US generals are sure that Russia can attack Belarus

Applying the well-known principle of "divide and conquer" in practice, the United States continues to drive a wedge into relations between Russia and Belarus in order to destroy the Union State.




During an interview with the Polish television channel BelSat, which cooperates with the Belarusian branch of the American Radio Liberty, US troop commander Ben Hodges said that Russia could well repeat the “Ukrainian scenario” in Belarus and attack it if it considers that it it will be beneficial to her.

The American general did not conceal in the course of the interview that it would be better for the United States if Belarus President Lukashenko continues to refuse to deploy Russian units in the republic.

In his opinion, if Russia acts in Belarus the same way as in Ukraine and occupies its or its part, then those European countries that are now inclined to justify Moscow’s actions in relation to Kiev will turn away from it.

In making this statement, Hodges referred to his knowledge of Russian history over the past three centuries, which led him to this conclusion.

One can safely assume that the degree of lies of the American general is directly related to his belief that on the pro-American television channel he will not be asked uncomfortable questions related to the history of the United States, which have achieved their power by ruining other countries and killing millions of people.
  • Photos used: https://belsat.eu
56 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.
I have an account? Sign in
  1. Oleg Rambover Offline Oleg Rambover
    Oleg Rambover (Oleg Rambover) 27 October 2019 16: 31
    -2
    You do not have to be an American general to guess that Russian tanks will be in Minsk, if only the Belarusian authorities look in the direction of Europe, and especially NATO.
    1. 123 Offline 123
      123 (123) 27 October 2019 19: 09
      0
      You do not have to be an American general to guess that Russian tanks will be in Minsk, if only the Belarusian authorities look in the direction of Europe, and especially NATO.

      And who needs to be to think of such a thing? belay
      Can you point out precedents? Maybe tanks are in Kiev or in Tbilisi?
      1. Oleg Rambover Offline Oleg Rambover
        Oleg Rambover (Oleg Rambover) 27 October 2019 23: 48
        -2
        Quote: 123
        And who needs to be to think of such a thing?

        Well, for example, the president of Russia.

        https://www.kommersant.ru/doc/877224

        Pay attention to the release date of the article.
        How many Russian tanks did they reach Tbilisi in 2008? 50 kilometers? The Georgian authorities understood the hint. The Ukrainian authorities also understood something like this, but there was a Maidan, the main requirement of which was European integration, had to be re-shown. Do you think that the Russian authorities will calmly watch if Belarus is getting into NATO?
        1. 123 Offline 123
          123 (123) 28 October 2019 00: 41
          0
          And who needs to be to think of such a thing?
          Well, for example, the president of Russia.

          I carefully read the article on the link. It is fascinating, but there is not a word about Minsk and Belarus. There are no Russian tanks in Kiev (more precisely, in a new way - in Kuev), or in Tbilisi. In my opinion, you slander the president.

          How many Russian tanks did they reach Tbilisi in 2008? 50 kilometers? The Georgian authorities understood the hint.

          But they didn’t come in, although they could. And it was not a hint, but a kick with a boot. And the kick was received not for the desire to join NATO, but for the attack on Abkhazia and the murder of Russian peacekeepers. But the Georgian authorities didn’t understand anything, they simply couldn’t, and now they only quieted down for a while.

          The Ukrainian authorities also understood something like this, but the Maidan happened, the main requirement of which was European integration

          Maidan is not rain, it does not happen by itself, it was organized. European integration, by the way, was noodles that were hung on the ears of ordinary people. After the Maidan, the new government did not rush to sign it right away. In general, it was just an excuse. The reasons were deeper, the Americans decided to go ahead, "push the situation", violated all agreements. Naturally, they took action. But even after five years, our tanks are not in Kiev. And here everything happened not because of the desire to join NATO.
          As for Belarus, naturally, countermeasures will be taken if NATO drifts, but where did you get the idea that there will be tanks in Minsk?
          Nobody was going to occupy anyone and is not going to.
          1. Oleg Rambover Offline Oleg Rambover
            Oleg Rambover (Oleg Rambover) 29 October 2019 00: 43
            0
            Quote: 123
            but not a word about Minsk and Belarus. There are no Russian tanks in Kiev (more precisely, in a new way - in Kuev), or in Tbilisi. In my opinion, you slander the president.

            This is because then (thank God and now) no one gave a plan for Belarus to join NATO.
            Well, persuaded. Not in Minsk, but near Minsk.

            Quote: 123
            And it was not a hint, but a kick with a boot. And the kick was received not for the desire to join NATO, but for the attack on Abkhazia and the murder of Russian peacekeepers.

            How everything turned out well. In April, Putin spoke about the problems of Georgian sovereignty, and in August of that year, Russian tanks were already under Tbilisi.



            Quote: 123
            The Maidan is not rain, it doesn’t happen on its own, it was organized.

            Remember one of the foundations of political science. They cannot create a revolutionary situation from outside, it is created for internal reasons, from the outside they can only help one of the parties to an already existing conflict.

            Quote: 123
            But after five years, our tanks are not in Kiev. And here everything happened not because of the desire to join NATO.

            Well, Ukraine is no longer joining NATO. And NATO is not particularly eager to get Ukraine. But Ukraine received problems of sovereignty precisely in those territories where our guarantor promised. Another coincidence?

            Quote: 123
            As for Belarus, naturally, countermeasures will be taken if NATO drifts, but where did you get the idea that there will be tanks in Minsk?
            Nobody was going to occupy anyone and is not going to.

            It seems that our Belarusian brothers do not share your confidence.

            https://m.gazeta.ru/army/2016/09/13/10191803.shtml
            1. 123 Offline 123
              123 (123) 29 October 2019 16: 34
              +1
              This is because then (thank God and now) no one gave a plan for Belarus to join NATO. Well, persuaded. Not in Minsk, but near Minsk.

              Come on, it's not the details, in the capital or on the outskirts. You bring to the fact that the territory is occupied, but in fact this is not so.

              How everything turned out well. In April, Putin spoke about the problems of Georgian sovereignty, and in August of that year, Russian tanks were already under Tbilisi.

              Interesting broadcast. laughing So Putin warned and tanks already in Tbilisi. belay Have you missed anything? smile An attack on South Ossetia, for example? belay You can tell about the same about Stalin, who warned about the war and once .... tanks are already in Germany. And yet, the killing of our peacekeepers and

              How everything turned out well

              not compatible. Please do not write such things.

              Remember one of the foundations of political science. They cannot create a revolutionary situation from outside, it is created for internal reasons, from the outside they can only help one of the parties to an already existing conflict.

              As far as I know, authorship of this definition is attributed to Vladimir Ilyich, it talks about the class struggle, which in this case is not true (update 3 signs in your memory). So in our case we have a banal coup. Apparently, you mean that it is impossible to organize such events from abroad. Partly agree, but externally, you can actively help aggravate the crisis. Training of fighters at foreign bases, financing, etc.
              Life in Ukraine has not changed for the better, but somehow a new coup is not visible on the horizon. Where is the revolutionary activity of the masses? The prerequisites have not disappeared, especially on the second basis.

              Well, Ukraine is no longer joining NATO. And NATO is not particularly eager to get Ukraine. But Ukraine received problems of sovereignty precisely in those territories where our guarantor promised. Another coincidence?

              No, this is not a coincidence. The forecast of the development of the situation based on real data and in-depth analysis came true. If a person says that you don’t need to stand under the load or you don’t need to cut the branch you are sitting on, but they don’t listen to him, you should not consider him guilty after receiving an injury.

              It seems that our Belarusian brothers do not share your confidence.

              I read the link that I can say ... you did not remain in debt and also pleased me. laughing Is this company preparing to repel "Putin's aggression"? With all due respect to the experts, the conclusion is sucked from the finger. Territorial troops in Belarus were created, if I am not mistaken, in 2002, and since then such events have been held regularly. Sorry, I won't write in more detail, the comment is already long.
              1. Oleg Rambover Offline Oleg Rambover
                Oleg Rambover (Oleg Rambover) 1 November 2019 11: 12
                0
                Quote: 123
                Come on, it's not the details, in the capital or on the outskirts. You bring to the fact that the territory is occupied, but in fact this is not so.

                I bring to the point that the GDP promised the territorial problems of Georgia and Ukraine if they attempted to join NATO and they received them. And about the occupation ... Read.

                UNGA Resolution No. A / RES / 71/205.

                Quote: 123
                Interesting broadcast. So Putin warned and tanks already in Tbilisi. Have you missed anything? An attack on South Ossetia, for example?

                With South Ossetia, some kind of troubled story. It is hard to believe that the Georgian leadership was completely insane and did not foresee the consequences of their actions.

                Quote: 123
                You can tell about the same about Stalin, who warned about the war and once .... tanks are already in Germany.

                What did Stalin promise and to whom? GDP promised concrete consequences for trying to join NATO and the promised consequences came.

                Quote: 123
                And yet, the killing of our peacekeepers and
                How everything turned out well
                not compatible. Please do not write such things.

                Please do not project your mindset on me. The death of people is always bad, this is not in doubt. I talked about politics.

                Quote: 123
                As far as I know, authorship of this definition is attributed to Vladimir Ilyich, it talks about the class struggle, which in this case is not true (update 3 signs in your memory).

                No, this is not Vladimir Ilyich who said and does not apply to the class struggle.

                Quote: 123
                So in our case we have a banal coup. Apparently, you mean that it is impossible to organize such events from abroad. Partly agree, but externally, you can actively help aggravate the crisis. Training of fighters at foreign bases, financing, etc.

                Coup, revolution or riot - what's the difference? The main thing is that the Russian Federation about ... I don’t know how it is in Russian, it has lost Ukraine, this is a huge foreign policy failure. Nobody has done so much for the Maidan as Yanukovych, no State Department is good for him. Who saw those bases.

                Quote: 123
                No, this is not a coincidence. The forecast of the development of the situation based on real data and in-depth analysis came true. If a person says that you don’t need to stand under the load or you don’t need to cut the branch you are sitting on, but they don’t listen to him, you should not consider him guilty after receiving an injury.

                Yes Yes Yes. GDP predicted that troops would enter, and GDP introduced troops. If you resort to your allegories, then Vladimir Vladimirovich first predicted a fall, and then actively filed it.

                Quote: 123
                I read the link, what can I say ... you did not remain in debt and also made me happy. Is this company preparing to repel "Putin's aggression"?

                Probably, yes, we must ask the main Belarusian brother.

                1. 123 Offline 123
                  123 (123) 1 November 2019 14: 59
                  +1
                  I bring to the point that the GDP promised the territorial problems of Georgia and Ukraine if they attempted to join NATO and they received them. And about the occupation ... Read. UNGA Resolution No. A / RES / 71/205.

                  Georgia received problems as a result of the attack on South Ossetia and the killing of peacekeepers, and Ukraine as a result of the coup and subsequent events. They gathered in NATO before, and now they are going, but before these exacerbations they had no problems. You do not perceive information that does not fit into your version? How do you think it was necessary to respond to the murder of our peacekeepers? Concern express?
                  The resolution was read, fascinatingly, only by the General Assembly - an advisory body, its resolutions are advisory in nature, something like PACE. And what does the Security Council think about this? The resolution is more than strange.

                  paragraph g) immediately cancel the decision to declare the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar people an extremist organization and ban it
                  activities and annul the decision to ban leaders of the Mejlis from entering the territory of Crimea.

                  Do not tell me when in Ukraine this same Majlis was registered?

                  With South Ossetia, some kind of troubled story. It is hard to believe that the Georgian leadership was completely insane and did not foresee the consequences of their actions.

                  Just not difficult, a normal person will not eat a tie.



                  No, this is not Vladimir Ilyich who said and does not apply to the class struggle.
                  "A revolutionary situation is a concept first formulated by VI Lenin in his work May Day of the Revolutionary Proletariat (1913)."

                  This is from the damned Wikipedia, if that, take the time, go in, correct it. laughing

                  Coup, revolution or riot - what's the difference? The main thing is that the Russian Federation about ... I don’t know how it is in Russian, it has lost Ukraine, this is a huge foreign policy failure. Nobody has done so much for the Maidan as Yanukovych, no State Department is suited for him. Who saw those bases.

                  You cannot lose what you don’t have. Ukraine did not belong to Russia, a sovereign state. What do we and Yanukovych have to do with it? The same bastard, like the rest, starting with Kuchma, is neither better nor worse.
                  "Estonian Farm" sounded loudly at one time:



                  Interested in details, not difficult to find.

                  Probably, yes, we must ask the main Belarusian brother.

                  So what? Belarus is also worried about American tanks in the Baltics 15 km away. from the border. Type in YouTube "territorial troops of Belarus", see how many years they have been training. It’s ridiculous to associate the next training camp with the expectation of aggression from Russia.
                  1. Oleg Rambover Offline Oleg Rambover
                    Oleg Rambover (Oleg Rambover) 3 November 2019 09: 47
                    0
                    Quote: 123
                    You do not perceive information that does not fit into your version?

                    The same question to you. Our president promised problems to neighbors and these problems have come, but you ignore it.

                    Quote: 123
                    How do you think it was necessary to respond to the murder of our peacekeepers? Concern express?

                    I dont know. And how did they respond to the murder of our peacekeepers in Kosovo, Bosnia and Croatia? Or how they reacted to a downed plane in Syria. Or how they reacted to a downed plane in Turkey, when they promised not to get rid of tomatoes and built a nuclear power plant for the Turks. So, they react, apparently, based on the situation and the desire to get the most out of it.

                    Quote: 123
                    The resolution was read, fascinatingly, only by the General Assembly - an advisory body, its resolutions are advisory in nature, something like PACE.

                    Do you think that at this assembly people just get ready and do not express the views of their governments? In this resolution, Crimea is called an occupied territory.

                    Quote: 123
                    Just not difficult, a normal person will not eat a tie.

                    This is an argument, five points. Here we are peeing comments, it is unlikely that this is a sign of success, but Saakashvili became the president of the country and it is difficult to imagine that an inadequate person could do this.

                    Quote: 123
                    This is from the damned Wikipedia, if that, take the time, go in, correct it.

                    What else should I correct? Once again, this applies neither to Lenin nor to the class struggle.

                    Quote: 123
                    You cannot lose what you don’t have. Ukraine did not belong to Russia, a sovereign state.

                    You can have a friendly neighboring country, neutral or hostile. It is difficult to call a foreign policy success from Ukraine with a Russian-speaking population and a common history a foreign country.

                    Quote: 123
                    What do we and Yanukovych have to do with it?

                    I don’t know what we and Yanukovych have to do with it. Once again, for the Maidan, Yanukovych did more than anyone else, especially the State Department.

                    Quote: 123
                    "Estonian Farm" sounded loud at one time

                    Horrible. I here and in Russia are full of such databases.

                    https://news.myseldon.com/ru/news/index/210488392
                    http://strikeball-24.ru/
                    http://strikeone.ru/krasstrike/krasteam

                    Are you seriously using such sources?

