A. Slucis uzskata, ka Latvijā nepieciešama atomstacija, lai valsts nebūtu atkarīga no Krievijas energopiegādēm. Vēl viņš domā, ka jāizveido 100 000 vīru liela zemessardze un sešu mēnešu obligātais karadienests, jāpaaugstina valsts valodas kontrolējošo iestāžu aktivitāšu līmenis, pieņemot darbā 1000 valodas inspektorus, un jāveicina krievu repatriācija.
Pēdējais ieteikums nav nekāds ultranacionālista murgojums: 2006. gadā Vladimirs Putins, toreizējais Krievijas prezidents, jau aicināja savus tautiešus atgriezties etniskajā dzimtenē, savukārt šogad Krievijas Reģionālās attīstības ministrija jau ieguldījusi aptuveni vienu miljonu latu īpašā programmā, kas izveidota konkrētam mērķim – krievu repatriācijai. Un jāatgādina demagogiem, ka še nav runa par "deportācijām", ko saldkaisli apžļembā viens otrs latviešu politologs, bet gan par repatriāciju, kas ir humāns, saprotams, atbalstāms process.
Diez, kāda ir mūsdienu versija par "menševiki pret lieliniekiem"? Kur ir Staļins pret Trocki? Kārlis Markss pret Bakuņinu?
Šķiet, ka esmu to atradis t.s. vegānisma kustībā. Lūdzu, Exhibit № 1 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bhPPYN9
"Latvijas Nacionālās bibliotēkas sniegtos pakalpojumus pilnā apmērā var lietot tikai LNB reģistrētie lasītāji, kuriem ir izsniegta LNB lasītāja karte."
Igauņi publicējuši apskatu "Russia’s Espionage in Estonia: A Quantitative Analysis of Convictions"
Salīdzinājumam, aspaktījos VDD pārskatus. Par 2019.g. vēl nekā:
Salīdzinājumam, aspaktījos SAB pārskatus. Par 2019.g. vēl nekā:
Salīdzinājumam, aspaktījos MIDD (Militārā izlūkošana) -- tur vispār nav pārskatu:
Jāsecina, ka mūsu drošības dienestu rezultāti ir daudz labāki par igauņiem.
Pie mums krievi nespiego. Baidās, maitas.
Latvija ir "denied area" un "Moscow-rules" nestāv ne tuvu "Riga-rules".
Gadās tik pa kādam pārmījniekam, kas fotogrāfē vilcienu sastāvus.
Ar to arī mūs apsveicu, dārgie draugi! Veiksmīgu nākamo, 2020. gadu!
"Atis Zakatistovs atbildēja uz Daffy Duck [Otto Ozols] jautājumiem:"
Highlight [Otto Ozols]:
"Jānis Jurkāns kā DonKihots cenšas cīnīties par saliedētu, pilsonisku sabiedrību, kurā cilvēki netiek iedalīti škirās pēc viņu tautības. Nekādi murgi par pievienošanu kaut kādiem austrumu blokiem viņam pat prātā nav nākuši. Mazliet ironiski, bet Jurkāns & Co savā būtībā cīnās par to nosacīti normālo daudzo tautību līdzāspastāvešanu, kāda bija Pirmās republikas un pat Ulmaņa režīma laikā."
"[The] Finns were not so insane as to imagine that they could achieve a military victory. Instead, as a Finnish friend expressed it to me, “Our aim was instead to make Russia’s victory as slow, as painful and as costly for the Russians as possible.” [One] platoon skied through the forest, invisible in their white camouflage uniforms, to within firing range of a Soviet column. They then climbed nearby trees while carrying their rifles, waited until they could identify the Soviet officers in the light of the bonfire, shot and killed the officers, and then skied off, leaving the Soviets frightened, demoralised and leaderless. Finally, the Finnish army, like the Israeli army today, was effective far out of proportion to its numbers, because of its informality that emphasised soldiers taking initiative and making their own decisions rather than blindly obeying orders. Neighbouring Sweden, although closely connected to Finland through long-shared history and shared culture, refused to send troops out of fear of becoming embroiled in war with the Soviet Union. But why, in March 1940, did Stalin not order the Soviet army to keep advancing and to occupy all of Finland? One reason was that the fierce Finnish resistance had made clear that a further advance would continue to be slow, painful and costly.
