey between Russia and Turkey, he makes Azerbaijan a friend of our enemy. Address your "separate applause" to him. And "do not meddle in the Kalash row" of our centuries-old confrontation with the Ottomans.
            1. Bakht
              Bakht April 27 2016 10: 03
              "Centuries-old" is also from a series of pearls that deserve a separate discussion.

              Let's say the "centuries-old" confrontation between France and Germany ended with the European Union. The war of independence from England ended in the closest alliance between Britain and the United States. Anyone who uses such historical terms is doomed to lose. As the ancients said, "you cannot enter the same river twice."

              Azerbaijan did not choose anything. Russia pushed Azerbaijan away in the 90s, and Turkey extended a helping hand to us. If Russia is "a friend of our enemy", then the result will be definite.

              "Geopolitical ambitions" also require separate consideration. For example, Armenia's geopolitical ambitions extend to most of the South Caucasus and Turkey. In general, Armenia solves its problems and friendship with Russia helps them in solving these problems. But now geopolitics requires good relations between Russia and Azerbaijan (in full accordance with your thesis). And as soon as the interests of Russia ceased to suit the Armenians, a wave of anti-Russian rallies swept through Yerevan. They are still small. But is the symptom really not visible? Your "ally" solves his problems. And if these tasks conflict with the interests of the Russian Federation, then so much the worse for the Russians.

              I don’t care about these problems. My problem is solved quite simply. The cessation of occupation and the regime of silence at the front. When in 1998 the President of Armenia agreed to these conditions (in full accordance with UN resolutions), he was quickly overthrown. And the current president overthrew. Do you think he will change his mind?

              PS If anyone thinks that Russia has ordered and the war has ended, he is very mistaken. Yesterday there were 120 cases of fire attacks. Using heavy artillery. The new flash is about to come. And do not care about the opinion of Russia. While the occupier on our land - war is inevitable.

              PPS For those who believe that Moscow’s orders are being executed
     Бои на front are continuing
              1. DMB_95
                DMB_95 April 27 2016 10: 43
                Quote: Bakht
                "Centuries-old" is also from a series of pearls that deserve a separate discussion.

                Let's say the "centuries-old" confrontation between France and Germany ended with the European Union. The war of independence from England ended in the closest alliance between Britain and the United States. Anyone who uses such historical terms is doomed to lose. As the ancients said, "you cannot enter the same river twice."

                Azerbaijan did not choose anything. Russia pushed Azerbaijan away in the 90s, and Turkey extended a helping hand to us. If Russia is "a friend of our enemy", then the result will be definite.

                Maybe someone's centuries-old confrontation ended with something like "friendship", but between Russia and Turkey, it only escalated. And losing to your Ottoman friends is not part of our plans, even if more years of confrontation are needed. And Russia is not only the "friend of your enemy" - Armenia, but also the enemy of your friend - Turkey.
                1. Bakht
                  Bakht April 27 2016 11: 51
                  Well, if Russia needs enemies, then everything is in order. Tell me, who will be the beneficiary in the event of a Russia-Turkey war?

                  They say that a person’s head doesn’t just wear a hat. We will simulate a situation. War Russia-Turkey. The most favorable option for the Russian Federation. The defeat of Turkey and incidentally Azerbaijan. The undoubted beneficiary is Armenia. Very likely - Iran. Maybe Greece. Syria is in doubt.

                  But what does Russia win? Capture the straits? What for? The isolation of the Russian Federation internationally will be total. UN membership is in doubt (repetition of the situation with the League of Nations). Why the straits - if there is nowhere to carry goods? Complete economic and political blockade of the country. There is no currency income from the word at all. The removal of Russian oil and gas from the market leads to an explosive increase in the prices of these goods. Saudi Arabia, USA, Canada come to life. All the most expensive hydrocarbon projects get a start in life. Russian exports of 5 million barrels per day will immediately find substitution for US shale projects and Canada’s oil sands. That is, everyone who has the opportunity to sell oil will receive a profit. The Russian Federation will not have such an opportunity.

                  So the geopolitical gain lies in the control over the straits. Minus - Ukraine, the Baltic states, the whole of Eastern Europe are no longer "partners" but obvious enemies. Central Asia will think hard. In any case, Kazakhstan and Belarus will definitely think about it. NATO gets the opportunity to deploy its coastal complexes on the territory of Romania, Bulgaria and Ukraine. The Black Sea is not becoming an internal sea of ​​the Russian Federation, but devilishly dangerous for navigation.

