Что значит газ никому не нужен?Originally Posted by remodify
Ты как-то обоснуй это.
Я наоборот вижу заинтересованность в российском газе. У меня есть факты. А у тебя есть или ты просто высказал свое желание, чтоб так было?
Re: Россия. Что происходит?-2
Что значит газ никому не нужен?
Ты как-то обоснуй это.
Я наоборот вижу заинтересованность в российском газе. У меня есть факты. А у тебя есть или ты просто высказал свое желание, чтоб так было?
Я не хамлю — я защищаюсь от вашей тупости.
Re: Россия. Что происходит?-2
That is, the Pentagon does not envision a scenario in which Russia doesn’t manage to grab some Baltic territory first. The goal is to deter — Defense Secretary Ashton Carter announced this summer that the United States would be sending dozens of tanks, armored vehicles, and howitzers to the Baltics and Eastern Europe — and, if that fails, to painstakingly regain NATO territory.
The Pentagon is also chewing on various hybrid warfare scenarios, and even a nuclear one. The senior defense official says, “As you look at published Russian doctrine, I do believe people are thinking about use of tactical nuclear weapons in a way that hadn’t been thought about for many years . . . . The doctrine clearly talks about it, so it would be irresponsible . . . to at least not be thinking through those issues. Any time there is nuclear saber rattling, it is always a concern, no matter where it comes from.”
B61-12-nuclear-bombNote: German public television ZDF reports on Sept. 22, 2015, that the U.S. will station 20 new atomic weapons, B61-12, in Germany. Each B61-12 has four times the destructive power of the one that was used on Hiroshima in 1945. “With the new bombs the boundaries blur between tactical and strategic nuclear weapons,” Hans Kristensen, the Director of the Nuclear Information Project at the Federation of American Scientists, told ZDF.
There is a strong element of disappointment among senior foreign-policy and security officials in these discussions, of disbelief that we ended up here after all those good years in America’s relations with Russia.
The State Department official says: “A lot of people at the Pentagon are unhappy about the confrontation. They were very happy with the military-to-military cooperation with Russia.” Some think that Russia is a distraction from the real threat — China. Others think that working with Russia on arms control is more important than protecting Ukrainian sovereignty. Not only would they rather not have to think about Moscow as an enemy, but many are also miffed that even making these plans plays right into Putin’s paranoid fantasies about a showdown between Russia and NATO or between Russia and the United States — which makes those fantasies, de facto, a reality. In the U.S. planning for confrontation with Russia, says the Senate staffer, Putin “is getting the thing he always wanted.”
In his July confirmation hearing to ascend to the chairmanship of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Joseph Dunford said that Russia posed an “existential threat” to the United States and that America must do more to prepare itself for hybrid warfare of the type Russia deployed in Ukraine. Dunford’s statement angered the Obama White House, which saw it as potentially provocative to Moscow.
The fact that U.S. repeatedly lost in the Pentagon’s own war games against Russia could explain why, according to a Sept. 25, 2015 article on the Russian news site, SvetKolemnas.Info, a “summary report of the Russian Ministry of Defense for the internal needs of the Kremlin” states that within three weeks after President Putin orders a “first strike” against America and its NATO allies, the military forces of the Russian Federation will achieve “a total defeat” of U.S. military forces, including:
The destruction of all 18 US aircraft carriers and ships capable of carrying aircraft, and of all US and NATO military satellites.
The strategic takeover of heavy weapons.
The “erasing” of all US bases in the UK.
The total loss of US and NATO troops of over 35,000 (dead, wounded, captured and missing), and material losses of at least 15 trillion dollars (ships, aircraft, weapons, etc.)
The report envisions that after Russia achieved tactical superiority over US and NATO forces during the first 24 hours of the war, Moscow would issue a demand for the removal of all US forces, nuclear weapons and equipment from Europe, in exchange for a cessation of hostilities.
If the demand is met, Russian forces would then withdraw from the conquered territories. If the request is rejected, the forces of the Russian Federation would deploy tactical nuclear weapons against US military bases and NATO in Europe, as well as EMP/electronic weapons against the United States and Canada. Russia would also be prepared to use intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBM). Fearing total global nuclear war, the US and the EU would immediately lose the political will to fight.