When I visited in 1959, knowing almost nothing about the history of Finland’s two wars with the Soviet Union, I asked my hosts why Finland deferred to the Soviet Union in so many ways, imported the inferior Moskvich cars and was so afraid about the possibility of a Soviet attack. I told my hosts the US would surely defend Finland if the Soviet Union attacked. In retrospect, there was nothing more cruel, ignorant and tactless that I could have said to a Finn. Finland had bitter memories that, when it was attacked by the Soviet Union in 1939, it had not been helped by the US, Sweden, Germany, Britain or France. Finland had to learn from its history that its survival and independence depended on itself."
If you say why not bomb them [communists] tomorrow, I say why not today? If you say today at five o' clock, I say why not one o' clock?
Aven worked with Gaidar in the 1980s, when both were in the All-Union Scientific Research Institute for System Studies (VNIISI), a Moscow branch of the mysterious International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA) in Vienna.
The most telling fact is probably the common biographical detail shared by all the three economists-politicians-oligarchs (Aven, Chubais and Berezovsky) as well as Gaidar. All of them were, in one way or another, linked to the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.
In a recent interview, Economic Development Minister Alexey Ulyukaev indirectly confirmed that the institute had been envisioned by Yury Andropov, the head of the Soviet KGB and later secretary general of the Communist Party's Central Committee, as an incubator for ideas and cadres for reforms he planned to implement in the Soviet Union.
True, Ulyukaev spoke not about the Institute itself, but about its branch in Moscow, the above-mentioned All-Union Scientific Research Institute for System Studies. However, when asked about whether Andropov had indeed put together a reform project for the USSR, which had involved all the "young reformers", Alyukaev said: "Of course it existed! The most important institutes - first of all, the All-Union Scientific Research Institute for System Studies, the Institute for Economy and Technological Development Prognosis (where Gaidar later worked, M.L.) - were working on it. Only our 'curators' did not foresee qualitative change, all they thought about was how to change the system of indices and motivation.
There can be different takes on what the KGB curators of these "young economists" did or did not foresee. For instance, it is often claimed (especially regarding Berezovsky) that Russia's oligarchs had long assumed that they had "privatized" the KGB, but it eventually turned out that it was them who were "privatized" by the KGB.
But let me focus on facts, not interpretations. It is clearly a fact that after the failed coup of August 1991 the IIASA economists - Aven, Gaidar and Chubais - suddenly rose to highest government posts (there were many more IIASA alumni there).
This interesting and telling fact is what makes me want to look deeper into the role of the IIASA in their respective careers. Especially since Stanislav Shatalin, the head developer of the 500 Days programme that was to make the USSR transition to market economy, had also previously been linked to the IIASA. Not to mention many other IIASA alumni who are now important cogs in Putin's regime.
According to Grechenevsky, the anonymous KGB curator, who accompanied the "young economists" to internships at the IIASA, might be the former KGB colonel, or major general - and later businessman - Sergey Kugushev. Kugushev is known to have been involved in one of the analyst groups appointed by Andropov to draft a modernization plan for the USSR.
Not only has he described in detail Andropov's reform plan for the USSR, Corporation Red Star, but also elaborated on the role the IIASA was to play in implementing it. According to Kugushev, Andropov had decided to have specialists, who would be in charge of implementing the USSR reform plan, trained abroad and instructed in Western expertise.
The selection process for the "interns" was particularly strict, the head of the KGB took personal charge of it, often sifting through secret surveillance footage. One of the central criteria for would-be interns was how easy they would be to handle once they were in top government positions. This was part of preparation for, according to Kugushev, a possibility of the Communist Party loosing power. The KGB planned to stay on and take over control in the country.
This lengthy essay argues that as Europe disappears, Eurasia coheres. In other words, “The supercontinent is becoming one fluid, comprehensible unit of trade and conflict, as the Westphalian system of states weakens and older, imperial legacies – Russian, Chinese, Iranian, [and] Turkish – become paramount. Every crisis from Central Europe to the ethnic-Han Chinese heartland is now interlinked. There is [only] one singular battlespace.” The question for Continental America, given its status as an 'island' far away from the Eurasian supercontinent, is whether it will be able to “keep its powder dry” or not.
One of the main themes that runs though the book is that the days of monolithic nation states are over, and the future will be more fragmented, more chaotic, and more dangerous than the present. The United States can no longer be the world’s policeman, and both Russia and China will have to deal with serious internal instabilities.
- those Muslim prison-states have all but collapsed (either on their own or by outside interference), unleashing a tide of refugees into debt-ridden and economically stagnant European societies.
