Comments by "Emir" (@irongron) on "Силиконовый занавес"
channel.
-
Mr. Smith is a very interesting guest, a great man and a great discussion, much appreciated. When you mentioned "escalation management" and he corrected you and said it was appeasement, I will mention to all readers in your defence Jonathon, that you also have called it this for a long time, ditto for myself too. Another thing that jumped out at me was Mr. Smith's mention of "s different form of communism under Tito", well in Yugoslavia at that time we could travel freely, own a small business and farms remained in private hands, there was no disastrous "Sovkhoz" or "Kolkhoz" collective farms. Keep in mind that Tito broke with Stalin and left he Soviet Bloc in 1948 successfully (unlike poor Czechoslovakia in 1968 and Hungary in 1956). And lastly, I don't think we are ever getting the F-16's. We were supposed to have them last new years, now mid year, this month. It's never gonna happen. Thank you Jake Sullivan and Samuel Charap (massive sarcasm). 😐
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Great discussion with Professor Grunewald, she briefly touched on the aircraft industry, as part of her general outline. I can do a value add comment for her here, as my personal studies going back to the late 80's was Soviet Aerospace. Susan mentioned the freedom some "camps" had (like the Germans building the 2nd tallest university in Moscow) plus also how late some were held (as late as 1955). These 2 points are very closely related to the prison "workplaces" (they were more like workplaces than camps) for aerospace workers, called "Sharashkas" - from the wikipedia article "Sharashka" - Sharashkas (singular: Russian: шара́шка, [ʂɐˈraʂkə]; sometimes sharaga, sharazhka) were secret research and development laboratories operating from 1930 to the 1950s within the Soviet Gulag labor camp system.
So, the famous Ukrainian rocket scientist Sergey Korolyov, worked at one of these "Sharashkas". He was saved rom the normal GULAG' camp system by Andrey Tupolev, (the designer of the Tu-95 Bear , Tu-22 Blinder, Tu-26 now 22M Backfire etc). Also rocket engine designer Glushko was saved by Tupolev et. al.. These "Sharashkas" was how the USSR beat American into space in 1957 with Sputnik and 1961 with Vostok (Yuri Gagarin)". Anyway the main point is the many German rocket scientists and V2 technicians who were held in these "Sharashkas" were not let go until mostly 1955 as far as I can determine. The best, well researched source for this (there's many others) is a book by author James Harford called - Korolev: How one man masterminded the Soviet drive to beat America to the moon
2
-
2
-
I re-watched this viideo oj James discussing many interesting topics for the second time and it hasn't dated at asll, still worth watching again for sue He also mentioned the 1997 Moscow founding document with NATO in regards to the bogus "poor Russia victim of NATO" BS peddled by Mearsheimer et al. here is a summasry of the text, if I put a link the comment willl get zzpped. The document explicitly staees "NATO and Russia do not consider each other as adversaries;" so it makes you wonder, did Tsar Putin ever read this and note that very important point ? Yeltsin obviously was aware of it, seems his chosen successor was not....
Founding Act on Mutual Relations, Cooperation and Security between NATO and the Russian Federation
1. The "Founding Act on Mutual Relations, Cooperation and Security between NATO and the Russian Federation" was approved by the North Atlantic Council on 16 May 1997. It is the product of four months of intensive negotiations between Secretary General Solana and Russian Foreign Minister Primakov. The Secretary General, the Heads of State and Government of the North Atlantic Alliance and the President of the Russian Federation will sign the document in Paris on 27 May.
The NATO - Russia Founding Act reflects the changing security environment in Europe, an environment in which the confrontation of the Cold War has been replaced by the promise of closer cooperation among former adversaries. It reflects in particular the practice of consultation and cooperation established between the Alliance and Russia over the last few years, the most remarkable example being the participation of Russian troops alongside those of NATO and other partner countries in IFOR/SFOR.
NATO and Russia do not consider each other as adversaries; the Founding Act is the expression of an enduring commitment, undertaken at the highest political level, to build together a lasting and inclusive peace in the Euro-Atlantic area.
2. The new security partnership between NATO and Russia will be one step among others which are being taken to build a stable, peaceful and undivided Europe. It will allow the Alliance and Russia to forge a closer relationship. This is in the interest, not only of NATO and Russia, but also of all states in the Euro-Atlantic area.
3.The Founding Act, as agreed with the Russian side, has four sections. It begins with a preamble which establishes the context for the stable and enduring partnership we want to build. It states the reasons why NATO and Russia believe that it is in their shared interest to cooperate more broadly and intensively.
It highlights the profound transformation that the Alliance has undergone since the end of the Cold War, through reductions of conventional and nuclear forces, through a revision of its strategic concept, through its new missions such as peacekeeping, and through its support for security cooperation throughout Europe, in particular within the framework of Partnership for Peace. It also refers to the transformation Russia is undergoing, its force reductions - which will continue -, the withdrawal of Russian forces from Central and Eastern Europe, the revision of Russia's military doctrine, and its participation in the multinational operation in Bosnia-Herzegovina.