The Russian Ministry of Defense report also states that tens of millions of American Christians could very well act as a “fifth column” in support of the Russian Federation, given that those Christians have had “to defend against their own ‘demonic’ leaders destroying America.” American Christians would side with the Christian forces of the Russian Federation who only seek to liberate the United States, Europe and the rest of the world from those demonic leaders’ “satanic design.”
In this manner, with the “fifth column” of Christian Americans supporting Christian Russia, a global nuclear disaster would be averted, and the United States under a new Christian leadership could then return to a peaceful way of life and “cease terrorizing the world.”
This image is in the SvetKolemnas.Info article
The report notes that, according to CNN, the readiness of the US military is now at a historic low, with half of U.S. Marine Corps units at below the level of military preparedness. The report further sites a U.S. blog, Fellowship of the Minds, on the mass exodus of Christians from the US military. All of which has rendered a once-fearsome military increasingly dysfunctional because of the Obama regime’s sex/gender experimentation, including American cadets being forced to march in high heels as part of their education, and Obama’s appointment of “Erica [sic] K. Fanning, an open homosexual, as Commander of the US Army.”
Note: Last month, Obama nominated Eric Fanning, an admitted homosexual, to be Army Secretary. (See “Obama names open homosexual to be Secretary of U.S. Army“)
The report estimates that if the de-Christianized and demoralized U.S. military were to face the Christian forces of the Russian Federation, it would take only 3 weeks for the U.S. military to be drained of all their “will to fight”.
Referring to Salon.com, “one of the most popular U.S. magazines,” now “openly supporting” sex between an adult and a child, pedophilia being just another sexual lifestyle, the SvetKolemnas.Info article cryptically concluded that “After all, things of hell belong to hell … maybe it’s time to make this monster go back where they belong.”
Re: Россия. Что происходит?-2
просто пукнул в воздух. он новенький, пока еще не наигрался в песочнице. серьезная аргументация ему не по зубам.
Re: Россия. Что происходит?-2
If Russia Started a War in the Baltics, NATO Would Lose — Quickly
War games show NATO’s eastern flank is vulnerable. To deter Moscow, the United States will need to deploy heavy armor on a large scale, a new study says.
If Russian tanks and troops rolled into the Baltics tomorrow, outgunned and outnumbered NATO forces would be overrun in under three days. That’s the sobering conclusion of war games carried out by a think tank with American military officers and civilian officials.
“The games’ findings are unambiguous: As currently postured, NATO cannot successfully defend the territory of its most exposed members,” said a report by the Rand Corp., which led the war gaming research.
In numerous tabletop war games played over several months between 2014-2015, Russian forces were knocking on the doors of the Estonian capital of Tallinn or the Latvian capital of Riga within 36 to 60 hours. U.S. and Baltic troops — and American airpower — proved unable to halt the advance of mechanized Russian units and suffered heavy casualties, the report said.
The study argues that NATO has been caught napping by a resurgent and unpredictable Russia, which has begun to boost defense spending after having seized the Crimean peninsula in Ukraine and intervened in support of pro-Moscow separatists in eastern Ukraine. In the event of a potential Russian incursion in the Baltics, the United States and its allies lack sufficient troop numbers, or tanks and armored vehicles, to slow the advance of Russian armor, said the report by Rand’s David Shlapak and Michael Johnson.
“Such a rapid defeat would leave NATO with a limited number of options, all bad,” it said.
The United States and its NATO allies could try to mount a bloody counter-attack that could trigger a dramatic escalation by Russia, as Moscow would possibly see the allied action as a direct strategic threat to its homeland. A second option would be to take a page out of the old Cold War playbook, and threaten massive retaliation, including the use of nuclear weapons. A third option would be to concede at least a temporary defeat, rendering NATO toothless, and embark on a new Cold War with Moscow, the report said.
However, the war games also illustrated there are preemptive steps the United States and its European allies could take to avoid a catastrophic defeat and shore up NATO’s eastern defenses, while making clear to Moscow that there would no easy victory.
A force of about seven brigades in the area, including three heavy armored brigades, and backed up by airpower and artillery, would be enough “to prevent the rapid overrun of the Baltic states,” it said. The additional forces would cost an estimated $2.7 billion a year to maintain.