                  Flag in hand and go to war. Spill Russian blood for the geopolitical interests of Armenia and the economic interests of the United States and Saud. Well, the history of some does not teach anything. Well, there is no Kutuzov on you.
                  1. Bakht
                    Bakht April 27 2016 12: 52
                    Well, after such a simulation, the question. What does Russia want from Turkey? An official apology, admission of his ERROR, extradition of the guilty and financial compensation (not very important, but it would be nice). As the head of the STATE Vladimir Putin says, after that we can talk about the normalization of relations. Who in the Kremlin talks about the "age-old enmity" and the defeat of Turkey? It is in the Kremlin and not all sorts of verbiage, "analysts".

                    And the cherry on the cake. Who is against the deployment of Russian peacekeepers in the Karabakh conflict zone? The President of Armenia and the "Minister of Defense of the NKR" And a bunch of political scientists in Armenia itself. And they are categorically against it. Why? Because the peace in Karabakh DOES NOT MEET the interests of Great Armenia. The plan from the first to the last letter was written in Washington. Draw Russia into the war. In Ukraine, in Syria, in the South Caucasus. It doesn't matter where. The main thing is to reformat the world economic system and ensure the dominance of the dollar system for another 20-30 years.

                    Quote "The future world will be built without Russia, on the ruins of Russia and at the expense of Russia." Now it is clear who benefits from the war in Karabakh? It didn't work out in Ukraine and Syria, let's play the Karabakh card. Russia will burn in the flames of this war - well, this does not bother anyone in the West. By the way, in Armenia too. So go ahead. Let the Russian Vanya shed blood for the interests of his "ally."
                    1. Bakht
                      Bakht April 27 2016 13: 55
                      Excellent. I saw the cons. So my arguments are valid. So that later there was no misunderstanding. This is Russia's "ally" in the South Caucasus. If you do not respect the interests of Armenia, you will be replaced.
                      - Let's not touch on that. The French have a good saying: they betray only their own. Our ally repeatedly betrayed us, but remained his own, so let's not give him opportunities for betrayal. This ally must understand that he must be an equal partner with us, we are not interested in the fact that he has nuclear weapons, he must respect our interests, otherwise, he will be for us the same partner as Paris, Berlin, Rome . Russia should understand that arming Azerbaijan, provoking it, provoking an attack, will simply lose our partnership.

                      - I believe the resumption of escalation is possible, starting from this moment, until the end of the summer. We have no time. We must begin to change ourselves, so that we too begin to be respected, so that we find allies. Before that, we must understand that we are firmly moving towards our goal. I think Lavrov also realized that Russian peacekeepers, and in general all peacekeepers in the NKR will be met not with bread and salt, but with lead. I’m not saying this, the commanders of the NKR Defense Army are talking about this. So, we don’t have time, war is inevitable, and we must act as one, and the authorities must decide what they will do. Qualitatively, you need to change.

                      1. DMB_95
                        DMB_95 April 27 2016 16: 19
                        Three posts in a row! Have you talked to yourself? It happens .. And about our relations with Turkey, everything is simpler and tougher than you piled. We don’t want a war with anyone (and I didn’t seem to call for it), but if Russia is forced to fight, we will hell with any possible problems that you wrote about. We will chop with anyone until we win or die. All. And Armenia is in the background here, why did you write so much about it and Karabakh?
                      2. Bakht
                        Bakht April 27 2016 20: 17
                        Three posts because not always everything can be put into one.

                        You can fight with anyone. The article says that "Turkey and the United States seek to rekindle the flames of old conflicts." And half of the article is about Nagorno-Karabakh. So I did not shy away from the topic. And I entered into a polemic with you, because you have chosen some strange allies. But these are your problems.