- The more urbanized, the more educated, and even the more enlightened the world becomes, counterintuitively, the more politically unstable it becomes, too. This is what techno-optimists and those who inhabit the world of fancy corporate gatherings are prone to miss: They wrongly equate wealth creation—and unevenly distributed wealth creation at that—with political order and stability.
- Russia does not require an invasion, only a zone of influence in the Intermarium that it can achieve by gradually compromising the democratic vitality of rimland states. (Hungary, in particular, is well on its way in this regard.)
- America is learning an ironic truth of empire: You endure by not fighting every battle. In the first century A.D., Tiberius preserved Rome by not interfering in bloody internecine conflicts beyond its northern frontier. Instead, he practiced strategic patience as he watched the carnage. He understood the limits of Roman power.
- It took England nearly half a century to hold the first meeting of a parliament after the signing of the Magna Carta, and more than seven hundred years to achieve women’s suffrage. What we in the West define as a healthy democracy took England the better part of a millennium to achieve. A functioning democracy is not a tool kit that can be easily exported, but an expression of culture and historical development.
- If the United States helps topple the dictator Bashar al-Assad on Wednesday, then what will it do on Thursday, when it finds that it has helped midwife to power a Sunni jihadist regime, or on Friday, when ethnic cleansing of the Shia-trending Alawites commences?
- The fact that the world is modernizing does not mean that it is Westernizing. The impact of urbanization and mass communications, coupled with poverty and ethnic divisions, will not lead to peoples’ everywhere thinking as we do.
- liberalism thrives only when security can be taken for granted—and that in the future we may not have that luxury.
- the external aggression of these new regional hegemons is, in part, motivated by internal weakness, as they employ nationalism to assuage unraveling domestic economies upon which the stability of their societies rests.
- People everywhere—in the West, in the Middle East, in Russia, in China—desperately need something to believe in, if only to alleviate their mental condition. They are dangerously ready for a new catechism given the right circumstances, for what passes as a new fad or cult in the West can migrate toward extremism in less stable or chaotic societies.
- In In The Face of War: Reflections of Men and Combat (1976), Larteguy writes that contemporary wars are, in particular, made for the side that doesn’t care about “the preservation of a good conscience.” So he asks, “How do you explain that to save liberty, liberty must first be suppressed?” His answer can only be thus: “In that rests the weakness of democratic regimes, a weakness that is at the same time a credit to them, an honor.”
- “The heart of liberalism is individualism,” [Huntington] wrote. “It emphasizes the reason and moral dignity of the individual.” But the military man, because of the nature of his job, has to assume irrationality and the permanence of violent conflict in human relations.
- “The liberal glorifies self-expression” because the liberal takes national security for granted; the military man glorifies “obedience” because he does not take that security for granted.
- the twenty-first century will be defined by vulgar, populist anarchy that elites at places like Aspen and Davos will have less and less influence upon, and will less and less be able to comprehend. Imperialism, then, will be viewed as much with nostalgia as with disdain.
The Baltic states are like three pieces of meat on a skewer comprising a single road route from Poland that passes through terrain less than 90 kilometers (60 miles) wide at its narrowest point.
You are not allowed to access this content due to your location or other restrictions set by content owner! (Error code: 5) # Your country is CH and IP address is XXX
2019. gada prioritātes - atbalstām projektus, kuri veicina:
* latviskās identitātes un piederības stiprināšanu un latviešu valodas saglabāšanu, kā arī kultūras izpēti un saglabāšanu;
* mērķtiecīgu diasporas iesaistīšanu Latvijas tautsaimniecības, valsts pārvaldes un zinātnes attīstīšanā;
* diasporas pilsoniskās un politiskās līdzdalības veicināšanu;
Tas laikam par pēdējo punktu -- veicināt remigrāciju.
Tangible common equity (TCE) is an uncommonly used measure of a company's financial strength. It indicates how much ownership equity owners of common stock would receive in the event of a company's liquidation. During the financial and economic crisis of 2008–2009, it gained public popularity as a measure of the viability of large commercial banks. TCE, when used in a ratio with tangible common assets, is a measure of a bank's ability to absorb losses (e.g., homeowners defaulting on mortgages) before becoming insolvent. It is one of the factors considered by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency to determine if a bank has become insolvent.