                    Quote: 123
                    So what? Belarus is also worried about American tanks in the Baltic states, 15 km away. from the border.

                    Do you think that Belarusians are equally afraid of Americans and us? And is that normal?
                    1. 123 Offline 123
                      123 (123) 3 November 2019 13: 10
                      +1
                      The same question to you. Our president promised problems to neighbors and these problems have come, but you ignore it.

                      Let's say the conversation is valid. He did not promise problems, but warned that they would be in case of certain actions. And he talked about joining NATO.
                      The article says in Georgia:

                      The Russian president hinted that if NATO provides a Membership Action Plan (MAP) to Georgia’s NATO, Russia will recognize Abkhazia and South Ossetia based on the Kosovo precedent, and thereby create a buffer zone between NATO forces and its borders.

                      The war in Georgia began not because of the provision of an action plan by NATO, but because of an armed attack on Ossetia and our peacekeepers.
                      In Ukraine:

                      And here he very transparently hinted that if Ukraine were nevertheless admitted to NATO, this state would simply cease to exist. That is, in fact, he threatened that Russia could begin to tear off the Crimea and Eastern Ukraine.

                      It turns out, he hinted, further the assumption of the journalist. How can such a conclusion be drawn from "cease to exist"? belay "Will cease to exist" and the rejection of Crimea and Eastern Ukraine are two different things. And what happened after the warning? Ukraine joined NATO? There just happened a coup, with all the ensuing consequences. And so, how do you think the territories have been torn away, that Ukraine has ceased to exist? Have you changed your mind?

                      I dont know. And how did they respond to the murder of our peacekeepers in Kosovo, Bosnia and Croatia?

                      Do you think it is correct to compare Kosovo and South Ossetia? The Georgian army stupidly went on the attack, with artillery, tanks, aircraft. There are separate incidents in Kosovo. Look at the link causes of death and how many more peacekeepers from different countries died. And how did they answer?

                      http://artofwar.ru/p/ponamarchuk_e/text_0250.shtml

                      Do you think that at this assembly people just get ready and do not express the views of their governments? In this resolution, Crimea is called occupied territory.

                      Well, that you, of course not, they express the position of their government, but otherwise you are absolutely right, "just play it out", like PACE. Real affairs are dealt with by the Security Council, its resolutions are binding. By the way, they answered, what does the Security Council think about this? And yes, they have no idea what they voted for and have never been to Crimea, otherwise how can they demand to restore the rights of an organization that was not registered in Ukraine itself. Why, if the Mejlis represents the interests of the people of Crimea, was it not registered in Ukraine?

                      This is an argument, five points. Here we are peeing comments, this is hardly a sign of success, but Saakashvili became the country's president and it is hard to imagine that an inadequate person could do this.

                      Glad you like it. Do you consider Saakashvili a successful person? Eating ties, running on rooftops and being wanted at home? He has failed everything he tried. Such success is not for me, it is better to write comments.

                      Once again, this applies neither to Lenin nor to the class struggle.

                      Lenin is the author of this expression, and he spoke precisely of the class struggle. Read at your leisure:

                      https://scepsis.net/library/id_1466.html

                      or just type "revolutionary situation" into the search engine.

                      It is difficult to call a foreign policy success from Ukraine with a Russian-speaking population and a common history a foreign country.

                      Do you think that the Russophobic regime in Ukraine means "losing Ukraine"? Today one regime, tomorrow another, nothing lasts forever.

                      ... we and Yanukovych. Once again, for Maidan Yanukovych did more than anyone else, especially the State Department

                      What do we mean and Yanukovych? The Americans paid for everything, organized it, the State Department putter gave out cookies, Yanukovych loved everything. And what about us? What have we done for maidan?

                      Are you seriously using such sources?

                      In this case, the sources are comparable. I took the first link I came across. The photographs of Nazis with military weapons, learning to plant mines at the military personnel of NATO countries, deserve no less faith than the speculations of a journalist from Kommersant.

                      Do you think that Belarusians are equally afraid of Americans and us? And is that normal?

                      No, I do not think so. Where does this conclusion come from? I just talked about flawed logic in an attempt to link the statement of Lukashenko and one of the training of the territorial troops. They have been training since 2002, and Lukashenko has spoken, and so they are preparing for our aggression? request
                      1. Oleg Rambover Offline Oleg Rambover
                        Oleg Rambover (Oleg Rambover) 11 November 2019 10: 50
                        -1
                        Quote: 123
                        He did not promise problems, but warned that they would be in case of certain actions.

                        What's the difference? In any case, the article turned out to be prophetic and this is interesting.

                        Quote: 123
                        The war in Georgia began not because of the provision of an action plan by NATO, but because of an armed attack on Ossetia and our peacekeepers.

                        Blessed is he who believes.

                        Quote: 123
                        “Will cease to exist” and the rejection of Crimea and Eastern Ukraine are two different things. And what happened after the warning?

                        So Ukraine did not join NATO.

                        Quote: 123
                        Do you think it is correct to compare Kosovo and South Ossetia?

                        Why not? Both there and there died Russian peacekeepers. Do you know what the fog of war is? It’s hard to believe that in a couple of hours you can figure out what is happening there.
                        Well, compare with a plane shot down by the Turks.

                        Quote: 123
                        Otherwise, you are absolutely right, "just potryndet", like PACE. Real affairs are dealt with by the Security Council, its resolutions are binding.

                        Do not know where 10 members of the Security Council come from?
                        What did you send to this mejlis? For most countries of the world, Crimea is the territory of Ukraine. Even if the organization was registered after 14 years (and this is not entirely true), for the world community this does not change anything. What's not clear?

                        Quote: 123
                        Such success is not for me, it is better to write comments.

                        To each his own. Your assessment of Saakashvili’s actions is biased, at least in domestic politics. If you talk with the Georgians, they very much appreciate the police reform. Economic policies are assessed differently, but certainly not the worst option.
                        Yes, in my opinion, he is much more successful than the average person.

                        Quote: 123
                        Lenin is the author of this expression, and he spoke precisely of the class struggle. Read at your leisure:

                        The Marxist definition of revolution is strongly ideologized, class theory has clearly failed. I like the idea of ​​Davis James that protests are caused by disappointment. He spoke primarily about economic expectations, but it seems to me that this applies not only to economic expectations, but also to political ones.

                        Quote: 123
                        Do you think that the Russophobic regime in Ukraine means "losing Ukraine"? Today one regime, tomorrow another, nothing lasts forever.

                        The most interesting thing is that in Ukraine now the most pro-Russian regime of the possible and in the coming decades is unlikely to change anything. (As in Georgia)

                        Quote: 123
                        What do we mean and Yanukovych? The Americans paid for everything, organized it, the State Department putter gave out cookies, Yanukovych loved everything. And what about us? What have we done for maidan?

                        What do we mean and Yanukovych? You said that. That the Americans paid and organized everything, unfounded fantasies. For 20 years, Americans have invested 5 billion in Ukraine, most of which went through the Ukrainian government. Russia only one payment of 3 billion swelled. Without Nuland cookies, of course, there would be no Maidan. Yanukovych, as a politician with low social responsibility, tried to sell more expensively and arranged an auction between the Russian Federation and the EU. The Russian Federation won the auction, but the citizens of Ukraine, at least their active part, have already set their sights on Europe, but then disappointment came (see Davis). Blood has been spilled, and recently, spilled blood usually means the end of a regimen. The Russian Federation despite the fact that it could not offer anything to the Ukrainians, so that they would not look towards Europe, no idea.

                        Quote: 123
                        In this case, the sources are comparable. I took the first link I came across. The photographs of Nazis with military weapons, learning to plant mines at the military personnel of NATO countries, deserve no less faith than the speculations of a journalist from Kommersant.

                        Of course, comparable, the second most cited newspaper and people. from YouTube with 34 followers. One and the same who argues. Can you take a battered dude in tattered camouflage from Cherkizon for a NATO instructor? Why do they need mines that are installed from an airplane, or with a specially equipped truck?

                        Quote: 123
                        No, I do not think so. Where does this conclusion come from? I just talked about flawed logic in an attempt to link the statement of Lukashenko and one of the training of the territorial troops. They have been training since 2002, and Lukashenko has spoken, and so they are preparing for our aggression?

                        Well, consider only Lukashenko’s statement.
                      2. 123 Offline 123
                        123 (123) 11 November 2019 15: 52
                        +2
                        He did not promise problems, but warned that they would be in case of certain actions. - What's the difference?

                        Promising problems is a threat, and so is a warning.

                        The war in Georgia began not because of the provision of an action plan by NATO, but because of an armed attack on Ossetia and our peacekeepers. - Blessed is he who believes.

                        Do you have an alternative version of the outbreak of war? smile

                        Do you think it is correct to compare Kosovo and South Ossetia?

                        Why not? Both there and there died Russian peacekeepers.

                        Look again at the link how peacekeepers died in Kosovo and not only ours died. In South Ossetia there was a direct attack by the Georgian army, that is, aggression.

                        Do you know what the fog of war is? It’s hard to believe that in a couple of hours you can figure out what is happening there.

                        Lack of reliable information about the current situation, did you mean this? It is not entirely clear who and where tried to figure out a couple of hours. Specify if possible. If about Ossetia, then look at how many Russian troops entered the battle. The decision was made for a long time.

                        Well, compare with a plane shot down by the Turks.

                        You can compare with him. And it is possible with the shelling of US troops by the Turks.

                        https://www.kp.ru/online/news/3636986/

                        Not every such incident automatically leads to the outbreak of hostilities. In both cases, they evaluated the situation and made an adequate decision.

                        Do not know where 10 members of the Security Council come from?

                        I know, therefore I speak. Do you know the difference between the Security Council and the Gene. assembly between the European Commission and the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe?

                        Why are you pestering this Majlis? For most countries of the world, Crimea is the territory of Ukraine. What's not clear?

                        Am I pestering? belay This is shown to me by a resolution in which Russia is required to recognize an organization that has not been registered in Ukraine. This characterizes vividly the competence of the voters.

                        Even if the organization was registered after 14 years (and this is not entirely true), for the world community this does not change anything.

                        What do you mean, this is not entirely true? But as? Come on, what does it mean for the global community? By analogy, the PACE decision is not the opinion of the European Union. As for "for most countries, Crimea is the territory of Ukraine", so what? The world is full of disputed territories and such issues are not resolved by direct voting. Today they think so, tomorrow they think differently. See how the United States and the USSR recognized. The same Kosovo was recognized by some countries, now they have changed their minds and do not recognize it. What does it change? From a legal point of view, the annexation of Crimea is flawless. Ukraine loves to hang around courts on various occasions, why doesn't it even try to sue in Crimea?

                        Your assessment of Saakashvili’s actions is biased, at least in domestic politics. If you talk with the Georgians, they very much appreciate the police reform.

                        And yours, of course, is objective? If you communicate with the Georgians, then there will be both opponents and supporters. If he is such a national hero, then why is he wanted? Is the junta in power there? And those who evaluate police reform are aware of torture in prisons? And in general, we are not discussing managerial talents.

                        The Marxist definition of revolution is strongly ideologized, class theory has clearly failed.

                        And God bless them, the definition of V.I. Lenin, I just explained about the wrong interpretation.

                        I like the idea of ​​Davis James more

                        I am very happy for you, but does not allow discussing the format, comment. and so too long.

                        The most interesting thing is that in Ukraine now the most pro-Russian regime of the possible and in the coming decades is unlikely to change anything. (As in Georgia)

                        That's right - the MODE, but what about will change, "we'll have a look."

                        What does it mean, we and Yanukovych? You said that.

                        I said that it is not necessary to unite us and Yanukovych in a heap. He lost the country, we did not lose anything.

                        That the Americans paid and organized everything, unfounded fantasies. For 20 years, Americans have invested 5 billion in Ukraine, most of which went through the Ukrainian government.

                        We won't discuss the majority, but where is the rest? The Americans invested "to support democracy," while Russia simply gave a loan. Feel the difference.

                        already set their sights on Europe, but then disappointment came

                        Yanukovych was disappointed, who finally managed to read the association agreement and understood the consequences.

                        Blood has been spilled, and recently, spilled blood usually means the end of a regimen.

                        Tell the Chinese, otherwise they do not know. repeat But the "revolutionaries" thought, as you did, apparently read the same books, that is why they shot people. By the way, what's up with the investigation? request Apparently, it’s inconvenient to dig on yourself. sad

                        Of course, comparable, the second most cited newspaper and people from YouTube with 34 subscribers. One and the same who argues. Can you take a battered dude in tattered camouflage from Cherkizon for a NATO instructor? Why do they need mines that are installed from an airplane, or from a specially equipped truck?

                        I said the first link I got is not like it, look at another one.

                        https://rg.ru/2016/12/16/andrej-kliuev-boevikov-majdana-gotovili-v-polshe-i-pribaltike.html

                        And who, besides "the second most cited newspaper", published such nonsense? And citation is another argument. According to the rating link, pay attention to the two right columns, it turns out the best REN TV channel, and the best Internet resource RBC.

                        Well, consider only Lukashenko’s statement

                        Lukashenko has new statements every other day, often directly opposite.
                      3. Oleg Rambover Offline Oleg Rambover
                        Oleg Rambover (Oleg Rambover) 16 November 2019 20: 26
                        -1
                        Quote: 123
                        Promising problems is a threat, and so is a warning.

                        So what is the difference? Especially if it says GDP?
                        Something we parted. Returning to the topic of the article. Well, let's say I'm wrong, and you're right. Why the Russian Federation will not be able to conduct a military operation for the same reasons and against Belarus?

                        Quote: 123
                        You can compare with him. And it is possible with the shelling of US troops by the Turks.

                        Are you getting away from the answer? Well, compare with the shelling of US troops by the Turks. You want to say that the Russian Federation could do the same and not respond? Is comparing a projectile 100 meters a clearly random and intentionally shot down plane equivalent?

                        Quote: 123
                        I know, therefore I speak. Do you know the difference between the Security Council and the Gene. assembly between the European Commission and the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe?

                        I know.

                        Quote: 123
                        Am I pestering? This is shown to me by a resolution in which Russia is required to recognize an organization that has not been registered in Ukraine. This characterizes vividly the competence of the voters.

                        We are losing the thread of discussion.
                        you said

                        You bring to the fact that the territory is occupied, but in fact this is not so.

                        In response, I cited a resolution where Crimea is called the occupied territory of Ukraine. But the conversation turned to the Majlis.
                        And this does not characterize the competence of the voters. Rather, your ignorance of the question (and mine). Public organizations are not required to register (at least in the Russian Federation), this is a voluntary matter. In Ukraine, the Mejlis was not registered, but carried out its activities. The Russian Federation banned the activities of the Mejlis, as they say, feel the difference.

