126

Re: And what, won Syria?

Hello, Marty, you wrote: M>> it is interesting, you protect whose interests? M> I - the and who will protect interests of the native land? M>> and whether your activity for the country is necessary? M> it is necessary. To me the country money pays for operation the country cannot pay. The company  or private pays to you. So the question remains opened - whether your activity for the country is necessary.

127

Re: And what, won Syria?

Hello, metall74, you wrote: M> the country cannot pay. The company  or private pays to you. M> so the question remains opened - whether your activity for the country is necessary. Persuaded. Can and is not necessary. Also what further?

128

Re: And what, won Syria?

Hello, Marty, you wrote: M>> the country cannot pay. The company  or private pays to you. M>> so the question remains opened - whether your activity for the country is necessary.: M> persuaded. Can and is not necessary. Also what further? And anything, actually nothing your activity means. Within a statistical error in country scales.

129

Re: And what, won Syria?

Hello, metall74, you wrote: M> and anything, actually nothing your activity means. Within a statistical error in country scales. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=64UppuXQJEc

130

Re: And what, won Syria?

Hello, ML380, you wrote: ML> I can not. The candidate for whom I want to vote illegally did not admit. On such choices I will not go. It!

131

Re: And what, won Syria?

Hello, B0FEE664, you wrote: BFE>>> you think, what rescue of Asada and Syria or struggle against Igilom - overall objectives in Syria for the Kremlin? No, it is the minor purposes. P>> and what main things? Too it is interesting to me BFE> Control of deliveries of gas to Europe. The gas conduit which only reflected and still far not the fact that would once be implemented looks the feeble reason of serious operation. On mine (amateurish and not educated) a sight, the operation purposes in Syria were about such: Primary: 1. Demonstration of current military potential of the Russian Federation 2. Gain of political influence of the Russian Federation in the short-range east Secondary: 3. Saving, and is better solidifying of the military man  by the Mediterranean sea and the short-range east 4. Destruction or essential easing  5. Check and tests of systems of the arms especially new 6. Training in actual practice personal, and especially officer, composition to guiding of the modern war Why such purposes? The last years the transfer by the NATO countries, and especially the USA, armies to the boundaries of the Russian Federation, plus campaign in mass-media about the Russian threat generally and "spiteful  Putin" in particular was activated that suggests that some military circles in the NATO consider that the Russian Federation can be won immediate war easily. Operation on association of Crimea with disarmament of the Ukrainian bases made impression, but it was no actually military operation. As the Russian Federation at all  in serious war and furthermore in the territory, and in universal nuclear destruction too it is not interested it makes sense to show visually to potential opponents that army of the Russian Federation is capable to conduct serious operations, and the direct military conflict manages  expensively and it is better to live in peace. Therefore the first and major purpose - demonstration that army in the Russian Federation is capable to solve serious fighting tasks the Second purpose - solidifying of political influence in the short-range east. Region important, both on layout and on petrogas stores. Political influence gives  advantages. In particular influence on that what gas conduits where to build and where it is not necessary. Well and the greater influence in one region strengthens the general influence of the country in the world as a whole. Further other - military bases in the short-range east are useful because of layout, and it is useful for gain of political influence.  - officially declared war of the Russian Federation and sooner or later would begin support of terrorists in the Russian Federation therefore the before it to destroy, the better. The tasks which performance allows to achieve the given purposes follow from the purposes: 1. The active bombardments , strategically and tactically. Approaches  the purposes 1, 4, 5, 6 2. Support of the Syrian terrestrial army, terrestrial instructors and tactical bombardments of opponents. The purposes 1, 4, 5, 6 3. And the same not only about , but also other insurgents in Syria. The purposes 1, 5, 6 4. Diplomatic settlement of disagreements with those insurgents, which . The purpose 2, simplification of the decision of the task 5. 5. Saving of the power at the duly elected president of Syria. The purpose 2, 3. As a matter of fact it is evident demonstration that the union from the Russian Federation it is not simple words, and support which can even transform a hopeless situation into the positive. 6. To apply in fight the diversified means available in an arsenal. The purposes 1, 5, 6.  is certainly not savages in desert as some write, but nevertheless to bomb their cruise missiles from the submarine or to send an aircraft carrier with an escort in the presence of terrestrial air base it it is wildly irrational if stupidly to compare the expended money and received  fighting effect. But if to consider these steps as means of achievement enumerated above the purposes 1, 5 and 6 - that it , is exceptional effective steps for their achievement turn out. 7. And other tasks, type of constant rotation of frames, support beautiful PR etc.

132

Re: And what, won Syria?