Ar nenogurstošo Rietumu nopelšanu un revizionismu Jaša Levins ir sevišķi kaitinošs, jo tādi ir visi, kas zāģē zaru uz kura sēž vai apdzied lielo padomju "tautu brālību". Tomēr, ja atsijā kaitniecisko ideoloģiju, izklāstītie fakti ir interesanti paši par sevi, pat ja tos vērtē pilnīgi pretēji — viens kā pierādījumu Rietumu ļaunuma impērijai, otrs kā vēlamu parādību. Tostarp, tas sniedz labu ieskatu ASV "lawfare" caur t.s. "Jackson–Vanik amendment".
Soviet Jews were seen as a means to an end. We were seen as a weapon.( ... tālāk ... )
The US government’s push to liberate Soviet Jews is not normally seen as an attempt to leverage and weaponize nationalist identity against the Soviet Union — but that is precisely what it was.
In the 1960s and 70s, a Jewish nationalist and cultural movement began to take off organically in the Soviet Union. It was highly illegal and started out in secrecy. People went to jail for it and had their lives destroyed. But it kept growing. Combined with USSR’s systemic antisemitism, repression of Jewish culture and language, and a crackdown on activists who wanted to emigrate to Israel, this cultural and nationalist awaking began to congeal into a small but committed anti-communist and anti-Soviet movement — with its own underground samizdats, leaders, and organizations.
Israel was the first to offer covert support for the movement in the hopes of using Soviet Jewish immigration as an untapped demographic weapon against what its leaders saw as the Palestinian population threat.
But in America people had much grander plans for it.
In the 1970’s business world there were no “Stakeholders,” there were only owners, employees, vendors, and clients. Each group had to represent and comport themselves as such. In the tour d’force below, Mike lays down the law. Davis reminds everyone that he owns the company and that he has standards. Standards must be followed. No liquor on site. Keep the workplace clean. Hire good people. Pay them well. Take care of yourself. Take care of the equipment. We are here to work, not be friends. This is true in every business, why not just say so? Why keep up the charade to the contrary?
Kanādas armijas atvaļinātais ģenerālis M.Barils norādīja, ka pēc tikšanās ar militārajiem speciālistiem nācies izteikt neizpratni par Latvijas parlamenta rīcību Otavas konvencijas jautājumā. Latvijas militāro struktūru atbildīgās amatpersonas norādījušas, ka problēmām nevajadzēt būt, jo Latvija jau ievēro konvencijas principus, turklāt kājnieku mīnas pasaulē vairs neesot aktuālas, jo tiekot izmantota cita, modernāka tehnika.
Uz viesu neizpratni A.Laksa atbildēja, ka 8.Saeimā lielākajai daļai deputātu nav politiskās un likumdošanas pieredzes, tāpēc jau uz kādu no nākamajām komisijas sēdēm tiks uzaicināts aizsardzības ministrs Ģirts Valdis Kristovskis, lai sniegtu paskaidrojumus par Latvijas kavēšanos konvencijas ratificēšanā. Komisijas priekšsēdētājs pauda pārliecību, ka jau tuvākajā nākotnē Saeima savu neizdarību labos un Otavas konvencija tiks ratificēta.
Tikšanās noslēgumā Kanādas armijas atvaļinātais ģenerālis M.Barils norādīja, ka, jo vairāk valstu pievienosies konvencijai un to ratificēs, jo “neērtāk būs” lielākajām pasaules mīnu ražotājām un uzkrājējvalstīm — Krievijai, ASV, Ķīnai, Indijai, Baltkrievijai, Pakistānai, Korejai. “Būtu tikai loģiski, ka tāda maza, demokrātiska un pavisam nemilitāra valsts kā Latvija parakstītu šo nozīmīgo konvenciju,” sarunas noslēgumā teica [Arnolds] Laksa.
( ... tālāk ... )
Key indicators will include movement forward of field hospitals, bulk fuel and ammunition;
marshalling of transport aircraft and rail cars; unit recalls; social media activity; deployment of large forces
towards the border and into Belarus; and intensified information operations and border provocations, among
The Russian intention is twofold: if possible, to strike
through Lithuania to link up with Kaliningrad, cutting off the Baltic States altogether; if not, to seize and hold
Estonia and possibly Latvia to demonstrate NATO’s inability to enforce Article 5 and fracture the Alliance. The
pretext would likely be claims that Russian ethnic minorities have been attacked or oppressed. NATO would
see these preparations, and much would depend on an early decision to posture for defense. Russian
disinformation would be intense and many allies would be hesitant to react. If the North Atlantic Council delays
until after Russian forces have crossed the border, the lost time could be fatal. In this contingency, the US should
immediately form a coalition based on its strongest and closest allies.
