Hi Peter!
I don't want III Word War. I hope, You too.
Lydia.



(February 23, 2012)- Former Member of Russian Joint Chiefs of Staff Col.-Gen. Leonid Ivashov: Russia Is Ready to Use Military Power to Defend Iran and Syria; Attack on Syria or Iran Is Indirect Attack on Russia.

Interviewer: "Dr. Leonid, do you think that these preparations and very large maneuvers, which will soon be conducted by Russia, are meant as preparation for war, or rather, a military strike against Iran?" [...]

Leonid Ivashov: "These maneuvers and training will demonstrate Russia's readiness to use military power to defend its national interests and to bolster its political position. The maneuvers will show that Russia does not want any military operations to be waged against Iran or Syria. I assume that the people in the West and in Israel who design the schemes for a large geopolitical operation in the greater Middle East region draw a direct connection between the situation in Syria and in Iran. Indeed, these two countries are allies, and both are considered guaranteed partners of Russia. The only question, therefore, is who they will try to destroy first as a stable country: Syria or Iran. [...]

"A strike against Syria or Iran is an indirect strike against Russia and its interests. Russia would lose important positions and allies in the Arab world. Therefore, by defending Syria, Russia is defending its own interests.

"In addition, Russia is thus defending the entire world from Fascism. Everybody should acknowledge that Fascism is making strides on our planet. What they did in Libya is nearly identical to what Hitler and his armies did against Poland and then Russia. Today, therefore, Russia is defending the entire world from Fascism."

Hi Lydia,

No one wants a third world war but the question is put in a very simplistic way. In our latest chat we discussed part of this issue and it's not a yes or no question and nor are Syria and Iran similar in regard to Israeli security issues.

Iran regularly states that they want to destroy Israel and the Israeli people. With that in mind a nuclear Iran is a danger to Israel but not only to Israel. A nuclear Iran is a danger to the western world and many of the Arab countries in the region.

In regard to the video. The general in a way was threatening the west with what he said. I believe you are aware what's happening in Syria. The only non arab country still supporting Syria is Russia. There is a consensus amongst the western countries and more if you take into account the UN and the rest of its membership all are demanding action to be taken. Russia vetoed the latest actions in the security council. The muslim countries also want to take action aside from Lebanon and Iran.

Iran is a different story and for all practical purposes a nuclear Iran endangers Israel (and the western world) and Israel has every right to defend herself. If the sanctions don't work and so far they haven't a preemptive strike might be the only option left. Only time will tell.

If you think about a preemptive strike against Iran whether by Israel, America/Israel together or a coalition of countries it doesn't necessarily mean there will be a third world war. Far from it and what you have to consider is that the majority of arab countries also are against a nuclear Iran cos that endanger them as well. That also negates what the Russian general said in the video cos very few arab countries will be upset if Iran's nuclear capabilities will be destroyed or delayed for what ever period of time.

The video you posted is as I said basically a threat to the west and totally unnecessary cos the west isn't threatening Russia.

Shalom,

Peter

Quote:
Hi Peter!
I don't want III Word War. I hope, You too.
Lydia.



(February 23, 2012)- Former Member of Russian Joint Chiefs of Staff Col.-Gen. Leonid Ivashov: Russia Is Ready to Use Military Power to Defend Iran and Syria; Attack on Syria or Iran Is Indirect Attack on Russia.

Interviewer: "Dr. Leonid, do you think that these preparations and very large maneuvers, which will soon be conducted by Russia, are meant as preparation for war, or rather, a military strike against Iran?" [...]

Leonid Ivashov: "These maneuvers and training will demonstrate Russia's readiness to use military power to defend its national interests and to bolster its political position. The maneuvers will show that Russia does not want any military operations to be waged against Iran or Syria. I assume that the people in the West and in Israel who design the schemes for a large geopolitical operation in the greater Middle East region draw a direct connection between the situation in Syria and in Iran. Indeed, these two countries are allies, and both are considered guaranteed partners of Russia. The only question, therefore, is who they will try to destroy first as a stable country: Syria or Iran. [...]

"A strike against Syria or Iran is an indirect strike against Russia and its interests. Russia would lose important positions and allies in the Arab world. Therefore, by defending Syria, Russia is defending its own interests.

"In addition, Russia is thus defending the entire world from Fascism. Everybody should acknowledge that Fascism is making strides on our planet. What they did in Libya is nearly identical to what Hitler and his armies did against Poland and then Russia. Today, therefore, Russia is defending the entire world from Fascism."

Hi Peter!