                        Yes, about "Rubilov". Surely they looked at the map. What border will you cut through? This is not the 19th century. Russia and Turkey have no common border. :-)
                      3. DMB_95
                        DMB_95 April 28 2016 09: 32
                        1. And what is the "strangeness" of the Kurds and Iran, as potential allies, compared to other forces in the region? 2. You yourself noted - this is not the 19th century, therefore, a common border is not required for waging a war. Although there is a sea border, as well as our bases in Syria and Armenia. 3. About "Rubilov" in principle. I wrote how we are ready to fight any enemy, not just Turkey.
                      4. Bakht
                        Bakht April 28 2016 17: 07
                        It seems that I did not write anything about the "oddities" of the Kurds and Iran. In the 19th century, there was a common border and it was possible to fight. And now the war will not be solved by air strikes alone. So a common border in case of war is very necessary. Rockets can fly in both directions.

                        A strange picture looms. I asked to look at the map many times. Common border oh how you need it. Take the realities of life. Not conjectures and dreams, but realities. Since October, the campaign of the videoconferencing in Syria. Has anyone even heard from the ear about the participation of the Russian air forces from the base in Armenia? At least as a base supply or airfield jump? Gauges fly through Iran.

                        Here the dog rummaged. Geography .... How to supply a base in Gyumri without a transport corridor? Given that the base in Armenia is within the reach of the barrel artillery, I would not really count on it. Apparently not only me, but also the General Staff of Russia is not very sure. The same goes for bases in Syria. Suppose the straits are closed. How to supply? I often hear about military transport aircraft. Poor BTA ... How many planes are needed and all the air lines can be easily broken.

                        Slowly, very slowly, we approach Lavrov’s main thought. So what does the Russian Foreign Ministry require from Armenia and Azerbaijan?
                      5. DMB_95
                        DMB_95 April 28 2016 17: 54
                        Something you are fixated on Armenia. Didn’t I already wrote that in the case of a real war, Armenia (and Azerbaijan too) will be in the background. Their role is important in the event of a local conflict, and not in the Global War. With regard to geography, Turkey has a huge Black Sea coast, and we - the Black Sea Fleet, the Marines, the airborne forces, airborne forces, etc., etc. and, most importantly - the lack of fear of any enemy.
                      6. Bakht
                        Bakht April 28 2016 18: 26
                        We talk about different things or do not understand each other. The topic of "old conflicts". I'm more interested in Karabakh. That's the whole reason why I "got stuck".

                        And you write about some kind of war with Turkey. Which no one in the Kremlin supports.

                        And then, are you so confident in military success? Military axiom "any battle is lost until victory is achieved." I'm not going to discuss it at the level of "throwing all our hats". Believe me, you won't. But I'm not going to get into such a jungle.

                        The most important for me personally is the question of who benefits from the war, who will benefit and how to avoid the war. Not "no fear", but AVOID war.
                      7. DMB_95
                        DMB_95 April 29 2016 10: 12
                        Quote: Bakht

                        The most important for me personally is the question of who benefits from the war, who will benefit and how to avoid the war. Not "no fear", but AVOID war.

                        Who benefits from Russia's war with anyone is clear for a long time. I am writing about a possible war with Turkey based on the framework of the article, although besides Turkey we have enough potential and obvious opponents. As for "confidence in military success" ... You and I really do not understand each other and speak "different languages." In the event of a War, every time we fight, as in the last. Without the "head cover". We just fight like this. And your words "any battle is considered lost until victory is achieved" is not an axiom at all. There are enough battles in the history of Russia, after which only the killed and wounded remained on our side, but this was not a defeat. And I will not list our victories.
                      8. Bakht
                        Bakht April 29 2016 22: 41
                        What you have written is beyond logic. Since I know history quite well (you cannot praise yourself - no one will praise yourself), you are unlikely to find battles "after which only the dead and wounded were left on our side, but it was not a defeat"

                        Unfortunately, in the history of Russia over the past 150 years (figuratively speaking) there are just a few victories.