Hello, fmiracle, you wrote: BFE>> Control of deliveries of gas to Europe. F> a gas conduit which only reflected and still far not the fact that would once be implemented looks the feeble reason of serious operation. Yes well! The USA crushing  and Asada could receive control over gas deliveries to Europe. What would become with the price for gas? F> on mine (amateurish and not educated) a sight, the operation purposes in Syria were about such: F> Primary: F> 1. Demonstration of current military potential of the Russian Federation Why in Syria, instead of in Afghanistan and not in Africa? F> 2. Gain of political influence of the Russian Federation in the short-range east What for? F> Secondary: F> 3. Saving, and is better solidifying of the military man  by the Mediterranean sea and the short-range east What for? For oil and gas control?  and I about it. F> 4. Destruction or essential easing  yes. F> 5. Check and tests of systems of the arms especially new And what, became simple trainings not enough? F> 6. Training in actual practice personal, and especially officer, composition to guiding of the modern war It without terrestrial operations? F> why such purposes? F> the last years the transfer by the NATO countries, and especially the USA, armies to the boundaries of the Russian Federation, plus campaign in mass-media about the Russian threat generally and "spiteful  Putin" in particular was activated that suggests that some military circles in the NATO consider that the Russian Federation can be won immediate war easily. I doubt that it so. F> Therefore the first and major purpose - demonstration that the army in the Russian Federation is capable to solve serious fighting tasks And to launch race of arms without the visible reasons? F> the second purpose - solidifying of political influence in the short-range east. Region important, both on layout and on petrogas stores. Political influence gives  advantages. In particular influence on that what gas conduits where to build and where it is not necessary. Well and the greater influence in one region strengthens the general influence of the country in the world as a whole. It also is the principal reason.

133

Re: And what, won Syria?

Hello, B0FEE664, you wrote: F>> the Gas conduit which only reflected and still far not the fact that would once be implemented looks the feeble reason of serious operation. BFE> yes well! The USA crushing  and Asada could receive control over gas deliveries to Europe. What would become with the price for gas? The USA finances  years so 30-40 under different signboards. What for it to smash?

134

Re: And what, won Syria?

Hello, metall74, you wrote: M>>> the country cannot pay. The company  or private pays to you. M>>> so the question remains opened - whether your activity for the country is necessary.: M>> persuaded. Can and is not necessary. Also what further? M> and anything, actually nothing your activity means. Within a statistical error in country scales. And?

135

Re: And what, won Syria?

Hello, marcopolo, you wrote: F>>> the Gas conduit which only reflected and still far not the fact that would once be implemented looks the feeble reason of serious operation. BFE>> yes well! The USA crushing  and Asada could receive control over gas deliveries to Europe. What would become with the price for gas? M> the USA finances  years so 30-40 under different signboards. What for it to smash? To receive a legal occasion of control.

136

Re: And what, won Syria?

Hello, Marty, you wrote: M>>>> so the question remains opened - whether your activity for the country is necessary.: M>>> persuaded. Can and is not necessary. Also what further? M>> and anything, actually nothing your activity means. Within a statistical error in country scales. M> and? Above by a line it is written

137

Re: And what, won Syria?

Hello, marcopolo, you wrote: M> the USA finances  years so 30-40 under different signboards. What for it to smash? Years  230 240 not  itself in imaginations

138

Re: And what, won Syria?

Hello, metall74, you wrote: M>>>>> so the question remains opened - whether your activity for the country is necessary.: M>>>> persuaded. Can and is not necessary. Also what further? M>>> and anything, actually nothing your activity means. Within a statistical error in country scales. M>> and? M> above by a line it is written Also what output?

139

Re: And what, won Syria?

Hello, Marty, you wrote: M>>>>>> so the question remains opened - whether your activity for the country is necessary.: M>>>>> persuaded. Can and is not necessary. Also what further? M>>>> and anything, actually nothing your activity means. Within a statistical error in country scales. M>>> and? M>> above by a line it is written M> And what output? Well same it is obvious

140

Re: And what, won Syria?

Hello, metall74, you wrote: M>>>>> and anything, actually nothing your activity means. Within a statistical error in country scales. M>>>> and? M>>> above by a line it is written M>> And what output? M> M> well same All is obvious with you clearly

141

Re: And what, won Syria?

Hello, Marty, you wrote: M>>> And what output? M>> M>> well same All is obvious M> with you clearly what exactly, cannot explain?

142

Re: And what, won Syria?

Hello, metall74, you wrote: M>>>> And what output? M>>> M>>> well same All is obvious M>> with you clearly M> what exactly, cannot explain? I do not see sense

143

Re: And what, won Syria?

Hello, Marty, you wrote: M>>> All with you is clear M>> what exactly, cannot explain? M> I do not see sense and what for then asked?

144

Re: And what, won Syria?

Hello, HPR, you wrote: HPR> Is not present, she not on a throne sits. And is faster in a seat, quite budgetary. And  so that as though on a throne.

145

Re: And what, won Syria?

Hello, metall74, you wrote: M> and what for then asked? My God, what tediousness. I about myself thought that the bore, now I see that in vain.

146

Re: And what, won Syria?

Hello, marcopolo, you wrote: M> Hello, Shmj, you wrote: S>> One speak lost, others speak won. What won, whom won? What sense was to win? M> Kaddafi M> Here to you and result. .

147

Re: And what, won Syria?

Hello, GhostCoders, you wrote: M> Kaddafi GC> jpg M> Here to you and result. GC> Ugu. Well so look, with whom Kaddafi still ! There all European and world beau monde.

148

Re: And what, won Syria?

Hello, Vi2, you wrote: Vi2> Well so look, with whom Kaddafi still ! There all European and world beau monde. So still look with whom Putin greets

149

Re: And what, won Syria?

Hello, GhostCoders, you wrote: GC> So still look with whom Putin greets They are live or at them too the paunch is unstitched?