                        Quote: 123
                        Drop what does it mean for the world community?

                        This means that most countries of the world do not recognize Crimea as Russian.

                        Quote: 123
                        From a legal point of view, the annexation of Crimea is impeccable. Ukraine likes to lug around the courts on various occasions, why is it not even trying to sue the Crimea?

                        Judging by your statements on the Majlis, your knowledge of law is not better than mine. Who told you that perfect? And about the trial

                        https://www.novayagazeta.ru/articles/2019/11/11/82685-gde-kogo-za-chto

                        Quote: 123
                        And yours, of course, is objective? If you communicate with the Georgians, then there will be both opponents and supporters.

                        Unlikely. But as I understand it, there is a consensus in Georgia that the police reform was successful. In any case, the world is not black and white.
                        What are we discussing? You said that for everything that he undertook, it was a failure. This is not true.

                        Quote: 123
                        That's right - the MODE, but what about will change, "we'll have a look."

                        What is so hidden in the word mode? There are democratic regimes, there are autocratic regimes (as in the Russian Federation), totalitarian regimes (Stalin's USSR). In Georgia, closer to democratic. In Ukraine, probably, too.

                        Quote: 123
                        I said that it is not necessary to unite us and Yanukovych in a heap. He lost the country, we did not lose anything.

                        Something again, some kind of misunderstanding. Who unites us and Yanukovych? We have lost at least a neutral neighbor and acquired a hostile one.

                        Quote: 123
                        We won't discuss the majority, but where is the rest? The Americans invested "to support democracy," while Russia simply gave a loan. Feel the difference.

                        http://vkurse.ua/business/donory-razvorovyvayut-granty.html

                        You really think that if the Ukrainians were given money for the revolution, they would have arranged it. And the main thing is not clear why this is for the Americans.
                        And about the loan ...

                        https://m.dp.ru/a/2014/04/22/Rossija_vlozhila_v_Ukrainu

                        Feel the difference. And at the same time efficiency.

                        Quote: 123
                        Yanukovych was disappointed, who finally managed to read the association agreement and understood the consequences.

                        Yanukovych bucks in his eyes flickered, which he received from the Russian Federation, for which everything was up to. He was disappointed when citizens began to break into his residence and no one in all of Ukraine sided with him.

                        Quote: 123
                        Tell the Chinese, otherwise they don't know. But the "revolutionaries" thought, as you did, apparently read the same books, that is why they shot people. By the way, what's up with the investigation? Apparently, it is inconvenient to dig on ourselves.

                        Each rule has its own exception. In addition, in China, human life is rather cheaply valued.
                        Nothing to say about the shooting on the Maidan. No reliable data.

                        Quote: 123
                        I said the first link I got is not like it, look at another one.

                        This one is much better. There would be some more independent confirmation, he would not have a price. It would be strange to hear from him that he himself was to blame for the crisis. People tend to justify themselves.

                        Quote: 123
                        And who, besides "the second most cited newspaper", published such nonsense? And citation is another argument. According to the rating link, pay attention to the two right columns, it turns out the best REN TV channel, and the best Internet resource RBC.

                        Published only with a link to Kommersant. Exclusive. You can find confirmation of this nonsense in any political card issued after 14 years. There is no confirmation of the nonsense about the NATO bases preparing the Banderaites. Than you RBC did not please. Kommersant is one of the largest federal media outlets, it is foolish to deny it.

                        Quote: 123
                        Lukashenko has new statements every other day, often directly opposite.

                        What is also an inadequate person? Do all countries have such leaders around Russia?
                      4. 123 Offline 123
                        123 (123) 16 November 2019 22: 51
                        +2
                        Why the Russian Federation will not be able to conduct a military operation for the same reasons and against Belarus?

                        Russia can do a lot, but why against Belarus? Why not against Kazakhstan? Are there any prerequisites?

                        Well, compare with the shelling of US troops by the Turks. You want to say that the Russian Federation could do the same and not respond? Is comparing a projectile 100 meters a clearly random and intentionally shot down plane equivalent?

                        I want to say that the opening of fire does not mean an automatic declaration of war. And how did you determine that the shell was random? By your logic, the Americans should immediately start a war. Or are they just wiped off? Do not like this example? There is another. In Syria, more than one plane was shot down; there is also an IL-20. Do you think that Russia should immediately start a war against Syria? After the incident, we conducted an analysis, figured out that it was a provocation, we managed to avoid war. Are you not happy with this development? In the case of Georgia, the blow was not immediately dealt, at first they figured out that this was a full-blown aggression. That's clearer?

                        In response, I cited a resolution where Crimea is called the occupied territory of Ukraine. But the conversation turned to the Majlis.
                        And this does not characterize the competence of the voters.

                        But who knows what resolution they adopted. It reflects the views of the voting countries on this issue and all. And the requirement to register the Mejlis still characterizes the competence of the voters. I doubt that they even read the resolution.

                        Rather, your ignorance of the question (and mine). Public organizations are not required to register (at least in the Russian Federation), this is a voluntary matter.

                        Your ignorance of the question is perhaps mine hardly. They demanded state registration. And according to our laws, this is:

                        In the case of state registration of a public organization, its permanent governing body exercises the rights of a legal entity on behalf of a public organization and performs its duties in accordance with the charter. Article 8 Federal Law of 19.05.1995 N 82-ФЗ

                        Public organizations are subject to registration in the manner prescribed by law. Ukraine Law of Ukraine No. 4572-17, see Article 12, Section 2.

                        http://hersones.eu/zakon/obedineniya/

                        Russia. Federal Law of May 19.05.1995, 82 N 21-FZ see Article XNUMX

                        http://www.consultant.ru/document/cons_doc

                        In Ukraine, the Mejlis was not registered, but carried out its activities. The Russian Federation banned the activities of the Mejlis, as they say, feel the difference.

                        Well, let him in Ukraine and carry out its activities. Our laws are different. In Ukraine, Hizb ut-Tahrir is permitted. The Ukrainian court refused to recognize neo-Nazi and authorized the activities of the S-14. Feel the difference.

                        This means that most countries of the world do not recognize Crimea as Russian.

                        So what? It is their right, they want - they recognize, they want - they do not recognize. What's next? Golan recognized the United States, does not recognize the EU, does it somehow interfere with Israel?

                        Judging by your statements on the Majlis, your knowledge of law is not better than mine.

                        Who told you that perfect? And about the trial

                        I won’t argue about you, but somewhere in the mezzanine I have a diploma in law. I read the link, there is a Ukrainian mournful on the supply of weapons to the DPR / LPR and concern over the Mejlis. WHERE IS THE SUIT FOR CRIMEA?

                        request Are shy?

                        You really think that if the Ukrainians were given money for the revolution, they would have arranged it. And most importantly, it is not clear why this is for the Americans.

                        What does it mean if? And not for revolution, but for coup. Why - the topic is too long for this format. Read this for now:

                        https://inosmi.ru/world/20140415/219565444.html

                        And about the loan ...

                        https://m.dp.ru/a/2014/04/22/Rossija_vlozhila_v_Ukrainu

                        Feel the difference. And at the same time efficiency.

                        Russia invested in the economy, created a common economic space. The United States invested in NGOs, the goal was to tear Ukraine away from Russia. Compare how much you need to invest to build a house, and to destroy it. Feel the difference and efficiency.
                        I won’t write about Yanukovych, he’s not worth it.

                        Each rule has its own exception. In addition, in China, human life is rather cheaply valued.

                        Want to say, in Ukraine, human life is expensive?
                        Nothing to say about the shooting on the Maidan. No reliable data.

                        And there will be, like Odessa, the murder of Elderberry, etc. Why, I think, is not worth explaining.

                        This one is much better. There would be some more independent confirmation, he would not have a price. It would be strange to hear from him that he himself was to blame for the crisis. People tend to justify themselves.

                        Maybe you will give an independent confirmation to the article in Kommersant?

                        Published only with reference to Kommersant. Exclusive. You can find confirmation of this nonsense in any political map issued after 14 years. Confirmation of nonsense about the NATO bases preparing Bandera does not exist. Why did RBC not please you? Kommersant is one of the largest federal media outlets; it is foolish to deny it.

                        In the federal media, the founder is the federal government body; Kommersant is not. What is the confirmation on the card? Is Ukraine missing there?

                        What is also an inadequate person? Do all countries have such leaders around Russia?

                        Why is it inadequate? Rather, it’s multi-vector, it’s going to defend itself from Russia, or together with Russia from NATO.

                      5. Oleg Rambover Offline Oleg Rambover
                        Oleg Rambover (Oleg Rambover) 21 November 2019 13: 22
                        0
                        Quote: 123
                        Russia can do a lot, but why against Belarus? Why not against Kazakhstan? Are there any prerequisites?

                        Good question. In Kazakhstan, there are regions with an ethnically Russian population, there really (unlike in Ukraine) there is oppression of Russian-speaking citizens, in my opinion, an ideal place to promote the "Russian world". And about Belarus ... And what were the preconditions in Ukraine? In Belarus there are authoritarian regimes, the common problem of which is the transit of power. Lukashenka will not last forever and it is not known where the curve of power change will lead.

                        Quote: 123
                        I want to say that the opening of fire does not mean an automatic declaration of war. And how did you determine that the shell was random? By your logic, the Americans should immediately start a war. Or are they just wiped off?

                        Hmm, strange ... It seemed to me that I was arguing that war was not necessary, and according to your logic, war was mandatory. So I agree with you that the opening of fire and even sacrifice does not necessarily mean a declaration of war. It could also be in Ossetia.
                        I determined by several parameters. Firstly, it is difficult to imagine why Turkey needs this, in the sense. the consequences for the Turks can be very deplorable, secondly, they are allies, and thirdly, 100 meters very far.
                        I do not know whether the Americans "wiped out" there or not, but I wonder how you assess the situation with the Russian aircraft shot down by Turkey.

                        Quote: 123
                        ... there is also an IL-20. Do you think that Russia should immediately start a war against Syria? After the incident, we conducted an analysis, figured out that it was a provocation, we managed to avoid war. Are you not happy with this development? In the case of Georgia, the blow was not immediately dealt, at first they figured out that this was a full-blown aggression. That's clearer?

                        Again you are attributing something to me, no one owes anything. Provocation - rather loudly said, rather, the incompetence of our allies. Better explain to me why the blow to our peacekeepers in Ossetia was inflicted in only one place? There were two bases in Tskhinvali, only one was hit. Several posts were scattered across Ossetia, and they, too, thank God, were not fired upon, and peacekeepers calmly sat there throughout the war. And this, read, the definition of aggression.

                        Quote: 123
                        But who knows what resolution they adopted. It reflects the views of the voting countries on this issue and all. And the requirement to register the Mejlis still characterizes the competence of the voters. I doubt that they even read the resolution.

                        Yes, reflects the views of the governments of the voting countries. What are we discussing at all?
                        Did you read it yourself? There is no requirement to register the Majlis, there is a requirement to lift the ban. Feel the difference. You yourself cited a paragraph.

                        g) immediately annul the decision to declare the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar people an extremist organization and prohibit its activities and annul the decision to prohibit leaders of the Mejlis from entering the territory of Crimea.

                        Quote: 123
                        Your ignorance of the question is possible, mine is unlikely. They demanded state registration. And according to our laws, this ...

                        Regarding the required registration, see above. And according to our laws, you are also wrong, according to the same 82 Federal Law of Article 3.

                        Public associations created by citizens may be registered in the manner prescribed by this Federal Law and acquire the rights of a legal entity or function without state registration and the acquisition of the rights of a legal entity.

                        I don’t know how things were going on in Ukraine with the registration of the Mejlis, but you will not deny that it existed in Ukraine, was not banned, conducted some activity and interacted with the Ukrainian authorities?

                        Quote: 123
                        Well, let him in Ukraine and carry out its activities. Our laws are different. In Ukraine, Hizb ut-Tahrir is permitted. The Ukrainian court refused to recognize neo-Nazi and authorized the activities of the S-14. Feel the difference.

                        You yourself have developed the topic of the Mejlis, I do not care if it will act in the Russian Federation or not. The only thing, I would like everything to be according to the laws. Let's change the constitution of the Russian Federation and renounce the jurisdiction of the international court of the United Nations, then go ahead. Feel the difference? The Russian Federation interacts with Hezbollah, in Russia there is some kind of non-governmental pension fund Pamyat or the union of Orthodox gonfalon-bearers, Russian marches are held and neo-fascists rallies throughout Europe. No, I don’t feel the difference.

                        Quote: 123
                        So what? It is their right, they want - they recognize, they want - they do not recognize. What's next? Golan recognized the United States, does not recognize the EU, does it somehow interfere with Israel?

                        Israel does not interfere, Israel is not a person and nothing interferes with it. Citizens of Israel - it is likely not interested. So it is with Russia. Citizens of the Russian Federation creates problems.

                        Quote: 123
                        WHERE IS THE SUIT FOR CRIMEA? Are shy?

                        You are again not familiar with the question.

                        https://www.unian.net/politics/1729092-v-mid-obyyasnili-pochemu-ukraina-ne-podaet-isk-v-mejdunarodnyiy-sud-oon-po-vozvrascheniyu-kryima.html

                        Claims have been filed with the court in which both parties recognize the decisions of the UN court. On the issue that you are saying, the Russian Federation does not recognize the jurisdiction of the UN court and the court does not accept such claims. Or are you talking about what courts? And yes, the accession of the Crimea is not perfect from a legal point of view.

                        Quote: 123
                        What does it mean if? And not for revolution, but for coup. Why - the topic is too long for this format. Read this for now:

                        https://inosmi.ru/world/20140415/219565444.html

                        That means if. There is no reliable information about the financing of the USA Maidan. Revolution, coup, what difference does it make. So I'm talking about the fact that there are no sane motives for the United States to organize a coup. In the article, the former head of Ukraine again complains about the State Department. The protests did not have obvious leaders, go - neither go to the American embassy, ​​you will not become a leader. If you want, I’ll find a photo where Zhirinovsky eats cookies in the shape of the American flag at a reception at the US Embassy. He then becomes the leader of the protests? The article talks about the Italian election of 48 years. But again, the United States helped one of the warring parties, and did not raise it from scratch.

                        Quote: 123
                        Russia invested in the economy, created a common economic space. The United States invested in NGOs, the goal was to tear Ukraine away from Russia. Compare how much you need to invest to build a house, and to destroy it. Feel the difference and efficiency.
                        I won’t write about Yanukovych, he’s not worth it.

                        Do not la la about the common economic space, it was a payment for loyalty, and you understand that perfectly. Money has gone nowhere and it is difficult to call it efficiency. What are you so afraid of the Americans, they are not at all smart people, in twenty years they have given out to the Ukrainian government more than 4 billion, and at the same time they have invested in the overthrow of the same government that was given the money, it's hard to call them sane. And before that, Ukraine was tryndets as attached to Russia? And the Crimea and the Donbass had to plant Ukraine back? And I ask you to save me from parallels, especially those not related to reality.