                        1812 - victory after the surrender of Moscow
                        1854 - defeat
                        1878 - victory without result
                        1905 - defeat
                        1914 - defeat
                        1936-1940 - we will not consider (unclear result)
                        1945 - Victory (with a capital letter)
                        1988 - Defeat (with a capital letter)

                        This is so short. No patterns are visible.
                      9. DMB_95
                        DMB_95 April 30 2016 21: 45
                        Your choice is not subject to logic from 1812 to 1988. Russia successfully fought before, and after, and during this period. Take the 18th century, for example. A whole series of victories over the same Ottoman Empire. Suvorov won many battles on land without losing a single one, and Ushakov did the same at sea. And from your list ... 1812 is a victory after the surrender of Moscow, isn't it a victory? Even some. 1854 - The Crimean War began with the defeat of the Turkish fleet by Nakhimov. Then Britain, France, Turkey and several of their small allies could not take Sevastopol for more than 200 days, while suffering huge losses and having a large numerical superiority and more modern weapons. They were opposed by only a small part of the entire Russian Army. They gave them Crimea, although their plans were to capture the entire Black Sea coast. A few years later, Crimea was returned. 1878 - how is this "victory without result"? The defeat of the Turkish army and the liberation of most of the Balkan Peninsula and the states located there from occupation. And successful hostilities in the Caucasus theater of operations. 1905 - defeat, albeit local. I agree. 1914 - 1920, so more precisely. There is a whole tangle of victories and defeats. World War I, Revolution, Civil War with Intervention. The Russian Empire crawled out of this bloody mess in the form of the USSR, having lost part of the territory, rather small compared to what it managed to save. Germany, Turkey lost no less, and Austria-Hungary disappeared forever. 1936-1940. Victory over Japan in two major border conflicts. Heavy, but Victory over Finland. 1945 - I agree, Great Victory. 1988. I would not call Afghanistan unambiguously a defeat. They left the country in an orderly manner, without a hint of flight. They left a government loyal to the Union, which held out for several years. Again, in the conditions of damn "Perestroika" and / of Gorbachev. You write: "It is unlikely that you will find battles, after which only the killed and wounded remained on our side, but this was not a defeat." There are many of them. For example - the defense of the Brest Fortress. Or February 29, 2000, Chechnya. Height 776 under Ulus-Kert. 89 paratroopers of the 6th company, 104 PDP, 76 Guards. Airborne divisions fought to the death against about 2-2,5 thousand militants of Khattab (killed) and Basayev (killed). The landing had an opportunity to retreat, but the guys almost all died without retreating. The militants lost several hundred killed and wounded. I do not consider this a defeat. This is short.
  • AdekvatNICK
    AdekvatNICK April 26 2016 18: 32
    to shoot and interrogate ... then again to shoot.
  • avvg
    avvg April 26 2016 18: 33
    Washington will spoil every way in the space of the former republics of the USSR, to the extent that so far Russia allows it.
  • Runx135
    Runx135 April 26 2016 18: 37
    But in order for this not to happen, it is necessary that any state remembers its uniqueness and proceeds from its own interests, and does not run ahead of the locomotive in an effort to lick "something" to "someone".
  • Oleg Lavrov
    Oleg Lavrov April 26 2016 18: 44
    Let them try to shit in the Caucasus ... We have already seen this. By the way, we saw how the "NATO-army" of Georgia from South Ossetia was scrambling. Now, pin ... dos, they are trying to sniff the same losing noodles in Azerbaijan ... well, well ... we are not used to stepping on the same rake twice, unlike pins ... dos!
  • RuslanNN
    RuslanNN April 26 2016 18: 44
    ISIS in Shiite Azerbaijan ???? what does this "political scientist" smoke? The Karabakh conflict was fanned by the west through the Armenian diaspora with the aim of breaking up the USSR. Armenia occupied 20 percent of the territory of Azerbaijan, massacred civilians - old people, children and women in Khojaly, wiped out so many settlements from the face of the earth and now blames Azerbaijan for everything. the hat is really on fire on the thief. There are four UN resolutions on the withdrawal of Armenian troops from the territory of Azerbaijan, to which Armenia has scored and no one remembers it. When the Armenians liberate the occupied territories, then it will be possible to talk about peace. Time is playing against Armenia, it loses in demography and economy. It's a pity that young lives will be cut short again.
    1. Stavros
      Stavros April 26 2016 21: 15
      Did you read Ruslan these four resolutions, do you even know what was the point of these resolutions when these resolutions were put forward? As for Khojaly, why do they say that the tragedy that happened near Agdam says that it happened in Khojaly? Read Mutalibov, whom he blames there, will are surprised. And about 20%, your fellow countrymen write that they liberated some territories, do not put them in an idiotic position. Really didn’t liberate anything at least a percentage of the territories?
    2. the finish
      the finish April 28 2016 10: 29
      Read the article by Kazimirov about 4 resolutions ...