4. Section I details the principles on which the NATO - Russia partnership will be based. These include commitments to norms of international behaviour as reflected in the UN Charter and OSCE documents, as well as more explicit commitments such as respecting states' sovereignty, independence and right to choose the means to ensure their security, and the peaceful settlement of disputes. Both sides commit themselves to strengthening the OSCE with the aim of creating a common space of security and stability in Europe.
5. Section II creates a new forum: the NATO - Russia Permanent Joint Council (PJC). This will be the venue for consultations, cooperation and - wherever possible - consensus building between the Alliance and Russia. The PJC will:
hold regular consultations on a broad range of political or security related matters;
based on these consultations, develop joint initiatives on which NATO and Russia would agree to speak or act in parallel;
once consensus has been reached, make joint decisions, if appropriate, and take joint action on a case-by-case basis.
Such joint actions may include peacekeeping operations under the authority of the UN Security Council or the responsibility of the OSCE.
6. Section III details a broad range of topics on which NATO and Russia can consult and perhaps cooperate, including preventing and settling conflicts, peacekeeping, preventing proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and exchanging information on security and defence policies and forces. Conversion of defence industries, defence related environmental issues, and civil emergency preparedness are other areas for consultation and possible cooperation spelled out in this section.
7. Section IV covers military issues. In this section, the members of NATO reiterate their statement of 10 December 1996 that they have no intention, no plan and no reason to deploy nuclear weapons on the territory of new members, nor any need to change any aspects of NATO's nuclear posture or nuclear policy - and do not foresee any future need to do so.
NATO also reiterates its 14 March 1997 Statement indicating that in the current and foreseeable security environment, NATO plans to carry out its collective defence and other missions by ensuring the necessary interoperability, integration and capability for reinforcement rather than by additional permanent stationing of substantial combat forces. Accordingly, the Alliance will have to rely on adequate infrastructure to allow for reinforcement if necessary.
8. NATO and Russia commit themselves in the same section to pursuing promptly the work relating to the adaptation of the treaty governing conventional forces in Europe (CFE), in order to further reduce the levels of Treaty Limited Equipment. This commitment will be pursued in the ongoing negotiations on CFE adaptation in Vienna and will help to achieve a result that reflects the changed security environment in Europe since the Treaty was adopted in 1990.
Finally, Section IV provides mechanisms to foster closer military-to-military cooperation between NATO and Russia, including by creating military liaison missions on both sides.
8Both sides have agreed that nothing in this document restricts or impedes the ability of either side to decide independently. It does not provide NATO or Russia at any stage with a right of veto over the actions of the other. The provisions of the NATO-Russia Founding Act can also not be used as a means to disadvantage the interests of other states.
9 The NATO-Russia Founding Act does not subordinate NATO to any other organisation, and it can in no way diminish the political or military effectiveness of the Alliance, including its ability to meet its security commitment to current and future members. NATO and Russia will work together on a broad spectrum of tasks in the Permanent Joint Council, which will, however, remain clearly separate from the North Atlantic Council - NATO's own decision-making body.
The Founding Act with Russia has been negotiated and will be concluded on its own merits; it is not meant as a compensation. It does not delay, limit or dilute NATO's opening for the accession of new members, and it will not relegate any new NATO member to second class status.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@kevkeary4700 Many reasons, the UK was a founding member of NATO, FInland was not. During the Soviet period Finnish foreign policy had to be approved by Moscow, how is that political strength ? The UK has major influence via the British Commonwealth, its former Empire, in Australia, the USA, India, etc Does Finland have this political influence ? NO way it does. Don't kid yourself dude. FInland is a decent country, but who do you think listens in the white house to Finland ? Sorry to say, but NO one. But the Brits get a say and the ear of many people.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
As Mr. Sims stated "Russia is the opposite of freedom", I get the feeling VP Harris has got our backs here in Ukraine and of course there will be no more Sullivan/Charap et. al. "escalation management", let's see how her new national security team pans that out. Victory will probably have to come in stages, Sir James Sherr outlined a scenario like that today on Brian Whitmore's "Ppwer vertical" podcast. On ruzzia joining NATO back in the 90's, it seems like letting the fox into the metaphorical hen house, I get the impression, from his known modus operandi's so far, Putin would have just started to attack members from within and wrecked NATO totally. Mr. Sim's 💯, If you are going to set such a line, you need to enforce it. It reminds me of a skit Cheppelle did about Rick James (Coke's one helluva drug), who was a habitual line crosser, because he was doing too much coke, and Eddie and Charlie Murphy would have to keep him in check and literally thump him to get him to cut that crap out.. You gotta keep line crossers in check or you look weak!
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2