                        Quote: 123
                        Want to say, in Ukraine, human life is expensive?

                        More expensive than in China. About the same as in Russia.

                        Quote: 123
                        And there will be, like Odessa, the murder of Elderberry, etc. Why, I think, is not worth explaining.

                        For the same reasons, why the customers of the murder of Nemtsov, Politkovskaya will not be punished?

                        Quote: 123
                        Maybe you will give an independent confirmation to the article in Kommersant?

                        Yes Easy. Find a decree recognizing Ossetia and Abkhazia. And about the accession of Crimea.

                        In the federal media, the founder is the federal government agency. What is the confirmation on the card?

                        Federal means nationwide. There is no Ukraine within the borders of 14 years.

                        Quote: 123
                        Why is it inadequate?

                        Something I don’t understand, you want to say that in the first and second cases, Lukashenko carries garbage, or is he serious in the first and second cases?
                      6. 123 Offline 123
                        123 (123) 21 November 2019 19: 06
                        +2
                        Russia can do a lot, but why against Belarus? Why not against Kazakhstan? Are there any prerequisites?

                        Good question.

                        The question is good, the answer is not very. Let's not smear porridge. And what are the prerequisites there, and what are there .... Once you say that Russia can conduct a military operation against Belarus, please be kind, justify your point of view.

                        Hmm, strange ... It seemed to me that I was arguing that war was not necessary, but according to your logic, war was mandatory.

                        Distort. smile Please give a quote where I argued like that.

                        So I agree with you that the opening of fire and even sacrifice does not necessarily mean a declaration of war. It could also be in Ossetia.

                        Re-read the comment again, first figured out the situation, realized that it was a full-blown aggression and then struck.

                        Better explain to me why the blow to our peacekeepers in Ossetia was inflicted in only one place? There were two bases in Tskhinvali, only one was hit. Several posts were scattered across Ossetia, and they, too, thank God, were not fired upon, and peacekeepers calmly sat there all over the war.

                        Firstly, this is a lie, the second base was also fired, however, it suffered less. Secondly, what does it change?

                        And that, read the definition of aggression.

                        I read what I advise you, tired of doing your education.

                        Aggression is the use of armed force by a state against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of another state, or in any other way incompatible with the Charter of the United Nations, as established in this definition.
                        Explanatory Note: In this definition, the term “state”
                        a) used without prejudice to the question of recognition or the question of whether a State is a member of the United Nations ...

                        https://www.un.org/ru/documents/decl_conv/conventions/aggression.shtml

                        This definition of the UN, pay attention to paragraph A, is used regardless of whether South Ossetia is recognized or not.

                        Yes, reflects the views of the governments of the voting countries. What are we discussing at all?

                        Forgotten already? You claimed that this is a document that "branded" us as an aggressor. And this is just their opinion.

                        Did you read it yourself? There is no requirement to register the Majlis, there are requirements to lift the ban.

                        We discussed the requirements to register the Majlis, but since the previous comments are decently edited, we will no longer find the edges. And if we argue in this spirit, they do not demand, but call. They cannot demand anything.

                        Public associations created by citizens can be registered in the manner prescribed by this Federal Law and acquire the rights of a legal entity or function without state registration and the acquisition of the rights of a legal entity

                        Please note, created by citizens of the Russian Federation, not Ukraine.

                        but you will not deny that he existed in Ukraine, was not banned, conducted some activity and interacted with the Ukrainian authorities?

                        Well, let it exist there and interact with whoever it wants. And in general, you pay too much attention to such resolutions, apparently, considering them significant. For example, the next resolution was adopted to combat the glorification of Nazism and 120 countries voted for it, not 67 as for the Crimean one.

                        https://news.un.org/ru/story/2018/11/1342941

                        And such are accepted regularly. So what? It’s just a concussion.

                        Want to find a photo where Zhirinovsky at a reception at the US Embassy eats cookies in the shape of the American flag. He then becomes the leader of the protests?

                        You better find the statement of American officials where they talk about the financing of Zhirinovsky. Being at a reception and getting money from them are two different things.

                        But again, the United States helped one of the warring parties, and did not raise it from scratch.

                        This is an interference in the internal affairs of the country. Did you just see Italy in an article? belay Have you definitely read? There about 80 coups.

                        Do not la la about the common economic space, it was a payment for loyalty.

                        This is your speculation, so you can say about any loan, but it was given specifically for the economy, and not like the Americans have money for the "development of democracy." Therefore, your reasoning about efficiency is worthless.

                        What are you so afraid of the Americans, they are completely stupid people, for twenty years they have given out to the Ukrainian government more than 4 billion, while investing in the overthrow of the same government that was given the money, it is difficult to call them sane.

                        We are not afraid of them, but we should be careful about the insane, the monkey with the grenade is dangerous.

                        And before that, Ukraine was tryndets as attached to Russia?

                        Much stronger than now.

                        And the Crimea and the Donbass had to plant Ukraine back?

                        Is that botany gone? This statement is absolutely incomprehensible.

                        And I ask you to save me from parallels, especially those not related to reality.

                        Agreed. Well then, please be kind enough not to talk about Kazakhstan about the death of peacekeepers in Kosovo.

                        More expensive than in China. About the same as in Russia.

                        What is the basis of your statement that in China, human life is valued cheaper than in Ukraine? Just your personal opinion?

                        For the same reasons, why the customers of the murder of Nemtsov, Politkovskaya will not be punished?

                        It’s not always possible to find customers, but they even found performers on these killings and they are sitting, and Buzina’s killers were released right from the courtroom, they’re like patriots, there’s not even any talk about customers.

                        Yes Easy. Find a decree recognizing Ossetia and Abkhazia. And about the accession of Crimea.

                        Is this a confirmation? belay Well then, I have, irrefutable. Maidan, it happened.

                        Federal, means national

                        Federal means federal. National, apparently, mean popular? This is a subjective concept, remember, I gave you a reference to the rating, where in the next column is the leader of REN TV. I hope you will not tell me about reptilians, referring to this source?

                        There is no Ukraine within the borders of 14 years.

                        But it does exist. The article says

                        this state will simply cease to exist.

                        How on the basis of this it was concluded that he had in mind the Crimea and the Donbass - a mystery.

                        Something I don’t understand, you want to say that in the first and second cases Lukashenko carries garbage or in the first and second cases he is serious?

                        Not. I want to say that he said a lot of things and you can easily pick up a statement for any occasion, in support of any version.
                      7. Oleg Rambover Offline Oleg Rambover
                        Oleg Rambover (Oleg Rambover) 28 November 2019 20: 16
                        0
                        Quote: 123
                        The question is good, the answer is not very. Let's not smear porridge. And what are the prerequisites there, and what are there .... Once you say that Russia can conduct a military operation against Belarus, please be kind, justify your point of view.

                        Strange, you yourself raised the topic of Kazakhstan.
                        Justify? The Russian Federation conducted a military operation against Ukraine, although it did not bode well. On the same grounds, the Russian Federation can conduct a military operation against Belarus.

                        Quote: 123
                        Distort. Please give a quote where I argued like that.

                        Hmm .. like you talked about the need for war with Georgia. And then they began to give an example of the Americans in Syria and say that war is optional. Somehow you are chatting from side to side.

                        Quote: 123
                        Re-read the comment again, first figured out the situation, realized that it was a full-blown aggression and then struck.

                        They still cannot fully understand the situation, and then in half a day ...

                        Quote: 123
                        Firstly, this is a lie, the second base was also fired, however, it suffered less. Secondly, what does it change?

                        If I am not mistaken, the wounded and the dead were at the same base.

                        Quote: 123
                        I read what I advise you, tired of doing your education.

                        Oh May Goth! You opened my eye. But then, in your opinion, it turns out that both Chechen wars are an act of aggression by the Russian Federation. IS bombing is aggression too? And the operation in Dagestan can then be summed up under this definition. Like any CTO involving troops. And the dispersal of demonstrators this summer by internal troops - aggression against the beautiful Russia of the future? After reading this definition, you should have no difficulties qualifying the actions of the Russian Federation in the Crimea and in the Donbass. Do you think it turns out-the Russian Federation is an aggressor country?
                        You are trying to educate me, I’m telling you something new, it’s wonderful.

                        Quote: 123
                        Forgotten already? You claimed that this is a document that "branded" us as an aggressor. And this is just their opinion.

                        You have chosen the wrong profession, you had to apply to philologists. You again feel a subtle semantic difference, inaccessible to mere mortals. What's the difference between “stigmatize” and “just their opinion”. And who and how should "brand"?

                        Quote: 123
                        We discussed the requirements to register the Majlis, but since the previous comments are decently edited, we will no longer find the edges. And if we argue in this spirit, they do not demand, but call. They cannot demand anything.

                        So again, about the requirements, you started it, what are the questions for me.

                        Quote: 123
                        Please note, created by citizens of the Russian Federation, not Ukraine.

                        Do you know that Crimean citizens were automatically given Russian citizenship? Accordingly, the newly made citizens of the Russian Federation did not interfere with continuing to be members of their organization. Well, you're a lawyer, well, mine.

                        Quote: 123
                        Being at a reception and getting money from them are two different things.

                        For some reason, this works for Ukrainian politicians, and why for Russians it does not work (except for Navalny)?

                        Quote: 123
                        This is an interference in the internal affairs of the country. Did you just see Italy in an article? Have you definitely read? There about 80 coups.

                        The USSR then did not intervene, or what? It was part of the confrontation. It’s bad that they intervened, what can I say.

                        Quote: 123
                        This is your speculation, so you can say about any loan, but it was given specifically for the economy, and not like the Americans have money for the "development of democracy." Therefore, your reasoning about efficiency is worthless.

                        Have you definitely read the article?

                        According to Medvedev, this is the amount of support provided to the Ukrainians "through all kinds of preferences, including non-market terms of gas trading." At the same time, the prime minister noted that "we are kind, we are so arranged."

                        Who told you that we are talking about loans? So according to the old, good, Soviet, Russian tradition, the loan was interest-free, irrevocable.

                        Quote: 123
                        Much stronger than now.

                        What, it turns out, the US has achieved its goal? But do not tell me who is now the main trading partner for Ukraine?

                        Quote: 123
                        Is that botany gone? This statement is absolutely incomprehensible.

                        Sorry, typo. You need to read like this:
                        But the Crimea and the Donbass should have tied Ukraine back to Russia?

                        Quote: 123
                        Agreed

                        Do not be offended, just the association of complex political or social processes with family, construction, or something like that, seems to me unacceptable primitivization. You once fell through, but whoever uses this technique constantly makes you think that their way of thinking is also not at a very high level.

                        Quote: 123
                        What is the basis of your statement that in China, human life is valued cheaper than in Ukraine? Just your personal opinion?

                        I read the memoirs of Soviet military advisers. Even for Stalin's officers, the attitude of the Chinese commanders to the lives of their soldiers was a shock. The cultural revolution. One family, one child, human rights status. Once again, the cost of living in Ukraine and Russia is the same. Yes, this is my personal opinion. Are you broadcasting someone else’s opinion here?

                        Quote: 123
                        It’s not always possible to find customers, but they even found performers on these killings and they are sitting, and Buzina’s killers were released right from the courtroom, they’re like patriots, there’s not even any talk about customers.

                        I don’t know what was with Buzina, I was not interested and was not ready to discuss, but according to Nemtsov and Politkovskaya everyone knows who the customer is, but they do nothing.

                        Quote: 123
                        Is this a confirmation? Well, then I have, irrefutable. Maidan, it happened.

                        You confuse a causal relationship. In the case of Kommersant, at first there was an article, and then events followed, which were predicted with high accuracy. In your case, you are trying to explain the events after the fact, with the same success you can blame the reptilians for the Maidan.

                        Quote: 123
                        Federal means federal. National, apparently, mean popular? This is a subjective concept, remember, I gave you a reference to the rating, where in the next column is the leader of REN TV. I hope you will not tell me about reptilians, referring to this source?

                        As you say. I hope you do not compare Kommersant with REN TV?

                        Quote: 123
                        But it does exist. The article says, How on the basis of this it was concluded that he had in mind, Crimea and Donbass are a mystery.

                        Are you a perfectionist? You again read inattentively, it was about the Crimea, and about the Donbass.

                        Quote: 123
                        Not. I want to say that he said a lot of things and you can easily pick up a statement for any occasion, in support of any version.

                        So I did not understand whether Lukashenko was going to defend himself against the Russian world or not?
                      8. 123 Offline 123
                        123 (123) 28 November 2019 22: 56
                        +3
                        The Russian Federation conducted a military operation against Ukraine, although it did not bode well. On the same grounds, the Russian Federation can conduct a military operation against Belarus.

                        And against Mongolia or Canada. For some reason, it seems to you that Belarus is under threat. I don’t see the reasons, in my opinion, you have paranoia. Have you watched an addition?

                        Why Putin talked about the impending collapse of the European Union.

                        Read, here on the site by name you will find it useful. Then you will refer and say what Brexit Putin arranged.

                        Hmm .. like, you talked about the need for a war with Georgia. And then they began to give an example of the Americans in Syria and say that war is optional. Somehow you are chatting from side to side.

                        Your fantasy has broken out. Quote, kindly ....

                        They still cannot fully understand the situation, and then in half a day ...

                        Who can't figure it out? The picture is clear, and who still cannot, cockroaches in the head interfere. Does it surprise you to figure it out in half a day? It is impossible to completely hide preparation for a full-fledged military operation, there were preliminary data, it remained to refine the data and make an adequate decision.

                        If I am not mistaken, the wounded and the dead were at the same base.

                        Firstly, it does not matter, the second base could be located away from the direction of the attack, they attacked not only peacekeepers, but all of South Ossetia. Secondly, you are mistaken.

                        There were 2 bases of Russian peacekeepers in the city, one of them, located in the center, where the commander of the peacekeeping contingent General Kulakhmetov was located, was less affected.

                        https://topwar.ru/28003-podvig-mirotvorcev-v-chinvali.html

                        Oh May Goth! You opened my eye. But then, in your opinion, it turns out that both Chechen wars are an act of aggression by the Russian Federation. IS bombing is aggression too? And the operation in Dagestan can then be summed up under this definition. Like any CTO involving troops. And the dispersal of demonstrators this summer by internal troops - aggression against the beautiful Russia of the future? After reading this definition, you should have no difficulties qualifying the actions of the Russian Federation in the Crimea and in the Donbass. Do you think it turns out-the Russian Federation is an aggressor country?
                        You are trying to educate me, I’m telling you something new, it’s wonderful.

                        I promise not to try to do your education anymore. It can be seen that this is difficult for you; you don’t understand elementary things. This paragraph is even difficult to comment on, outright stupidity. Yes, and everything will be disassembled in detail too long. Just read the definition of aggression again. As can be considered aggression all of these cases. You have a very strange logic.