      1. Bakht
        Bakht April 28 2016 17: 19
        Again ... Well, how much can you listen to someone without reading the text itself? Are you so not sure that you yourself will not master the text of the resolution? Do you need someone to chew and put in your mouth? The text shows that Kazimirov is lying. In the Resolution there is no mention of the status of Nagorno-Karabakh. There is a provision on the sovereignty of Azerbaijan, a ceasefire and the withdrawal of occupation forces. In these words.
        By the way, the article very freely interprets the events of 1994. No Armenian forces could enter Kura. The laws of operational art have not been canceled.
        And as for peacekeepers, I would not be so sure. Right now, the Armenians categorically do not want peacekeepers. And in a few years they will again lie that Azerbaijan does not want it.

        PS The war continues and Armenian artillery shells the homes of civilians. Daily violations of the regime are recorded a hundred times. I think in a few days there will be another surge in activity.
  • V.ic
    V.ic April 26 2016 18: 46
    Of the zikhs, I respect only Timur Sultanovich Shaov.
  • AdekvatNICK
    AdekvatNICK April 26 2016 18: 46
    Erdoganchik. Dude, you are a poor-looking chick, you are knocking like a wench on everyone who draws pictures on you. Normal strong politicians do not pay attention to such things thereby showing their strong side. But alas, you are an affectionate wench and therefore, here's another hello from the Dutch. .. (clickable)
  • LÄRZ
    LÄRZ April 26 2016 18: 48
    They are looking for our pain points, they are revealing old sores ... War. They put pressure on us wherever they can.
    1. Yeraz
      Yeraz April 26 2016 19: 57
      Quote: LÄRZ
      They are looking for our pain points, they are revealing old sores ...

      Well, they told you 100000 times, SICKS SHOULD BE TREATED. With age, it will only get worse and the disease will show itself more. And the Karabakh conflict is a disease that makes itself felt, there was no freezing, every day there was a shootout. Every year there are about a hundred dead on each side. But, the longer the conflict, the worse the disease. And 100 soldiers do not die within a year, but within 2 days. And while Russia is not engaged in treating the disease, the disease will make itself felt. And the help of others will not be necessary early too deep.
      1. xetai9977
        xetai9977 April 27 2016 09: 13
        An absolutely idiotic article! Extremely tendentious and stupid. Another "strategist" who is completely unfamiliar with the realities and history of the region. Apparently, Regnum's subscriber)))). From time to time, ISIS men in summer uniforms "float out" (this is in mountainous Karabakh, where the temperature is below zero at night), then "Turkish special forces" ... Really not tired of playing Martians, adults like people. And here it is clear to a hedgehog, here the position of the cat Leopold (guys, let's live together) will not work. It is necessary to name who is the aggressor, who violated whose internationally recognized borders (recognized, by the way, by Russia) and make this aggressor go home. Then peace will come, not earlier.
  • Yeraz
    Yeraz April 26 2016 19: 13
    Lord, another deceitful article. It turns out that ISIS fought)))) And the author understood this because they were in summer clothes.
    That is, the fighters of Azerbaijan and Armenia in winter uniform are there, because it is really cold there at that time. And the ISIS maniacs, both came in the summer and went in it)) And given that they came from a warm country, then generally do not care for the cold)))) Just insanity extremely.
    And for starters, let Polad Muallim reread the statements, and then speak.
  • Bakht
    Bakht April 26 2016 19: 27
    The article is stupid to impossibility. There is nothing to comment on. The minus is mine there.
  • gur4enk
    gur4enk April 26 2016 20: 30
    In my opinion, in some cases, Russia needs to forget about honor and conscience as the Anglo-Saxons do, and put its own interests in the foreground! That there is no way to do "good for Turkey"? Turkey is not a mono-ethnic country, a multi-confessional country with fairly well-developed political parties, is it really impossible to make it more concerned with its internal problems and think less about its neighbors? (All this, of course, within reasonable limits, according to the method of the West)
  • Fatih88
    Fatih88 April 26 2016 21: 23
    Straight is a very objective article. As always they want to show guilty Azerbaijan. Also igil fought for us.))) Without it is useful to comment.
  • Vlad5307
    Vlad5307 April 26 2016 21: 23
    Quote: Runx135
    But in order for this not to happen, it is necessary that any state remembers its uniqueness and proceeds from its own interests, and does not run ahead of the locomotive in an effort to lick "something" to "someone".