The report was released Tuesday, the same day Defense Secretary Ash Carter unveiled plans to add more heavy weapons and armored vehicles to prepositioned stocks in Eastern Europe to give the Pentagon two brigade sets worth of heavy equipment on NATO’s eastern frontier. As it stands now, there are two U.S. Army infantry brigades stationed in Europe — one in Italy and the other in Germany — but they have been stretched thin by the constant demands of training rotations with allies across the continent. The new $3.4 billion plan outlined by Carter and the White House would add another brigade to the mix, but it would be made up of soldiers from the United States, rotating in for months at a time.
Late last month, Gen. Philip Breedlove, commander of U.S. European Command, released a new strategy anticipating — and pushing back against — the call for more rotational forces. Flying troops in and out of the region “complements” the units who call Europe home, he wrote, but they’re no “substitute for an enduring forward deployed presence that is tangible and real. Virtual presence means actual absence.”
David Ochmanek from the Rand Corp., a former senior Pentagon official who has studied the challenge posed by Russia’s military, called the administration’s budget proposal for European forces an important step and an “encouraging sign.”
“Heavy armored equipment, pre-positioned forward, is the sine qua non of a viable deterrent and defense posture on the alliance’s eastern flank,” Ochmanek told Foreign Policy. But he said much more needed to be done to strengthen NATO’s defenses.
The findings from the war games will be warmly welcomed by senior officers in the U.S. Army, who have struggled to justify the cost of maintaining a large ground force amid budget pressures in recent years and a preference for lighter footprints. And the report will reinforce warnings from top military leaders, including the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Joseph Dunford, that Russia may represent the number one threat to U.S. interests.
In early 2012, the Obama administration announced the withdrawal of two heavy brigades and their equipment from Germany, cutting deeply into the U.S. Army’s traditional, large footprint on the continent. Since then, the service has been slowly trying to move some hardware back into Germany for use in training exercises with NATO partners. Last year, U.S. Marines also began to roll a small number of Abrams tanks into Romania for a series of exercises with local forces.
Since Russia’s intervention in Ukraine sparked alarm in Eastern Europe, the United States has repeatedly vowed to defend Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania in the event of an attack, citing its mutual defense obligations under the NATO alliance. In a September 2014 speech in Tallinn, President Barack Obama made an explicit promise to protect the Baltic countries.
“We’ll be here for Estonia. We will be here for Latvia. We will be here for Lithuania. You lost your independence once before. With NATO, you will never lose it again,” Obama said.
But the Rand report said “neither the United States nor its NATO allies are currently prepared to back up the president’s forceful words.”
The borders that the three Baltic countries — all former Soviet republics — share with Russia and Belarus are about the same length as the one that separated West Germany from the Warsaw Pact during the Cold War. But in that era, NATO stationed a massive ground force along the frontier with more than 20 divisions bristling with tanks and artillery.
Tanks are few and far between now in NATO countries, the report said. Germany’s arsenal of about 2,200 main battle tanks in the Cold War has declined to roughly 250. Britain, meanwhile, is planning on pulling out its last brigade headquarters left on the continent.
With only light infantry units at the ready in the Baltics, U.S. and NATO planners are also worried about the continued Russian arms buildup in the exclave of Kaliningrad on the Baltic coast between Poland and Lithuania, and Moscow’s intention to build a new air force base in Belarus, just south of the Polish-Lithuanian border.
The war games run by Rand underscored how U.S. and NATO forces lack the vehicles and firepower to take on their Russian adversaries, which have maintained more mechanized and tank units. NATO ground troops also lacked anti-aircraft artillery to fend off Russian warplanes in the Baltic scenario.
“By and large, NATO’s infantry found themselves unable even to retreat successfully and were destroyed in place,” the report said.
In the war games, although U.S. and allied aircraft could inflict damage on the invading Russian forces, they also were forced to devote attention to suppressing Russia’s dense air defenses and defending against Russian air attacks on rear areas.
Although it was unclear if deploying more troops and armor would be enough to discourage Russia from gambling on an attack in the Baltics, NATO’s current weak position clearly did not pose a persuasive deterrent, the report said.
By undertaking “due diligence” and bolstering NATO’s defenses, the alliance would send “a message to Moscow of serious commitment and one of reassurance to all NATO members and to all U.S. allies and partners worldwide,” it said.
Re: Россия. Что происходит?-2
а почему в "сообщениинеотражается" только один человек и почему он не спит?!
Re: Россия. Что происходит?-2
по кочану.