                        What's the difference between “stigmatize” and “just their opinion”. And who and how should "brand"?

                        Read Article 39 of the Charter of the United Nations, on your own.

                        Do you know that Crimean citizens were automatically given Russian citizenship? Accordingly, the newly made citizens of the Russian Federation did not interfere with continuing to be members of their organization. Well, you're a lawyer, well, mine.

                        Except that the organization is recognized as extremist and banned. To understand the impossibility of such an organization, one does not have to be a lawyer.

                        Quote: 123 To be at the reception and receive money from them are two different things.
                        For some reason, this works for Ukrainian politicians, and why for Russians it does not work (except for Navalny)?

                        I do not understand you, please state your thoughts clearly.

                        The USSR then did not intervene, or what? It was part of the confrontation. It’s bad that they intervened, what can I say.

                        Then why do you even try to resent the Russian interference, real or imaginary, it does not matter. What, the confrontation is over? The world has become different and America and I are best friends?

                        According to Medvedev, this is the amount of support provided to the Ukrainians "through all kinds of preferences, including non-market terms of gas trading." At the same time, the prime minister noted that "we are kind, we are so arranged."
                        Who told you that we are talking about loans? So according to the old, good, Soviet, Russian tradition, the loan was interest-free, irrevocable.

                        Have you made a conclusion about interest-free and irrevocability? belay

                        What is it that the USA has achieved its goal? But do not tell me who is now the main trading partner for Ukraine?

                        And what do you think, what America was trying to achieve and what are we? State, from here and we will draw conclusions, only reasonably state, and not just fantasies.

                        But the Crimea and the Donbass should have tied Ukraine back to Russia?

                        Very strange conclusion. what How did you think of this?request

                        I read the memoirs of Soviet military advisers. Even for Stalin's officers, the attitude of the Chinese commanders to the lives of their soldiers was a shock. The cultural revolution. One family, one child, human rights status. Once again, the cost of living in Ukraine and Russia is the same. Yes, this is my personal opinion. Are you broadcasting someone else’s opinion here?

                        I'm afraid to disappoint you, but many years have passed, you know, the NKVD has not been working for us for a long time either, do you think that Red Guards are still operating in China? In Rome, for example, was decimation practiced, do Italians not value human life? Is China a Human Rights Problem? Do not compare Ukraine with Russia, they treat healthcare in a different way, it was practically destroyed, the killers are released simply because they are "patriots", can you tell us examples of how they took care of the lives of soldiers or worried about civilians in Donbass when they were fired upon?

                        I don’t know what was with Buzina, I was not interested and was not ready to discuss, but according to Nemtsov and Politkovskaya everyone knows who the customer is, but they do nothing.

                        Take an interest, the horizon broadens. And who is the customer?

                        You confuse a causal relationship. In the case of Kommersant, at first there was an article, and then events followed, which were predicted with high accuracy. In your case, you are trying to explain the events after the fact, with the same success you can blame the reptilians for the Maidan.

                        Reread from above again about the "collapse of the EU". The Georgians started the war, not Putin, besides, he was not the president, and he was not the one who organized the Maidan and the civil war in Ukraine.

                        As you say. I hope you do not compare Kommersant with REN TV?

                        Looking by what criteria, by popularity ratings, which, apparently, you think makes them authoritative, the comparison is correct.

                        Are you a perfectionist? You again read inattentively, it was about the Crimea, and about the Donbass.

                        And in a recent article there is about England. Have you heard about forecasting the development of the situation?

                        So I did not understand whether Lukashenko was going to defend himself against the Russian world or not?

                        Well, you see, you already doubted, it was enough to look at the situation with an open mind, and at first you thought that you were going to. good
                      9. Oleg Rambover Offline Oleg Rambover
                        Oleg Rambover (Oleg Rambover) 3 December 2019 10: 11
                        -1
                        Quote: 123
                        And against Mongolia or Canada. For some reason, it seems to you that Belarus is under threat. I don’t see the reasons, in my opinion, you have paranoia. Have you watched an addition?

                        Belarus is less than 500 km from Moscow, Mongolia and Canada are somewhat further. If after a change of power in Belarus it rushes to NATO and at the same time the Russian authorities need, for internal political reasons, a small victorious war (as was the case with Ukraine), then why not.

                        Quote: 123
                        Read, here on the site by name you will find it useful. Then you will refer and say what Brexit Putin arranged.

                        No thanks, I'm not interested. Its influence on processes in the EU is scanty (in contrast to the post-Soviet space), and so he often says all sorts of things lately. Either the world economy will collapse at 80 bucks a barrel, then liberalism has outlived itself, then it itself has liberal views. Not young already.

                        Quote: 123
                        Your fantasy has broken out. Quote, kindly ....

                        Didn't you say that the war began because of an attack on our peacekeepers? And then for some reason they began to talk about the shelling of the Americans and say that, like, war is not necessary.

                        Quote: 123
                        Who can't figure it out? The picture is clear, and who still cannot, cockroaches in the head interfere. Does it surprise you to figure it out in half a day? It is impossible to completely hide preparation for a full-fledged military operation, there were preliminary data, it remained to refine the data and make an adequate decision.

                        Well, for example, the International Commission could not determine who first opened fire on each other, peacekeepers or Georgian security forces. Both sides claim that the opposite side was the first to open fire, but both sides were more than once caught in a lie and they lacked confidence. You do not recall when you justified the operation, how many dead Ossetians were we talking about? And how much was in reality?

                        Quote: 123
                        I promise not to try to do your education anymore. It can be seen that this is difficult for you; you don’t understand elementary things. This paragraph is even difficult to comment on, outright stupidity. Yes, and everything will be disassembled in detail too long. Just read the definition of aggression again. As can be considered aggression all of these cases. You have a very strange logic.

                        It seems to me you are trying to merge. And not very technical. As a lawyer, you cannot but notice that the actions of the Russian Federation in Crimea fall under paragraphs a and e of Article 3 of resolution 3314, by the way the UN General Assembly, and actions in the Donbass under paragraph g of the same article.
                        It is much more interesting to compare Ossetia and Chechnya. For some reason I don’t consider either aggression, but for some reason you consider the actions of Georgia in Ossetia as aggression, but, as I understand it, there is no Russian action in Chechnya. But the situations are similar. Or you have double standards.

                        Quote: 123
                        Read Article 39 of the Charter of the United Nations, on your own.

                        Oh May Goth. You opened my eyes again. That is, the UK, China, Russia, the United States and France, by definition, can not be aggressors? I hope you never accused the US or France and Britain of aggression against Yugoslavia or Libya? By the way, do not recall the number of the UN Security Council resolution recognizing Georgia as an aggressor. (It’s good that you left the diploma in the closet, jurisprudence is clearly not yours).

                        Quote: 123
                        Except that the organization is recognized as extremist and banned. To understand the impossibility of such an organization, one does not have to be a lawyer.

                        You may not have noticed, but it was precisely the question of the legality of this ban that became the subject of litigation in the UN court.

                        Quote: 123
                        I do not understand you, please state your thoughts clearly.

                        You are not a stupid person, you all perfectly understood. Sami led an interview with Azarov, where he says that the leaders of the Maidan went to the US Embassy as a job. The cookies were handed out again. On this basis, you are trying to accuse the United States of organizing the Maidan. When Zhirinovsky goes to the US Embassy and eats cookies there, this does not bother you. Why such discrimination.

                        Quote: 123
                        Then why do you even try to resent the Russian interference, real or imaginary, it does not matter. What, the confrontation is over? The world has become different and America and I are best friends?

                        Where did I say that? Yes, the confrontation is over, at least during the Cold War. If you look at the history, then with the USA we have relations like a roller coaster, then friends, then enemies, it is not clear what, as of now. And today's anti-Americanism will pass.

                        Quote: 123
                        Have you made a conclusion about interest-free and irrevocability?

                        This is for a catchphrase. I don’t understand what is causing you difficulties? The prime minister said "at the expense of all kinds of preferences, including non-market terms of gas trade." Where did you see the loan here? Ukraine paid less than it should. This is a form of subsidy that does not imply a return. I only hope that they were not given only because "we are kind, we are so arranged." Otherwise, you will start to doubt the mental abilities of our leaders. I'm sure it was a payment for loyalty.

                        Quote: 123
                        And what do you think, what America was trying to achieve and what are we? State, from here and we will draw conclusions, only reasonably state, and not just fantasies.

                        If at all, then the elites of the United States have two main goals, messianic and strategic. Messianic consists of the idea that liberal democracy is the best form of society (with which one can agree) and attempts to impose this form of society in the whole world (which raises questions both in methods and in the readiness of these societies for such transformations). Strategic in maintaining for the United States economic, political, technological and military leadership. In Ukraine, for the United States there is nothing that can affect their strategic position, messianism remains.
                        It’s more difficult with Russia. There are no global goals. Day to stand, but night to hold out. At a tactical level, the elites of the Russian Federation want to preserve the post-Soviet space in their sphere of influence. In Ukraine, for the Russian Federation, domestic political goals were still traced.
                        IMHO

                        Quote: 123
                        Very strange conclusion. How did you think of this?

                        Well, of course, you said that the US wants to "tear" Ukraine from the Russian Federation. It is logical to assume that the Russian Federation should somehow resist such attempts. And what is the RF doing? Rejects the Crimea and and helps the separatists of Donbass. And I ask, should these actions bind Ukraine back? Or is the Russian leadership helping the Americans?

                        Quote: 123
                        I'm afraid to disappoint you, but many years have passed

                        The law - one family, one child - was repealed recently. Societies do not change instantly. 80 years have passed since the time of the great terror, they have 50.
                        Read about our healthcare, especially in the provinces. All the difference in this regard between the Russian Federation and Ukraine is only that the Russian Federation is richer (oil and gas to the West sells for bucks) and can allocate more money for this. Do you think the Donbass is worse than it was in Chechnya?

                        Quote: 123
                        And in a recent article there is about England. Have you heard about forecasting the development of the situation?

                        If politician Putin publishes publicly (at the NATO summit) such forecasts, being sure that this is just a forecast, he does not correspond to his position.

                        Quote: 123
                        Well, you see, you already doubted, it was enough to look at the situation with an open mind, and at first you thought that you were going to.

                        Well, of course, your words are against the words of Lukashenko ... Your words are, of course, more convincing. Who is this Lukashenko in general?

                        PS If you concede in the discussion, do not go over to the personality of the opponent, lose with dignity. When you begin to go through the mental abilities of the enemy, it does not say anything about him, it speaks about you.
                      10. 123 Offline 123
                        123 (123) 3 December 2019 12: 38
                        +2
                        No thanks, I'm not interested. Its influence on processes in the EU is scanty (in contrast to the post-Soviet space), and so he often says all sorts of things lately. Either the world economy will collapse at 80 bucks a barrel, then liberalism has outlived itself, then it itself has liberal views. Not young already.

                        If you think that he says all sorts of things, and then select individual statements and build theories on their basis, this speaks of a biased opinion and that you simply attract arguments in support of your fantastic version. Here we read, here we do not read, here we wrap the fish. lol

                        Didn't you say that the war began because of an attack on our peacekeepers? And then for some reason they began to talk about the shelling of the Americans and say that, like, war is optional.

                        You are right, the war began due to an attack on peacekeepers and South Ossetia, a full-scale war, and we did not start it. Not every incident involving the death of military personnel escalates into war.

                        Well, for example, the International Commission could not determine who first opened fire on each other, peacekeepers or Georgian security forces. Both sides claim that the opposite side was the first to open fire, but both sides were more than once caught in a lie and they lacked confidence.

                        In my opinion, you have surpassed the most inveterate propagandists. belay

                        The report on the topic of Georgia was presented by the Bulgarian MEP Evgeny Kirillov. The deputies of the European Parliament approved the text, which in principle coincides with the text of the EU Commission on the war in South Ossetia. According to the document of the EU commission, Georgia unleashed the war in August 2008, but Russia provoked it, and the response of the Russian armed forces was disproportionate.

                        This is by no means from the pro-Russian "Echo of the Caucasus" (Radio Liberty). Even they cannot deny that Georgia started the war, and do not try to find excuses for them. In the future, I will simply not return to this issue, you can not write.

                        You do not recall when justifying the operation, how many dead Ossetians were we talking about? And how much was in reality?

                        The usual counter-propaganda, remember that at that time they were playing on Western channels, how they lied about "aggressive Russia attacking a small, defenseless and peaceful Georgia." I no longer see any point in discussing this issue.

                        It seems to me you are trying to merge. And not very technical. As a lawyer, you cannot but notice that the actions of the Russian Federation in Crimea fall under paragraphs a and e of article 3 of resolution 3314, by the way, the UN General Assembly, and actions in the Donbass under paragraph g of the same article.
                        It is much more interesting to compare Ossetia and Chechnya. For some reason I do not consider either aggression, but for some reason you consider the actions of Georgia in Ossetia as aggression, but as I understand it, there is no Russian action in Chechnya. But the situations are similar. Or you have double standards.

                        You got hold of this resolution, honestly. This matter is the responsibility of the Security Council, see Article 39 of the Charter of the United Nations. By analogy, no one is interested in decisions of an arbitration court in a criminal case. I am glad that representatives of 67 countries share your point of view and no more. Perhaps the "world plumbers congress" shares it, what follows? Gen. solutions Assemblies are advisory in nature. They said we took note. That's all.

                        You may not have noticed, but it was precisely the question of the legality of this ban that became the subject of litigation in the UN court.

                        Do not quote the court decision?

                        You are not a stupid person, you all perfectly understood. Sami led an interview with Azarov, where he says that the leaders of the Maidan went to the US Embassy as a job. The cookies were handed out again. On this basis, you are trying to accuse the United States of organizing the Maidan. When Zhirinovsky goes to the US Embassy and eats cookies there, this does not bother you. Why such discrimination.

                        Zhirinovsky eats "cookies" and does not suit the coups, but here the financing of the opposition with the subsequent leadership of the coup. Direct interference in the internal affairs of the country. That's all discrimination.

                        Where did I say that? Yes, the confrontation ended, at least during the Cold War. If you look at the history, then we have relations with the United States, like a roller coaster, then friends, then enemies, it is not clear what, as of now. And today's anti-Americanism will pass.

                        Are you sure the confrontation is over? Read 2011 Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions (CAATSA). And this is not anti-Americanism, let them not poke their nose into our affairs and everything will be fine.

                        I only hope that they were not given only because "we are kind, we are so arranged." Otherwise, you will start to doubt the mental abilities of our leaders. I'm sure it was a payment for loyalty.

                        Let's say that trading preferences are a loyalty fee, this is a common occurrence. Financing the opposition to change power, all the more illegal, is a somewhat different phenomenon.