    It is necessary that the so-called. The "elites" who seized power in the former republics of the USSR realized their responsibility for the fate of the peoples over which they still had this power, and did not seek to fill the pockets of their little family. Then there will be no people willing to "run ahead of the locomotive" in an effort to lick something from someone. There are practically no real elites in power in all former republics, with rare exceptions. hi
  • RuslanNN
    RuslanNN April 26 2016 21: 41
    Quote: Stavros
    Did you read Ruslan these four resolutions, do you even know what was the point of these resolutions when these resolutions were put forward? As for Khojaly, why do they say that the tragedy that happened near Agdam says that it happened in Khojaly? Read Mutalibov, whom he blames there, will are surprised. And about 20%, your fellow countrymen write that they liberated some territories, do not put them in an idiotic position. Really didn’t liberate anything at least a percentage of the territories?

    Of course I read: Resolution 822 (1993) of 30 on April 1993 of the year, Resolution 853 (1993) of 29 of July 1993 of the year, Resolution 874 (1993) of 14 of October 1993 of the year, Resolution 884 (1993 of November X of November 12).
    And about 20 percent - I agree, it’s wrong, I was mistaken - now it’s already smaller, the process of liberation has begun. May God make such mistakes more often.
  • Stavros
    Stavros April 26 2016 22: 42
    RuslanNN, the process has begun, this is another question, let's not guess. I did not ask you to write the numbers and dates of the resolutions, you could read and read, but you did not understand that Azerbaijan did not implement these resolutions. When the first resolution was adopted, in the hands of the Armenians Kelbajar Lachin and Shushi was at that moment, your leadership simply thought that he could finish off the Armenians and then just end the war, you would just slaughter the Armenians or they would just run away. But the point is that the Armenians didn’t run and just started to capture district after region, and resolutions were put forward all new, and all had a complete ceasefire as the first condition. And when the ceasefire was signed, after that they suddenly remembered the resolutions. And about Khojaly, you never wrote, I want to tell you Ruslan, if you are going to blame the Armenians for their deeds and not look at any facts, this is one thing, and if you want to find out the truth who is to blame for the tragedy of these people, read independent sources.
    1. Bakht
      Bakht April 26 2016 23: 52
      So read independent sources. About Khojaly - for example, a report by the Sakharov Center. And Mutalibov is just an interested person. And it turns out like ukrov: they cut themselves and killed themselves. And this idiotic (I repeat idiotic) myth that the war began because the Armenians were going to be slaughtered. It would be good to learn someone who began to cut and expel.

      But the resolution has not been implemented and it is NOT GOING TO IMPLEMENT just Armenia. There is in all resolutions - the withdrawal of troops from the occupied territories. Instead, there was a capture of new ones. Some kind of strange performance. And now no one wants to implement these resolutions for 20 years. And as it was, they remembered the ceasefire. Nobody remembered the 1994 agreement until April of this year. And suddenly the Armenian side recalled sharply.

      In general, I can repeat - the article is stupid and odious. There is no truth there and was not close. Commenting nonsense does not make sense.
      1. garnik64
        garnik64 April 27 2016 00: 25
        -3 про резолюции читайте и успокойтесь.
        The refugees from Khojaly who almost reached Akna (Aghdam) were met with fire and they turned to the side along the front. And there they got caught in the crossfire. At that time this territory was controlled by the Armed Forces of Azerbaijan. If the Armenians killed the refugees and controlled these territories, they not such as to leave their "atrocities" on display.
        I’m sure that you know who really is to blame, but you need your genocide as opposed to Armenian.
        1. Bakht
          Bakht April 27 2016 01: 01
          You are talking nonsense. And about the genocide and about the resolution. Why read ABM resolutions, there is an ORIGINAL resolution. Read the text itself, not its interpretation by engaged individuals
  • atamankko
    atamankko April 26 2016 23: 25
    The USA craps wherever it sees fit,
    Autumn flies always bite harder.
  • Bakht
    Bakht April 27 2016 00: 02
    Here is one of the resolutions.
    Security Council
    Reaffirming its resolution 822 (1993) of April 30, 1993,
    Having considered the report of the Chairman of the Minsk Group of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe of July 27, 1993, 1
    Expressing grave concern at the deterioration of relations between the Republic of Armenia and the Republic of Azerbaijan and the tension between them,
    Welcoming the adoption by stakeholders of an urgent action plan to implement its resolution 822 (1993),
    Noting with concern the escalation of hostilities and, in particular, the capture of the Agdam region in Azerbaijan,
    Concerned that this situation continues to threaten peace and security in the region,
    Reiterating its serious concern about the displacement of a large number of civilians in Azerbaijan and the humanitarian emergency in the region,
    Reaffirming the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Azerbaijan and all other states in the region,
    Reaffirming also the inviolability of international borders and the inadmissibility of the use of force to acquire territory,