Re: Россия. Что происходит?-2
В Германии лучшим мировым политиком признали Владимира Путина
По результатам опроса на одном из немецких ресурсов оказалось, что канцлер ФРГ находится на последних позициях рейтинга
Берлин, 2 Февраля 2016, 16:29 — REGNUM В немецком интернет-голосовании на тему «Лучший мировой политик» лидером стал российский президент Владимир Путин. Канцлер ФРГ Ангела Меркель с оценкой в 2,5 балла оказалась на девятом месте из тринадцати.
Известный российский писатель и публицист Захар Прилепин на странице в Facebook опубликовал свой комментарий по поводу рейтинга мировых политиков на портале gmx:
«Из Германии прислали. На их портале gmx (как нам объясняют, это что-то вроде Яндекса или Рамблера в России) устроили голосование на тему «Лучший мировой политик». Результат был такой неприятный, что на другой день картинку убрали. Демократия же. Нехорошо получилось как-то. Но внимательные немцы успели скопировать».
Отметим, что для голосования было выбрано тринадцать мировых политиков, включая президента США Барака Обаму и канцлера Германии Ангелу Меркель. По данным портала web. de, российский лидер с оценкой 3,72 балла оказался на первом месте, за него проголосовало 12 321 человек.
На втором месте — глава фракции «Левых» в немецком парламенте Грегор Гизи. Он получил 3,11 балла от 10 911 человек. Замыкает тройку лучших мировых политиков премьер-министр Венгрии и лидер одной из крупнейших политических партий страны Виктор Орбан. Он получил 2,89 балла от 10 410 проголосовавших.
Американский политик, кандидат на пост президента США от Демократической партии Хиллари Клинтон оказалась на седьмом месте (2,35 «звезды» от чуть более 10 тыс. человек). Она обошла на одну позицию действующего американского президента Барака Обаму, он получил 2,3 балла. Канцлер Германии Ангела Меркель оказалась на последних позициях рейтинга, составленного на основе оценок пользователей. Меркель — на девятом месте с 2,28 баллами.
Сразу за немецким лидером — премьер-министр Греции Алексис Ципрас за него проголосовало 10 тыс. человек и общая оценка составила 2,21 балл. А на последнем месте расположился вице-канцлер ФРГ ЗигмарГабриэль(его оценка — 1.87"звезды»).
Как говорится на немецком ресурсе web. de, опрос проводится с 20 декабря 2015 года. Любой желающий может выразить свое мнение, поставив тринадцати политикам оценку по пятибалльной шкале. «За тех, кто вдохновил вас политически, ставьте пять звезд. Неудовлетворительной для политиков оценкой является одна «звезда», — сообщается на сайте.
Каждый представленный в опросе лидер сопровождается небольшим описанием. Так, например, о российском президенте сказано, что Владимир Путин как на национальном, так и на международном уровне, является для одних умным стратегом, а для других — «циничным, хладнокровным политиком». Отмечается, что международная критика обвиняет его в аннексии Крыма (полуостров вошел в состав РФ после референдума 16 марта 2014 года, когда более 96% проголосовавших проголосовали за воссоединение с Россией — прим. Ред). Однако в описании также указывается на то, что Владимир Путин принимает самое активное участие в борьбе с террористами запрещенной в РФ и многих других странах организации «Исламского государства».
Ранее ИА REGNUM сообщало, что по результата декабрьского опроса, который проводил «Левада-центр», деятельность президента РФ Владимира Путина одобряет 82% граждан страны. Работу премьер-министра России Дмитрия Медведева положительно оценили 56% респондентов. Работа правительства России в целом нравится 50% опрошенных. Негативно отзываются о ней 48%.
Re: Россия. Что происходит?-2
вот мне тоже так хочется.....Вот че моя жизнь? так пустышка. Думаю че ба сожрать вкуснова, какие туфли купить, какую книшку почитать. Мелочи, мелкие интересы какие-то у меня. А ведь я могла посвятить жизнь обсуждению какойнить страны. Могла ба с утра до вечера искать ссылки, постить по 10 форумам. Знать че и как в каком городе этой страны происходит. Мдааааа
Re: Россия. Что происходит?-2
мне кажется, вы напрасно себя корите - очень полная жизнь. вкусново, туфли, книшка!
Re: Россия. Что происходит?-2
неть....я буду работать над собой....Испанию например обсуждать всё время. Че у них все гладко штоле? я што картинок не найду про Испанию и ссылок? да факт найду!
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
|
Terms of Service | Privacy Policy |
 
|