                        If at all, then the elites of the United States have two main goals, messianic and strategic. Messianic consists of the idea that liberal democracy is the best form of society (with which one can agree) and attempts to impose this form of society in the whole world (which raises questions both in methods and in the readiness of these societies for such transformations).

                        That is, they instill liberalism, like the Comintern communism, and you don’t understand why this causes rejection and response, leads to increased tension? The United States has become the Comintern. And with the fact that liberalism is the best idea of ​​the world’s organization, one can agree, but it may not. And there is nothing to impose it.

                        Strategic in maintaining for the United States economic, political, technological and military leadership. In Ukraine, for the United States, there is nothing that can affect their strategic position; messianism remains.

                        So there is nothing in Ukraine? Who do you think are the strategic opponents of the United States? And does not the rapprochement of Ukraine with Russia and China (before the coup, huge investments were planned, hence increased influence) to their strengthening, which runs counter to strategic interests? So the conclusion about missionaries is extremely naive. And what this "missionary" leads to, you have the opportunity to consider in all the details.

                        Well, of course, you said that the US wants to "tear" Ukraine from the Russian Federation. It is logical to assume that the Russian Federation should somehow resist such attempts. And what is the RF doing? Rejects Crimea and helps the separatists of Donbass. And I ask, should these actions bind Ukraine back? Or is the Russian leadership helping the Americans?

                        To whom he rejects, to whom he attaches. These actions do not bind Ukraine, they do not allow the Americans to finally crush it and gain a foothold. The situation is unstable and everything can be reversed. The logic of strategic confrontation fits perfectly.

                        The law - one family, one child - was repealed recently. Societies do not change instantly. 80 years have passed since the time of the great terror, they have 50.

                        Interesting you reason. laughing And how much do you think it takes time? 75 years ago, people were burned in stoves in Germany, 155 years ago it was possible to buy a slave in the United States, in the state of Mississippi, the abolition of slavery was fixed in the 2013th year. Maybe they describe the horrors of totalitarianism in all colors?
                      11. Ravshan Offline Ravshan
                        Ravshan (Jamsut) 3 December 2019 17: 57
                        -2
                        Quote: 123
                        155 years ago in the United States you could buy a slave,

                        Ha!
                        Back in 1991 (28 years ago) any country (more often it was African, although, periodically, some Asian countries) could buy a "Soviet specialist" in the USSR. The same slave trade, only in profile.
                      12. 123 Offline 123
                        123 (123) 3 December 2019 18: 27
                        +1
                        Ravshan (Jamshut) Go ... drink the pills.
                  2. 123 Offline 123
                    123 (123) 3 December 2019 12: 39
                    +2
                    Read about our healthcare, especially in the provinces. All the difference in this regard between the Russian Federation and Ukraine is only that the Russian Federation is richer (oil and gas to the West sells for bucks) and can allocate more money for this. Do you think the Donbass is worse than it was in Chechnya?

                    Compare our provincial healthcare with the capital in Ukraine, you can with Belarus or Cuba, there is no oil and gas expected. In Ukraine, the policy is not in the interests of the population, people are not interested in them.

                    If politician Putin publishes publicly (at the NATO summit) such forecasts, being sure that this is just a forecast, he does not correspond to his position.

                    On the basis of what is the conclusion about the belief that this is just a forecast and will remain with them? He has complete information about the real state of affairs and can analyze the situation and draw the appropriate conclusions. We will wait and see how true he is. But you still keep the links, How the European Union will begin to crumble, you will refer to it and say - you see, this is what Putin arranged laughing

                    Well, of course, your words are against the words of Lukashenko ... Your words are, of course, more convincing.

                    Why mine? Are we coming back in a circle? Let me remind you that Lukashenko spoke decently to all occasions, utterances are directly opposite. And to cite some as an example and not pay attention to others, this is a biased attitude.

                    Who is this Lukashenko in general?

                    A politician of the "Putin" era. laughing

                    PS If you concede in the discussion, do not go over to the personality of the opponent, lose with dignity. When you begin to go through the mental abilities of the enemy, it does not say anything about him, it speaks about you.

                    Sorry if I offended you. hi See you in a week?
                  3. plabu Offline plabu
                    plabu 3 December 2019 14: 12
                    +1
                    Quote: Oleg Rambover
                    ... Belarus is less than 500 km from Moscow, Mongolia and Canada a little further. If after a change of power in Belarus it rushes to NATO and at the same time the Russian authorities need, for internal political reasons, a small victorious war (as was the case with Ukraine), then why not ...

                    Interestingly, you determine the distance in order to attack - if you assume this option, you definitely need to move out of Moscow, well, as you suggested?

                    Quote: Oleg Rambover
                    ... It seems to me that you are trying to merge. And not very technical. As a lawyer, you cannot help but notice that the actions of the Russian Federation in Crimea fall under clause a and e of article 3 of resolution 3314 by the way of the UNGA, and actions in the Donbass under clause g of the same article.
                    It is much more interesting to compare Ossetia and Chechnya. For some reason I do not consider either aggression, but for some reason you consider the actions of Georgia in Ossetia as aggression, but as I understand it, there is no Russian action in Chechnya. But the situations are similar. Or do you have double standards ...

                    First, about the points of the resolution - I must disappoint you, from the point of view of a lawyer, the points listed by you have nothing to do with the situations that you brought up, the rest was written to you by colleague 123.
                    Further, the situations in South Ossetia and Chechnya are also NOT similar - at least because in one of the situations you cited, quite legitimate peacekeeping forces were present, in compliance with almost all formalities, in the other situation there was nothing similar. And what is the similarity?
                    Moreover, the attack was carried out including on these very peacekeepers, which can be discussed further about the “similarity” ...

                    Quote: Oleg Rambover
                    ... You are not a stupid person, you all perfectly understood. Sami led an interview with Azarov, where he says that the leaders of the Maidan went to the US Embassy as a job. The cookies were handed out again. On this basis, you are trying to accuse the United States of organizing the Maidan. When Zhirinovsky goes to the US Embassy and eats cookies there, this does not bother you. Why such discrimination ...

                    What discrimination are you talking about? Who is Zhirinovsky? What is his OFFICIAL STATUS? And when and where was he caught trying to make a coup, or rebellion? bully
                    And who are or are some time ago those same leaders of the Maidan?

                    Quote: Oleg Rambover
                    ... The USA wants to "tear" Ukraine away from the Russian Federation. It is logical to assume that the Russian Federation should somehow resist such attempts. And what is the RF doing? Rejects the Crimea and and helps the separatists of Donbass. And I ask, should these actions bind Ukraine back? Or does the Russian leadership help the Americans? ... Read about our healthcare, especially in the provinces. All the difference in this regard between the Russian Federation and Ukraine is only that the Russian Federation is richer (it sells oil and gas to the West for dollars) and can allocate more money for this. Do you think that Donbass is worse than it was in Chechnya? ...

                    Well, “rejects Crimea” - this is your point of view, I have a different one, “helps separatists” - helps - yes, helps, but to whom? Obviously NOT "separatists", as you call them here - a completely different name or definition is applicable here, but later ...
                    And as for the Crimea - you wrote about health care, what it is, well then about health care - I have one of my relatives, let's call it that, for some time I worked for one very sickly and non-poor organization, which has an international status, and so they visited various sites of the very same health care, both in our country and in Ukraine, and not only, including in the Crimea, then the Ukrainian Crimea, and it was after the Crimea, she was in a very extinct state, I asked, she almost growled, then, getting a bottle of brandy, poured yourself and me, and t only then it seemed to break through, albeit without tears, but I expressed it before so very few times - it was about what kind of junk is in that very Crimea and, almost the most important thing, no one there to change and repair it GATHERED - before 2014, oh, how much time was still left, and after that there will still be talk about the fact that Russia “captured” Crimea ???
                    It's called in a completely different way - as soon as possible Crimea itself fled from Ukraine...
                    And I read somewhere about voting “at gunpoint”, well, well, they sent me a video about HOW people went to vote in March 2014, so you can not even try to convince me of the capture of Crimea ...
                    And as for Ukraine, everything is much more complicated - who in the distant year dreamed of separating from Moscow and living? That separated and let them live - while themselves ... hi
          2. 123 Offline 123
            123 (123) 21 November 2019 19: 21
            0
            A little addition. Then an article appeared on the site -

            Why Putin talked about the impending collapse of the European Union

            Read, come in handy. Then you will refer and say what Brexit Putin arranged. laughing
          3. 123 Offline 123
            123 (123) 3 December 2019 12: 36
            +2
            Belarus is less than 500 km from Moscow, Mongolia and Canada are somewhat further. If after a change of power in Belarus it rushes to NATO and at the same time the Russian authorities need, for internal political reasons, a small victorious war (as was the case with Ukraine), then why not.

            You have autumn weird logic and too much IF. If something happens and it will be needed ... If your grandmother grows up, you know what, then she will turn into yourself you know whom. lol And based on these assumptions, are you frightening here with the war with Belarus? In my opinion, your imagination just happened.
            Let us examine this question in more detail so as not to return to it in the future, and try to reason sensibly.

            If after the change of power of Belarus she rushes to NATO

            Change of power, well, changed, so what? Look at the poll data in Belarus, what they think about joining NATO. There are simply no real prerequisites for joining. The new government, by definition, cannot be pro-NATO. Why do they need NATO? Finland lives fine without NATO, why should it be different with Belarus? Only if by the change of power you mean a coup, as in Ukraine, and it is being done with the aim of bringing the military infrastructure to our borders. In this case, both the aggravation of the situation and the use of military force are possible. But to assert that the "bloodthirsty Kremlin" will be to blame in this case is fundamentally wrong. Try to imagine the situation, you have a fighting dog and you decided to settle it closer to the playground, you were warned not to do this, you drag it there anyway. Guess what will happen to your dog? And then declare - you see, I told you that he does not like animals! am Here in this regard, you argue. repeat No need to drag NATO to our borders and everything will be fine. (it turned out long, forced to break into pieces).
          4. Oleg Rambover Offline Oleg Rambover
            Oleg Rambover (Oleg Rambover) 7 December 2019 10: 32
            0
            Quote: 123
            Change of power, well, changed, so what? Look at the polls in Belarus, what they think about joining NATO. There are simply no real prerequisites for entry.

            Something I do not understand your claims. Any event occurs under certain conditions. The likelihood of using force in Belarus is low, but not zero. In Ukraine, too, was low.
            Polls, referenda are such a thing ... Especially in authoritarian regimes. Out in the Crimea (as in the Donbass), they first voted for the preservation of the union, then for the independence of Ukraine, then for joining Russia. The mood of citizens is changeable. After the Crimea and in Finland, they started talking about joining NATO.

            Quote: 123
            Only if under the change of power you mean a coup, as in Ukraine, and it is being done with the aim of pulling the military infrastructure to our borders.

            I think you have paranoia. In any event in the world you see the hand of the State Department. And about NATO .... Entry into the bloc is purely voluntary, I have never heard that someone got there under duress. This is not NATO approaching our borders; these are our neighbors, at the first opportunity, trying to screw it there. Well, you see, you have already agreed that the use of force against Belarus is possible.
            You again broke and primitivize with the help of dogs.
            It is interesting, but on the basis of what do you deprive the right to decide for yourself whether or not to join our neighbors?

            Quote: 123
            If you think that he says all sorts of things, and then choose individual statements and ...

            Let’s say, philosophizing our guarantor is uninteresting (for example, his discussion of liberalism speaks of his ignorance of the issue), his forecasts usually do not come true, but as an authoritarian leader, he tries to keep his word, promised to remove the landfill, and removed it. He promised to recognize Abkhazia, he recognized.

            Quote: 123
            This is by no means from the pro-Russian "Echo of the Caucasus" (Radio Liberty). Even they cannot deny that Georgia started the war, and do not try to find excuses for them.

            Have I denied somewhere that Georgia started the war? You are confusing something again.

            Quote: 123
            You got it with this resolution, honestly. This issue is the responsibility of the Security Council, see article 39 of the Charter of the United Nations.

            I got it? !!! belay You started pouring the same quotes with the definition of aggression from this resolution and brought a link to it. Ahhh .... I understand, you again mixed up, meaning resolution # 3314 of 74 with the definition of aggression (you read it there), and you thought about the 18th resolution about Crimea.
            So still, the United States can be an aggressor?
            Do you agree that Russia's actions in Crimea fall under paragraph a and e of your definition, and in the Donbass, paragraph g? And how do Russia's actions in Chechnya differ from the actions of Georgia in Ossetia, why is aggression in one place and not in another?

            Quote: 123
            Do not quote the court decision?

            So the trial is just beginning. And you do not quote the UN Security Council resolution recognizing Georgia as an aggressor?

            Quote: 123
            Zhirinovsky eats "cookies" and does not suit the coups, but here the financing of the opposition with the subsequent leadership of the coup. Direct interference in the internal affairs of the country. That's all discrimination.

            Wouldn't it be difficult for you to cite any evidence of American funding of the Maidan? It seems like other than, "they went to the embassy," and there are no arguments. Or I'm wrong?

            Quote: 123
            Are you sure the confrontation is over? Read 2011 Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions (CAATSA). And this is not anti-Americanism, let them not poke their nose into our affairs and everything will be fine.

            The confrontation during the Cold War certainly ended. Then there was a struggle between different systems, the USSR promoted its ideology, the elites were in no way connected with the West, the economy of the USSR was quite isolated and was the second in the world. None of this is now in sight. And the sanctions against some cooks, does it bother you much?

            Quote: 123
            Let's say that trading preferences are a loyalty fee, this is a common occurrence. Financing the opposition to change power, all the more illegal, is a somewhat different phenomenon.



            Quote: 123
            That is, they instill liberalism, like the Comintern communism, and you don’t understand why this causes rejection and response, leads to increased tension? The United States has become the Comintern. And with the fact that liberalism is the best idea of ​​the world’s organization, one can agree, but it may not. And there is nothing to impose it.

            You do not read me carefully, I wrote, it raises questions. In all fairness, liberal ideas are mostly promoted through soft power. I agree that countries themselves should come to this. Moreover, I am sure that it is impossible to impose liberal democracy from outside (like Maidan). Can you suggest anything better than a liberal democracy?

            Quote: 123
            So there is nothing in Ukraine? And who, in your opinion, are strategic opponents of the USA?

            I would not say that opponents are more likely competitors. This, of course, is the EU and China. Russia is only militarily comparable with the largest players, but no one is going to fight. Ukraine is a rather poor country, and the economic benefits of cooperating with it are very small. In general, Russia, like a crumbling elephant, Russia will not notice it too much, and given Medvedev’s words about preferences, it may even be more profitable. The US’s global goal with respect to Russia is to prevent its alliance with Germany in recent years.

            Quote: 123
            To whom he rejects, to whom he attaches. These actions do not bind Ukraine, they do not allow the Americans to finally crush it and gain a foothold. The situation is unstable and everything can be reversed. The logic of strategic confrontation fits perfectly.