    1. Condemns the seizure of the Agdam region and all other recently occupied areas of the Republic of Azerbaijan;
    2. Also condemns all hostile acts in the region, in particular attacks on civilians and the bombing and shelling of populated areas;
    3. Demands the immediate cessation of all hostilities and the immediate, full and unconditional withdrawal of the occupying forces involved in the conflict from the Agdam region and all other recently occupied regions of Azerbaijan;
    4. Encourages the parties concerned to reach durable ceasefire agreements and to abide by them;
    5. Reaffirms, in the context of paragraphs 3 and 4 above, its previous calls to restore economic, transport and energy ties in the region;
    6. Endorses the continued efforts of the Minsk Group of the Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe to ensure a peaceful resolution to the conflict, including efforts to implement resolution 822 (1993), and expresses grave concern at the devastating consequences of the escalation of hostilities in these efforts;
    7. Welcomes the preparations for the observation mission of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, including the schedule for its deployment, as well as the consideration of the proposal to ensure the presence of the Conference in the region as part of the meeting;
    8. Urges the parties concerned to refrain from any actions that impede the peaceful resolution of the conflict and to continue negotiations within the framework of the Minsk Group, as well as through direct contacts between them in order to achieve a final settlement;
  • Bakht
    Bakht April 27 2016 00: 04
    9. Urges the Government of the Republic of Armenia to continue to exert its influence in order to ensure compliance by the Armenians of the Nagorno-Karabakh region of Azerbaijan with the provisions of resolution 822 (1993) and this resolution and the adoption by this party of the proposals of the Minsk Group;
    10. Urges States to refrain from the supply of any weapons and military property that could lead to an escalation of the conflict or to continued occupation of the territory;
    11. Reiterates its call for the unhindered implementation of international humanitarian assistance activities in the region, in particular in all areas affected by the conflict, in order to alleviate the increased suffering of the civilian population, and reaffirms that all parties are obligated to comply with the principles and norms of international humanitarian law;
    12. Requests the Secretary-General and relevant international agencies to provide emergency humanitarian assistance to the affected civilian population and to help displaced persons return to their homes;
    13. Requests the Secretary-General, in consultation with the Chairman-in-Office of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, as well as the Chairman of the Minsk Group, to continue to report to the Council on developments in the situation;
    14. Decides to remain actively seized of the matter.

    Adopted unanimously at the 3259 meeting.
    1. Official Records of the Security Council, Forty-eighth Year, Supplement for July, August and September 1993, document S / 26184.

    Question to clever people. What clauses of this resolution were not fulfilled by Azerbaijan? And what did Armenia do? A lie must be unbelievable to be believed.
    1. Stavros
      Stavros April 27 2016 00: 47
      The third point is the immediate cessation of all hostilities and so on. If you, as the advancing side, ceased fire, the result might have been different now. Or did you think Bakhtiyar that you would continue the offensive, and the Armenians having opened the mittens would not answer you.
      1. Bakht
        Bakht April 27 2016 01: 05
        We discussed this a hundred times. The fire was discontinued in 1994 and the regime was observed for 20 years. Have the remaining items been completed? Azerbaijan ceased fire. Armenia was not going to do anything.
        Activity at the front is now the result of non-compliance with resolutions by Armenia. Or do you think that Azerbaijan should wait another 20 years?
        You have strange ideas about implementing UN decisions
      2. Bakht
        Bakht April 27 2016 01: 08
        By the way point 3. You wrote "other" so nicely. The fire was stopped, but this was not done. And this is today's demand. This is your "other" and is the stumbling block to which Armenia will never agree
  • Bakht
    Bakht April 27 2016 00: 12
    Without any discussion.

