Draghi Puterity shared Mirel Palada's post.
Interesant ce spune domnu' de la STRAFOR, nu-i asa? 
;)
;)
Uitati
aici cum se duce razboiul in zilele noastre. Ca si in zilele de
altadata: razboi rece, propaganda si inselaciune. Adica ideologie si
maskirovka. Si unii, si altii. In
treacat, analistul american - repet, american - Friedman confirma cu
seninatate felul in care ONG-urile sint instrumente importante de
actiune in strategia geopolitica a Statelor Unite.
"They saw the U.S. government acting through nongovernmental
organizations to stage political movements under the cover of
democratization, with the goal of undermining Russian national security.
For Moscow, Ukraine was where the most important U.S. and European
intrusion into Russia’s sphere of influence was taking place. The
Russians alleged that these NGOs were rigging elections and the
political systems in target countries"
"Western destabilization campaigns built on NGOs, whose members are oblivious to the strategic purpose they are serving, completely and sincerely focused on their moral quest. "
"Western destabilization campaigns built on NGOs, whose members are oblivious to the strategic purpose they are serving, completely and sincerely focused on their moral quest. "
By
George Friedman The U.S. Congress is close to passing a resolution
increasing sanctions on Russia, along with Iran and North Korea, and
it’s…
geopoliticalfutures.com
Smaranda Dobrescu Retin o idee nu legata neaparat de tema dezbatuta si care are oarece sens:
"It is difficult to imagine that they had control over Trump, because if they had sufficient information to control him, they would have protected him from any hint of connection to Russia. There are too many trails leading from the Russians to Trump to believe they had him. Phone calls and meetings would not have taken place, and contact with his staff would not have existed. But perhaps the Russians are getting clumsy, and perhaps they were seeking to discredit an American president."
"It is difficult to imagine that they had control over Trump, because if they had sufficient information to control him, they would have protected him from any hint of connection to Russia. There are too many trails leading from the Russians to Trump to believe they had him. Phone calls and meetings would not have taken place, and contact with his staff would not have existed. But perhaps the Russians are getting clumsy, and perhaps they were seeking to discredit an American president."
Preda Mihailescu Smaranda
Dobrescu @ Nu prea are sens. Pentru ca acele "trails" nu prea sunt
reale, privite mai cu atentie. In marea lor majoritate, mai mult decat
business as usual nu sunt. Incomparabil cu relatiile lui Clinton spre
exemplu, cu mari familii Saudite care finanteaza extermism islamic in
America. Asistenta ei era una dintre acestea. Deci nu prea exista, iar
analistul incearca sa impace capra cu varza aici.
De data asta, aflu ca reactia EUropenilor la un nou val de sanctiuni este prompta si in termeni categorici, cel putin din mass media EUropeana.
Asta ma face sa ma intreb daca sanctiunile Vestului impotriva Rusiei au fost cumva prezentate de catre promotori ca fiind de scurta durata, iar receptorul ca un debil care era la o lovitura distanta de implozie.
Nu stiu 100% cum s-ar fi verificat varianta de mai sus in cazul unei victorii a Hillarei... Daca EUropenii batrani nu pot inghiti un nou val de sanctiuni, cu atat mai putin ar inghiti un razboi.
Adiacent, ar trebui zabovit un pic pe semnificatia si viabilitatea aliantei energetice dintre mari si/sau viabilitatea ideii importul de gaz lichefiat din SUA.
Niciun comentariu:
Trimiteți un comentariu