            Your logic is strange. So, after all, did the USA win in Ukraine? He wanted to tear away Ukraine and they succeeded? What does it mean to completely bend? How does the exclusion of Crimea and the war in the Donbass prevent this? Russia is now for many years, and most likely decades - the enemy of Ukraine.

            Quote: 123
            Interesting you reason. And how much do you think it takes time?

            Will it be a revelation for you that serfdom or the Tatar-Mongol invasion still affects our lives? Or slavery to today's America?

            Quote: 123
            Compare our provincial healthcare with the capital in Ukraine.

            I don’t know how it is in Ukraine, but do you go to our clinics? I went about a year and a half ago, the line for ultrasound is half a year. Medical expenses in Ukraine are 8% of GDP, Russia ranks 91th between Sudan and Nigeria with 7% of GDP. Theft is about the same level. I understand that I really want to be better than Ukrainians, but this is not so.

            Quote: 123
            Let me remind you that Lukashenko spoke decently to all occasions, utterances are directly opposite. And to cite some as an example and not pay attention to others, this is a biased attitude.

            Can you quote his statement, where he promises to meet the Russian world with open arms?
          5. 123 Offline 123
            123 (123) 7 December 2019 21: 39
            +2
            The confrontation during the Cold War certainly ended. Then there was a struggle between different systems, the USSR promoted its ideology, the elites were in no way connected with the West, the economy of the USSR was quite isolated and was the second in the world. None of this is now in sight. And the sanctions against some cooks, does it bother you much?

            Have you read the law? If you are at a loss, try looking at the link on the website of the American Embassy:

            https://ru.usembassy.gov/ru/statement-president-donald-j-trump-signing-countering-americas-adversaries-sanctions-act-ru/

            Further considerations about elite systems, the size of the economy and cooks are more suitable for an infantile teenager. We are enshrined as opponents at the legislative level, the ban on the sale of oil equipment and components for the space industry is not used by cooks. With such reasoning in the magazine "Murzilka", please. The proof is over, yes, creative, well, what is the question, this is the answer. Catch -



            Only if the discussion continues in the same vein, is it time to complete this futile business. You yourself know that long comments do not miss, much is deleted.

            You read me inattentively, but I wrote, raises questions. In all fairness, liberal ideas are mainly promoted through soft power. I agree that the countries themselves have to come to this. Moreover, I am sure that it is impossible to impose liberal democracy from outside (like Maidan). Can you suggest anything better than a liberal democracy?

            C'mon, when there is not enough soft, the force goes into hard. laughing And why are you sure that this is the best?

            I would not say that the opponents are more likely competitors. This, of course, is the EU and China. Russia is only militarily comparable with the largest players, but no one is going to fight. Ukraine is a rather poor country, and the economic benefits of cooperating with it are very small. In general, Russia, like a crumbling elephant, Russia will not notice it too much, and given Medvedev’s words about preferences, it may even be more profitable. The US’s global goal with respect to Russia is to prevent its alliance with Germany in recent years.

            As for the opponents, see above, I will not spread porridge on the table. Unless, of course, teach how you can safely leave a comment on page 3.

            Your logic is strange. So, after all, did the USA win in Ukraine? He wanted to tear away Ukraine and they succeeded? What does it mean to completely bend? How does the exclusion of Crimea and the war in the Donbass prevent this? Russia is now for many years, and most likely decades - the enemy of Ukraine.

            With what a fright: The fight is on. The US situation in Ukraine is precarious, everything can turn back and very quickly. You ask questions that require long answers, the site format does not imply this. Want to detail, break into parts, for example: global confrontation. Ukraine, Georgia, etc.

            Will it be a revelation for you that serfdom or the Tatar-Mongol invasion still affects our lives? Or slavery to today's America?

            So I ask how much? Why, in your opinion, nothing has changed in China, but in Germany everything is different?

            I don’t know how it is in Ukraine, but do you go to our clinics? I went about a year and a half ago, the line for ultrasound is half a year. Theft is about the same level. I understand that I really want to be better than Ukrainians, but this is not so.

            I take a ticket to the clinic on the Internet, I don’t have to stand in line.

            Medical expenses in Ukraine are 8% of GDP, Russia ranks 91st between Sudan and Nigeria with 7% of GDP

            The argument is just killer laughing Ukraine’s budget is less than Moscow’s, percentage comparison is incorrect. Lithuania spends more on defense than Germany, as a percentage. Try to go to the Nigerian clinic, without waiting in line, I'm sure you will like it. lol

            Can you quote his statement, where he promises to meet the Russian world with open arms?

            Then first with you his statement about open arms and European values, including sexual minorities, is desirable. smile
          6. Oleg Rambover Offline Oleg Rambover
            Oleg Rambover (Oleg Rambover) 25 December 2019 13: 34
            -1
            Quote: 123
            Have you read the law? If you are at a loss, try looking at the link

            Hmm .. and what did you see in this law? Undoubtedly, Vladimir Vladimirovich has something to be proud of, that Russia is now on the same list with North Korea and Iran, a worthy result for 20 years of rule. Do you really think that the main rivals of the USA are North Korea and Iran?
            The confrontation between the USA and the USSR, it was a confrontation of ideas. The winner got the whole world. What ideas can Russia oppose to the idea of ​​liberal democracy and capitalism? Oligarchic monopoly capitalism? So these developed countries have become ill for a hundred years. What else? I can't wait to hear the reasoning of not a boy, but a husband. I hope this is not something like that in the West Russophobia is absorbed by mother’s milk, only dreaming of taking away our natural resources? Then Murzilka is better.
            And yes, specifically this cook law.

            Quote: 123
            C'mon, when there is not enough soft, the force goes into hard. And why are you sure that this is the best?

            Still, hard power is more about strategy.
            You cannot offer anything better.

            Democracy is the worst form of government, except for everyone else.

            I am ready to listen to the arguments not of the boy, but of my husband about the best form of state structure.

            Quote: 123
            With what a fright: The fight is on. The US situation in Ukraine is precarious, everything can turn back and very quickly.

            You yourself said that the United States aimed to “tear” it from the Russian Federation in Ukraine. I don’t know what the situation of the USA is in Ukraine, but the situation of the Russian Federation on non-fallow is quite certain. You might have heard of him recently in Paris. And this situation is quite stable and everything can turn only very, very, very slow. And I asked, the policy of the Russian Federation for the past 6 years, especially in '14, was aimed at opposing the “separation” of Ukraine, or did our rulers play along with the USA?

            Quote: 123
            So I ask how much? Why, in your opinion, nothing has changed in China, but in Germany everything is different?

            Well, it's like circles on the water, the farther, the less, but they become imperceptible very soon. The difference between Germany and China in their history, in Germany there was a strong influence of humanism of enlightenment, and therefore the outbreak of violence of the 20th century had less impact than in China.

            Quote: 123
            I take a ticket to the clinic on the Internet, I don’t have to stand in line.

            Me too, but an ultrasound in six months. In the children's clinic for a gastroenterologist, the turn is 3 months.

            Quote: 123
            The argument is simply murderous, Ukraine’s budget is less than Moscow’s, percentage comparison is incorrect.

            You read inattentively again, I wrote that "the whole difference in this regard between the Russian Federation and Ukraine is only that the Russian Federation is richer (oil and gas is sold to the West for bucks) and can allocate more money for this." It is just more correct to compare percentages, how much of the possible country allocates for health care. Do you think it turns out that the presence of oil makes Russians more moral and humane? New York's GDP is comparable to Russia's GDP, so what? By your logic, it turns out that they value life the most in the USA, where they spend an order of magnitude more money compared to the Russian Federation (Ukraine 6,9% 210 $, RF 6,4% 493 $, US 6,9% $ 7 285 per person )

            Quote: 123
            Then first with you his statement about open arms and European values, including sexual minorities, is desirable.

            Why is that? I didn’t say that you can find Lukashenko’s statement on any topic directly opposite, so I ask for a quote in confirmation of your words, maybe about European values.
        2. 123 Offline 123
          123 (123) 7 December 2019 21: 40
          +2
          I got it? !!! You started pouring the same quotes with the definition of aggression from this resolution and brought a link to it. Ahhh .... I understand, you again mixed up, meaning resolution # 3314 of 74 with the definition of aggression (you read it there), and you thought about the 18th resolution about Crimea.

          I just explained to you that this issue is within the competence of the Security Council, General Assembly resolutions and simply reflect the views of 67 countries on this issue.

          So still, the United States can be an aggressor?

          Unfortunately, I can’t understand the meaning of this sentence. A lot of time has passed, and my comment has been decently edited.

          Do you agree that Russia's actions in Crimea fall under paragraph a and e of your definition, and in the Donbass, paragraph g?

          If you like, let's try to look at events from a legal point of view. Firstly, it is not for us to decide, we are not a Soviet without. The UN, secondly, on the point: a) what invasion of Crimea do you mean? The troops were there legally. Things like invasion usually generate resistance. Refresh your memory of the number of Ukrainian security forces in Crimea and the resistance they put up, not to mention civilians. It seems that they were not at all opposed, besides, on average, about 70-80% changed their shoulder straps to Russian ones. A great bloodshed was averted, the legitimate elected parliament of Crimea acted. Has the current president of Ukraine expressed anything about this? I don’t remember something, can you tell me? This is a little like an occupation, if you don't believe it, take a ride to the Crimea, ask people. As for point e), then decide whether the invasion or they were already there, both points cannot be considered at the same time. Did the army break the agreement? The legitimate authorities did not think so (see paragraph above). Regarding point g) If you provide facts confirming "the sending by the state or on behalf of the state of armed bands, groups, irregular forces or mercenaries" to Donbass, I will be glad to return to the discussion of this topic. There is no need to mention the presence of volunteers, you do not consider the participation of Ukrainian nationalists in the Chechen war as Ukraine's aggression against Russia? Also, do not consider the actions of units such as the MTR and their Western counterparts. A separate topic.

          And how do Russia's actions in Chechnya differ from the actions of Georgia in Ossetia, why is aggression in one place and not in another?

          Firstly, it is worth distinguishing between the 1st and 2nd "Chechen companies". As for the first, the actions of the unforgettable Boris Nikolayevich are really strange, on the one hand, "take as much sovereignty as you want," and on the other, when they took as much, they wanted to send an army. As for the second company, the Khasavyurt agreements were signed. At that time, Ichkeria was already actually an independent state. The war began not with an "attack by hordes of Russian occupiers" (which could rightly be regarded as aggression), but with the invasion of Dagestan by "nice and kind" bearded uncles with the participation of such "representatives of the indigenous population" of Chechnya as Khat-Tab. You yourself know how the war ended. As for the conflicts in Georgia, initially Russia sided with Tbilisi, remember how our marines took out Gamsakhurdia on ships. After the situation "settled down", in fact, Abkhazia and South Ossetia lived separately. Peace was guaranteed by our peacekeepers. What happened next, you know.

          So the trial is just beginning. And you do not quote the UN Security Council resolution recognizing Georgia as an aggressor?

          That's when it’s over, then we’ll discuss it. I won’t bring a resolution; it wasn’t. These are our value judgments, yours and mine, no more laughing If you mean checks, then no. Investing 5 billion in "developing democracy" doesn't impress you? Watch these videos and try to add a logical series.





          Without the Americans, it would have looked a little different.

        3. Oleg Rambover Offline Oleg Rambover
          Oleg Rambover (Oleg Rambover) 25 December 2019 15: 32
          -1
          Quote: 123
          I just explained to you that this issue is within the competence of the Security Council, General Assembly resolutions and simply reflect the views of 67 countries on this issue.

          Once again, you quoted me with a definition of aggression from a UN GA resolution, and what do 67 countries have to do with it?
          And by the way, yes, if it’s

          ... just the opinion of 67 countries on this issue

          - then why in the Crimea there is not a single branch of Sberbank or Rosneft's gas station, and the delivery of a turbine turns into a special operation?

          Quote: 123
          Unfortunately, I can’t understand the meaning of this sentence. A lot of time has passed, and my comment has been decently edited.

          We understand that the UN Security Council will never be able to adopt a resolution condemning the United States for aggression, and I ask if the United States can be an aggressor.

          Quote: 123
          If you like, let's try to look at events from a legal point of view. Firstly, it is not for us to decide, we are not a Soviet without. The UN, secondly, on the point: a) what invasion of Crimea do you mean? The troops were there legally. Things like invasion usually generate resistance. Refresh your memory of the number of Ukrainian security forces in Crimea and the resistance they put up, not to mention civilians. It seems that they were not at all opposed, besides, on average, about 70-80% changed their shoulder straps to Russian ones. A great bloodshed was averted, the legitimate elected parliament of Crimea acted. Has the current president of Ukraine expressed anything about this? I don’t remember something, can you tell me? This is a little like an occupation, if you don't believe it, take a ride to the Crimea, ask people. As for point e), then decide whether the invasion or they were already there, both points cannot be considered at the same time. Did the army break the agreement? The legitimate authorities did not think so (see paragraph above). Regarding point g) If you provide facts confirming "the sending by the state or on behalf of the state of armed bands, groups, irregular forces or mercenaries" to Donbass, I will be glad to return to the discussion of this topic. There is no need to mention the presence of volunteers, you do not consider the participation of Ukrainian nationalists in the Chechen war as Ukraine's aggression against Russia? Also, do not consider the actions of units such as the MTR and their Western counterparts. A separate topic.

          Article 1
          Aggression is the use of armed force by a state against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of another state, or in any other way incompatible with the Charter of the United Nations, as established in this definition.

          Armed forces used? Used. Against territorial integrity? Yes again. Subject to Article 1

          a) the invasion or attack of the armed forces of a state on the territory of another state or any military occupation, no matter how temporary it may be, resulting from such an invasion or attack, or any annexation using force of the territory of another state or part of it;

          An attack is not an invasion. Point a) again, yes.
          Regarding resistance, 70% 80% are against, do not mind what the president said, the opinions of residents, etc. these are your fantasies, the definition of aggression is not a word about this.
          Especially for people like you wiseacres there is a special item.

          Article 5
          1. No considerations of any nature, whether political, economic, military or otherwise, can justify aggression.

          Point e) Who told you, you can not consider both points at the same time? Regarding who believes that, again, see article 5 point 1. And at the same time read the definition of legitimacy.
          Point g) You understand that the Donbass would not have survived without external support. Everyone understands this, if someone makes a fool of himself that I am not me and my horse is not mine, this does not mean that this convinced anyone.

          Quote: 123
          Firstly, it is worth distinguishing between the 1st and 2nd "Chechen companies". As for the first, the actions of the unforgettable Boris Nikolayevich are really strange, on the one hand, "take as much sovereignty as you want," and on the other, when they took so much, they wanted to send an army.