    Has no one ever read what exactly Russia needs in the South Caucasus? What is required of Armenia and Azerbaijan? Nobody in Brussels, neither in Moscow, nor in Washington is interested in Nagorno-Karabakh, Armenia or Azerbaijan in itself. The stakes are much higher.

    Well, at least take a look at the map. What does Russia need and what does it seek and demand from Baku and Yerevan? Sargsyan will not agree - another politician will agree. Aliyev will not agree to find another.

    Well, at least read the official documents ....
    1. Stavros
      Stavros April 27 2016 00: 48
      Please enlighten what Russia requires.
      1. Bakht
        Bakht April 27 2016 01: 06
        No discussion. Everything is written in print. And I'm not quite sure that it suits both sides.
  • Orionvit
    Orionvit April 27 2016 05: 10
    By the way, the Circassians are one of the few peoples in the Caucasus with whom Russia has always had normal relations. Unlike, for example, from Karachays. Recall that the Russian tsars had personal protection from the Circassians, some even at the cost of their lives covered them with their bodies, as was the case with Alexander III. Yes, but those days are gone.
  • Ros 56
    Ros 56 April 27 2016 07: 35
    So that the Turks and the striped ones were not up to us, they themselves must create problems on their territory, and we have specialists of this profile. They will bring the GDP to white-hot, they will feel in their own skin that this is unlucky and how to deal with it.
    1. Ros 56
      Ros 56 April 27 2016 16: 44
      Scarecrow, do you even respond when you quietly set the cons, look at you.
  • Knizhnik
    Knizhnik April 27 2016 08: 40
    Amazing nonsense. Considering the current cooling of relations between the Russian Federation and Turkey (although not so long ago ...), every word of this chef from political science is generously seasoned with "Turkish" sauce in order to hide the mediocre recipe and bad taste.
    We do not need to be set on fire, the fire of Karabakh smolders and will never go out, you must understand at last. An example of the genocide of Serbs in Serbian Krajina and Kosovo before our eyes - what have the "forgetful" "compromisers with Europe" achieved in Serbia? Those who betrayed the national idea are doomed to a pitiful lot.

    Regarding Turkey's position. It is no secret that over the past 25 years our relations have been different, the range ranged from the guiltily smiling Tansu Chiler, to whom the late Heydar Aliyev hinted that he knew about her tricks, to his brother-friend Suleiman Demirel. It is clear that Turkey has its own interests, and sometimes they can run counter to the interests of Azerbaijan. But all the leaders of Turkey knew and know that in their country there is a considerable percentage of the population, represented in the parliament, military circles, and the academic intelligentsia, which supports Azerbaijan at the "people's" level. It is impossible not to reckon with such a part of the electorate, whatever one or another leader would not want.
  • Volzhanin
    Volzhanin April 27 2016 08: 58
    The conflict can be stopped by harsh ultimatum of Russia to Armenia and Azerbaijan.
    Just to warn - if you continue to baragose, we will arrange for both of us such a goat face that it will not seem enough.
    The same with the mattress - you will climb where they do not ask - you will get along the arrogant striped face.
    Then everyone will understand everything.
    And if you continue to let snot bubbles, then only the lazy will not begin to atrocify at our borders.
  • Xent
    Xent April 29 2016 19: 30
    Comments are very very interesting, sometimes it was just funny. Yes, my dear ones, it’s ridiculous, even the most Vedas once understand that it’s impossible to prove something that, between us, only you believe. The Vedas are facts, there is truth and there is reality. And in real life ... Armenia like it or not, don’t push Europe to keep to Russia anyway, but from the commentary it was clear ... if you have to choose between Turkey and Russia, then there is only one choice for them - Turkey ...
    1. Bakht
      Bakht April 29 2016 22: 53
      The fact is one. Armenia without Russia is not a tenant. What does not stop striving for Europe. Azerbaijan provided real support to Turkey. Therefore we are friends.

      The funny thing is not this. It is ridiculous when the person and the state are identified. For example, Turkey is a friend to me. But Erdogan has long to hang. But Russia is not my enemy either.

      As some like to see everything in black and white .....