The nuclear issue of Iran is not the main reason that the West and the U.S. is preparing to strike.
The American geopolitical doctrine called "national security strategy," defined by the target system for all U.S. agencies, non-governmental organizations, and of course for the armed forces. This target setting - unipolar world led by the United States.
In the "U.S. national security strategy" in the 21st century is described in detail an implementation of the unipolar world. It is written that the installation of American dominance requires monitoring (secure access) for key areas of the world, strategic communications and global resources.
Iran meets all these requirements.
In the event of an attack on Iran's leading powers will not go away.
About ready to go to war in the event of an attack on Iran has already warned in China.
Conflict can result in a third world war, and it is possible that it will be nuclear.
If there is a war waged against Iran, he will have the right to defend themselves using all means at its disposal.
And the aggressor strikes against targets on foreign soil are not only possible but mandatory.
The Iranians know that to stop the aggression can only be a great loss of people to the American public opposed the war.
Where no rockets fly so far, there may sabotage actions.
For Russia and the Caspian Five consequences will be severe.
This is a huge refugee flows, strengthening radical elements, reduction of economic cooperation.
Gen. Ivashov assesses the possibility of war 50 to 50.
He believes that the Obama administration and U.S. military
do not want war. The military is already tired of war, and Obama is afraid that this adventure will prevent his election.
But there are powerful financial circles, who want to earn on this war, there is a Republican neocons who insist on this beat, there is a pro-Israeli circles in the U.S. who advocate an immediate hit.
But this can happen that will make a decision on aggression. This is a provocation, or that pripishut Iran, for example, a terrorist act, the right-wing supporters of the outbreak of war could trigger rapid whether attacks on Israel, or whether there is a terrorist attack, or a fifth column in Iran could trigger such as closing the Strait and it would be a provocation and the United States an excuse to unleash the war.


Chairman - Leonid Ivashov, president of the Academy of Geopolitical Problems, Doctor of Historical Sciences, Professor of International Journalism, MGIMO, Colonel-General.

He was born August 31, 1943 in Kyrgyzstan. He graduated from the Tashkent Higher Military Command School named after VI Lenin Military Academy named after MV Frunze. Since 1976, he served in the central office of the Ministry of Defense, served as Secretary of the Council of CIS Defense Ministers, was chief of the Main Directorate of International Military Cooperation of the Ministry of Defense. He was awarded orders and medals of the Soviet Union, Russia and foreign countries. Passion for life - Poetry.

Hi Lydia,

I read through the transcript of the video but the trans literal translation is not a very good one and the meaning is unclear in many parts.

I'd appreciate an accurate translation if you can find one.

Shalom,

Peter

Quote:
Hi Peter!

Threat or thought out plan of a military attack on Iran

The nuclear issue of Iran is not the main reason that the West and the U.S. is preparing to strike.
The American geopolitical doctrine called "national security strategy," defined by the target system for all U.S. agencies, non-governmental organizations, and of course for the armed forces. This target setting - unipolar world led by the United States.
In the "U.S. national security strategy" in the 21st century is described in detail an implementation of the unipolar world. It is written that the installation of American dominance requires monitoring (secure access) for key areas of the world, strategic communications and global resources.
Iran meets all these requirements.
In the event of an attack on Iran's leading powers will not go away.
About ready to go to war in the event of an attack on Iran has already warned in China.
Conflict can result in a third world war, and it is possible that it will be nuclear.
If there is a war waged against Iran, he will have the right to defend themselves using all means at its disposal.
And the aggressor strikes against targets on foreign soil are not only possible but mandatory.
The Iranians know that to stop the aggression can only be a great loss of people to the American public opposed the war.
Where no rockets fly so far, there may sabotage actions.
For Russia and the Caspian Five consequences will be severe.
This is a huge refugee flows, strengthening radical elements, reduction of economic cooperation.
Gen. Ivashov assesses the possibility of war 50 to 50.
He believes that the Obama administration and U.S. military
do not want war. The military is already tired of war, and Obama is afraid that this adventure will prevent his election.
But there are powerful financial circles, who want to earn on this war, there is a Republican neocons who insist on this beat, there is a pro-Israeli circles in the U.S. who advocate an immediate hit.
But this can happen that will make a decision on aggression. This is a provocation, or that pripishut Iran, for example, a terrorist act, the right-wing supporters of the outbreak of war could trigger rapid whether attacks on Israel, or whether there is a terrorist attack, or a fifth column in Iran could trigger such as closing the Strait and it would be a provocation and the United States an excuse to unleash the war.


Chairman - Leonid Ivashov, president of the Academy of Geopolitical Problems, Doctor of Historical Sciences, Professor of International Journalism, MGIMO, Colonel-General.

He was born August 31, 1943 in Kyrgyzstan. He graduated from the Tashkent Higher Military Command School named after VI Lenin Military Academy named after MV Frunze. Since 1976, he served in the central office of the Ministry of Defense, served as Secretary of the Council of CIS Defense Ministers, was chief of the Main Directorate of International Military Cooperation of the Ministry of Defense. He was awarded orders and medals of the Soviet Union, Russia and foreign countries. Passion for life - Poetry.

I would point out two elements you overlook Peter, and that conclude to your saying that the Russian gentleman is threatening the west.

1. Russia is not USSR.

2. The « West » needs to be defined as Globalists when one looks at the west for what the tendency is with regards to the UN and the EU.

The Russian gentleman in this video simply says what is very different to traditional Israeli and US foreign politics which have been having an apparent free ride with barely any noticeable barriers. It's not a simple matter that of imposing an idea - however valuable and truthful it may seem - when others see it very differently. Politics always lead to wars when personal ambitions and false pride govern, which is usualy what politics are all about.

Friendly
Robert