          That is, the first was aggression, and the second not?
          As far as I remember, Maskhadov claimed that, so to speak, official Grozny was not related to the events in Dagestan. Can you provide evidence of the participation of the Chechen authorities in these events?
          Well, OK. And actions against the Russian Federation against ISIS, banned in the Russian Federation, is aggression?

          Quote: 123
          That's when it's over, then we'll discuss. I will not give a resolution, it was not. These are our value judgments, yours and mine, nothing more. If you mean checks, then no. Investing 5 billion in "developing democracy" doesn't impress you? Watch these videos and try to add a logical series.

          If you can’t bring a resolution, then in your opinion, Georgia cannot be an aggressor. This is just your opinion. But you claimed that the Russian authorities figured out that the aggression happened, and the Russian authorities claimed that Georgia committed aggression. But this is just an opinion, which, in your opinion, does not affect anything. Something somehow complicated everything is with you.
          Regarding money for Maidan, as I understand it, is it just your fantasies, conspiracy theories, based on nothing? It is necessary to have a very stormy imagination in order to take this video as proof of the paid-up Maidan.
      2. 123 Offline 123
        123 (123) 7 December 2019 21: 41
        +2
        Something I do not understand your claims. Any event occurs under certain conditions. The likelihood of using force in Belarus is low, but not zero. In Ukraine, too, was low.

        The likelihood of the use of force in Belarus is no different from other countries. Why do you think it increased in Ukraine? After all, you yourself say, "under certain conditions."

        Polls, referenda are such a thing ... Especially in authoritarian regimes. Out in the Crimea (as in the Donbass), they first voted for the preservation of the union, then for the independence of Ukraine, then for joining Russia.

        Not expected belay Do you think that all years of independence of Ukraine were ruled by an authoritarian regime? good

        The mood of citizens is changeable. After the Crimea and in Finland, they started talking about joining NATO.

        Yes, it is being pulled heavily by the ears of NATO, as, indeed, Macedonia. Does Macedonia also fear our invasion?

        I think you have paranoia. In any event in the world you see the hand of the State Department.

        No more than you, everywhere bloody tentacles of the Kremlin seem laughing

        Joining the bloc is purely voluntary, I have never heard that someone got there under duress.

        That's right, voluntary, and you don’t need to campaign for him like that. If a country wants to join the EU, then it needs to join NATO. Is this not coercion?

        This is not NATO approaching our borders; these are our neighbors, at the first opportunity, trying to screw it there.

        But our borders are moving away and NATO is not approaching?

        Well, you see, you have already agreed that the use of force against Belarus is possible.

        Purely hypothetically it is possible to occupy Mars.

        It is interesting, but on the basis of what do you deprive the right to decide for yourself whether or not to join our neighbors?

        Firstly, it’s up to you to decide whether you need to put pressure on them, but there is pressure, you can call it soft power. Secondly, there are objective things, the United States, for example, is not happy with our military presence in Venezuela or Cuba and they are actively opposing this, why do you expect a different reaction from Russia? What to do with their right? Not to consider it or to consider nonexistent is simply silly.

        Let’s say, philosophizing our guarantor is uninteresting (for example, his discussion of liberalism speaks of his ignorance of the issue), his forecasts usually do not come true, but as an authoritarian leader, he tries to keep his word, promised to remove the landfill, and removed it. He promised to recognize Abkhazia, he recognized.

        Very strange position recourse first take his "philosophizing", build on it the theory of the occupation of Belarus, and you are not interesting. request You already decide whether they are interesting or not, and here we think, we don’t read here, here we wrap the fish ...
        Can you give an example of failed forecasts?

        Have I denied somewhere that Georgia started the war? You are confusing something again.

        No, do not deny, but stubbornly ignore this "insignificant" fact. I dare to recall the statements on this issue:

        How everything turned out well. In April, Putin spoke about the problems of Georgian sovereignty, and in August of that year, Russian tanks were already under Tbilisi.
        I bring to the point that the GDP promised the territorial problems of Georgia and Ukraine if they attempted to join NATO and they received them.
        The same question to you. Our president promised problems to neighbors and these problems have come, but you ignore it

        It’s all the same, to talk about ours is incomprehensible as it turned out to be tanks in Berlin in 1945.
      3. Oleg Rambover Offline Oleg Rambover
        Oleg Rambover (Oleg Rambover) 25 December 2019 15: 34
        -1
        Quote: 123
        The likelihood of the use of force in Belarus is no different from other countries. Why do you think it increased in Ukraine? After all, you yourself say, "under certain conditions."

        Well, yes, under certain conditions. The likelihood of such conditions for Belarus is much higher than, for example, for Mongolia.

        Quote: 123
        Yes, it is being pulled heavily by the ears of NATO, as, indeed, Macedonia. Does Macedonia also fear our invasion?

        Who pulls Finland like? Macedonia without a clue, rather Serbia, although after Montenegro who knows.

        Quote: 123
        That's right, voluntary, and you don’t need to campaign for him like that. If a country wants to join the EU, then it needs to join NATO. Is this not coercion?

        Are they forcing it right? Who, for example? There are several non-NATO countries.

        Quote: 123
        Secondly, there are objective things, the United States, for example, is not happy with our military presence in Venezuela or Cuba and they are actively opposing this, why do you expect a different reaction from Russia? What to do with their right? Not to consider it or to consider nonexistent is simply silly.

        I agree that the United States is also sensitive to its military presence on the American continent. Like there, kill the dragon to become a dragon yourself. Do you dream that the Russian Federation would become a new dragon?

        Quote: 123
        It is a very strange position, at first you take his "philosophizing", build on it the theory of the occupation of Belarus, and on you they are not interesting. You will decide whether you are interesting or not, otherwise we consider here, we don't read here, here we wrap the fish ...
        Can you give an example of failed forecasts?

        You already decide the threat in Georgia, Crimea and the Donbass, it was a forecast, philosophizing or revelation.
        Well, for example -

    2. The comment was deleted.
  • Panting Offline Panting
    Panting (Vyacheslav) 27 October 2019 20: 54
    -1
    Well, for sure! The general ate something stale in the morning.
  • Sapsan136 Offline Sapsan136
    Sapsan136 (Sapsan136) 28 October 2019 13: 47
    +2
    Russia may attack the United States if the United States leaves no choice for it! No need to take Russia to the extreme and harm it, then Russia will not have to be afraid!
    1. Ravshan Offline Ravshan
      Ravshan (Jamsut) 3 December 2019 17: 54
      -2
      Quote: Sapsan136
      Russia may attack the United States if the United States leaves no choice for it! No need to take Russia to the extreme and harm it, then Russia will not have to be afraid!

      Complete nonsense.
      Russia will NEVER attack the United States (with any weapons). Just because its army and economy do not allow this.
      But the USA will NEVER attack Russia with the help of strategic nuclear forces, since the Russian elite in this case will have to live underground. And with such a development of events, this elite can decide on an answer with the help of its strategic nuclear forces.
      The USA will not be able to attack Russia with conventional weapons and with the hands of allies, because the Russian strategic nuclear forces will immediately fly to the allies.
      USA attack Russia itself theoretically conventional weapons can. But not only with the goal of destroying Russia and its elite (then the strategic nuclear forces will fly in), but with the goal of partially shrinking its territory.
      But this is fraught with losses, and the United States treats them very painfully.
      Therefore such an attack practically ruled out.
      Therefore, Sapsan136, relax and exhale. There will be no war with the USA. Fold your penknife and put it in a drawer.
      1. plabu Offline plabu
        plabu 3 December 2019 18: 33
        0
        Surely something in the woods died today, and massively. bully - Ravshan finally began to have good thoughts and some things from this post can even be agreed ... hi
      2. Sapsan136 Offline Sapsan136
        Sapsan136 (Sapsan136) 3 December 2019 22: 41
        +3
        I will exhale in the ruins of the Pentagon, Sterlikov, and whoever destroys it does not matter to me, because after what the USA has done, their enemies have millions, tens, hundreds of millions ... Your masters, Yankees, make enemies in packs without thinking about the consequences and this will kill them ... sooner or later ..
        1. Ravshan Offline Ravshan
          Ravshan (Jamsut) 3 December 2019 23: 42
          -5
          Quote: Sapsan136
          I will exhale on the ruins of the Pentagon

          I'm just amazed at your bestial hatred.
          I am aware that Soviet citizens are difficult to call friendly and pleasant people.
          But even against their background you are unique. You rarely encounter such cave hatred. And certainly its presence is a sign of mental illness.

          Quote: Sapsan136
          and that will ruin them ... sooner or later ..

          Think about yourself. What will kill you. Moreover, early.
          1. Sapsan136 Offline Sapsan136
            Sapsan136 (Sapsan136) 5 December 2019 15: 59
            +2
            Now you seem to begin to understand who you are talking to, and it seems you are a little scared .... You don’t even know how many people like me and what we are ready for ... The Yankees by the hands of Chubais robbed our families , our country, and we will not forget it and we will not forgive it ... Everything has its own time ... we will reckon ...
            1. Ravshan Offline Ravshan
              Ravshan (Jamsut) 9 December 2019 19: 28
              -4
              Quote: Sapsan136
              By the hands of the Chubais, the Yankees robbed our families, our country,

              You have mixed up the spoilers.
              By that time you were all beggars, like church rats.
              You were robbed before, the Bolsheviks.

              Quote: Sapsan136
              and we won’t forget and forgive them ...

              This is because your head is empty (cabbage has grown).
              Alas, of course, but judging by your statements, this is indeed so.
              1. Sapsan136 Offline Sapsan136
                Sapsan136 (Sapsan136) 9 December 2019 19: 37
                +4
                Stop lying, you stole billions of uranium from Russia.
                1. Ravshan Offline Ravshan
                  Ravshan (Jamsut) 9 December 2019 19: 39
                  -3
                  Quote: Sapsan136
                  you stole billions of uranium from Russia

                  I didn’t steal anything from Russia. Remember this well.
                  1. The comment was deleted.
                    1. The comment was deleted.
                      1. The comment was deleted.
                      2. Ravshan Offline Ravshan
                        Ravshan (Jamsut) 9 December 2019 19: 54
                        -5
                        Quote: Sapsan136
                        Banderovets

                        Why "Bandera's"?
                        Bandera in the world, for many decades, as a trace of a cold.
                        And you, like the crazy quixote, are fighting with windmills.
                      3. Sapsan136 Offline Sapsan136
                        Sapsan136 (Sapsan136) 9 December 2019 19: 58
                        +3
                        Such as you, they will not deal with orderlies, but with firing squads ... With your track record, you have already jumped on Articles 280, 275, 205, 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation ...
                      4. Ravshan Offline Ravshan
                        Ravshan (Jamsut) 9 December 2019 20: 20
                        -5
                        Quote: Sapsan136
                        you already jumped on articles 280, 275, 205, 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation ...

                        You look after your articles more. It will be more useful.
                        In general, this is progress. Articles went into action.
                        Previously, everything was easier with your "spirit guides", bang a bullet in the back of the head, and yeah.
                        It may also happen that the Russians will remember the 30s, when the Bolshevik-Stalinists (your "spirit gurus") killed the Bolshevik-Leninists (calling them Trotskyists).
                        Yes, and by the way, I'm on the side of the Russians. And on the side of today's government, if that. Better than it was under your authority. Like it or not, progress in the development of society is obvious - one of the variations of theocratic slave-owning society in the USSR has been replaced by a society of developing feudalism. Those. society has risen one notch. Which is definitely good.
                      5. Sapsan136 Offline Sapsan136
                        Sapsan136 (Sapsan136) 9 December 2019 20: 39
                        +5
                        Most people like you will end up with this ... A military court for those like Korchinsky is quite enough ... You are not on the side of Russia, Mazepovets, you are on the side of Russophobes and Yankees ... any positive for Russia just bastard.
                      6. The comment was deleted.
                      7. The comment was deleted.
                      8. The comment was deleted.
                      9. The comment was deleted.
                      10. Ravshan Offline Ravshan
                        Ravshan (Jamsut) 9 December 2019 21: 20
                        -2
                        Quote: Sapsan136
                        in your countries with Russophobia

                        Yes? And which countries are sick with Russophobia, if not secret?
                      11. Sapsan136 Offline Sapsan136
                        Sapsan136 (Sapsan136) 9 December 2019 21: 22
                        +2
                        The countries of NATO, the former USSR, Sweden and Japan ...
                      12. Ravshan Offline Ravshan
                        Ravshan (Jamsut) 9 December 2019 21: 31
                        -4
                        Quote: Sapsan136
                        The countries of NATO, the former USSR, Sweden and Japan ...

                        Those. virtually the whole world.
                        Is it hard for you, Soviet citizens? Although you have taken the fashion of calling yourself Russian.
                        What kind of Russians are you?
                        Funny.
                      13. Sapsan136 Offline Sapsan136
                        Sapsan136 (Sapsan136) 9 December 2019 21: 33
                        +5
                        Sixes of the USA, this is not the whole World, this is its smaller part ... We are Russian, but you are not ...
                      14. Ravshan Offline Ravshan
                        Ravshan (Jamsut) 9 December 2019 21: 39
                        -3
                        Quote: Sapsan136
                        Sixes of the USA, this is not the whole World, this is its smaller part ...

                        "The whole world" is the USA today.
                        And do not hide your head in the sand.

                        Quote: Sapsan136
                        We are Russian, but you are not ...

                        When you so pretentiously call yourself Russian, it’s not so much a shame to hear, but how funny.
                      15. Sapsan136 Offline Sapsan136
                        Sapsan136 (Sapsan136) 9 December 2019 21: 42
                        +3
                        Read the Bible, Sterlikov? There is a suitable phrase - Az will repay ... You will receive what is due to you, according to your deeds ...
                      16. The comment was deleted.
                    2. Sapsan136 Offline Sapsan136
                      Sapsan136 (Sapsan136) 9 December 2019 23: 16
                      +4
                      The USA considers ALL the World only the slaves of the USA ... your World is limited by your slavery ... It is ridiculous to look at people like you ... Before you and Hitler considered the whole World ...
                2. plabu Offline plabu
                  plabu 10 December 2019 09: 20
                  +1
                  Quote: Ravshan
                  ...Those. virtually the whole world.
                  Is it hard for you, Soviet citizens? Although you have taken the fashion of calling yourself Russian.
                  What kind of Russians are you?

                  Funny.

                  It was with you that we "forgot" to consult what we should call ourselves, and your howls on this topic - but who cares, besides the parents, what is the unreasonable child babbling or humming? It's the same here - I don't know anything about your parents, but everything else from you has long been NOT interesting, boring you (all) russophobes and very predictable ... hi
  • sgrabik Offline sgrabik
    sgrabik (Sergei) 28 October 2019 18: 05
    0
    This moron, Hodges, thinks that we will attack our closest ally, and the Belarusians will fight with the Russians, this is some kind of absurd absurd nonsense that they smoke there before writing this nonsense.