If all goes well, the Baltic States will be arrayed for defense with seven active brigades and three eFP battalions,
augmented by one US heavy brigade in Lithuania and US airborne brigades in Latvia and Estonia, before
Russian forces reach NATO territory. Reserve units will secure critical infrastructure and provide local defense.
On D-Day, the most likely Russian course of action will be an attack by the 1st GTA, with one tank division
(with two brigades) and two airborne regiments, from Belarus on the axis Minsk–Vilnius–Kaunas–Kaliningrad.
A supporting attack,
conducted with one motor rifle division (with two brigades) and one airborne regiment, will attempt to seize
Riga along the axis Daugavpils–Jekabpils–Riga. This operation will feature parachute and heliborne operations
in rear areas to seize key crossings over the Daugava River.
These operations will follow major road and rail networks and will ignore national boundaries. As a theater
reserve, the Western Military District will retain control of one air assault division, one Spetsnaz brigade, and
one heavy artillery brigade. Spetsnaz units will not be used as maneuver units but will instead carry out attacks
against critical nodes and infrastructure. They will be used boldly and aggressively deep inside Baltic territory
and deserve serious consideration from commanders and planners.
In the attack, Russian commanders will advance aggressively under heavy artillery, supported by attack
helicopters, fixed wing close air support, cyberattacks and electronic warfare. Small tactical drones will be used
in “swarms” to spot artillery targets. While force ratios in terms of maneuver units are not overwhelming,
Russian superiority in armor, artillery fires, electronic warfare and close air support will be strong. Combat
experience will also provide an edge. They will show little regard for civilian casualties and will be prepared to
sustain losses themselves. All Russian unit leaders will understand the importance of winning quickly, as every
delay will give NATO more time to react.( ... tālāk ... )
"The US Navy has deployed sea lions to detect divers in the Persian Gulf. The sea lion is trained to detect the diver, connect a marker buoy to his leg by a C-shaped handcuff-like clamp, surface, and then bark loudly to raise the alarm. 20 sea lions have been trained for this at the US Naval Warfare Systems Center in San Diego. Some have been flown to Bahrain to help the Harbor Patrol Unit to guard the US Navy's 5th Fleet. Sea lions adapt easily to warm water, can dive repeatedly and swim up to 25 mph, can see in near-darkness, and can determine the direction of underwater sound. In training the sea lions have been known to chase divers onto land.
In 1970 to 1980 trained dolphins killed 2 Russian frogmen who were putting limpet mines on a US cargo ship in Cam Ranh bay in Vietnam. Subsequently, Russian PDSS frogmen were trained to fight back against trained dolphins. In an incident on the coast of Nicaragua PDSS frogmen killed trained anti-frogman dolphins. Arrival of underwater rifles and pistols seems to make the trained animal threat less."
Trump’s pullout from Syria is a tabloid-friendly illustration of the consequences of three decades of European security free-riding. After the end of the Cold War, the United States lost its strategic need to protect Europe. Europe may still be an economic superpower—able to impose global obligations on even the largest companies—but it is not a military superpower.
Wealth is only as good as the rules-based international order that upholds property rights, free trade, and market-based economic institutions. Or, in other words: That pile of gold is very useful—until the people with guns come and take it.
Without a shared defense policy, pooled military assets, and common military doctrine, the continent’s eastern flank will be vulnerable.
The Swiss Federal Court ordered the deportation of a second-generation Turkish immigrant who had committed 61 crimes within a two-year period. The 25-year-old was sentenced to 40 months imprisonment and will have to leave Switzerland after serving his sentence. Local and judicial authorities in canton Bern determined that integration had failed and that it was reasonable to send him to Turkey even though he had never lived there.
the evolving American view of Syria is really little more than a microcosm of an evolving American view of the Middle East writ large. American troop deployments throughout the region have been plunging for a decade and are now down to about one-tenth of their peak. America now has more troops in Afghanistan than the rest of the region combined, and that deployment is well on its way to a complete phase out. CENTCOM HQ in Qatar will almost certainly be closed soon (you don’t need a forward command center if there’s nothing to command). The Iraq advisory force is leaving. Kuwait, once the launchpad for multiple wars, has been reduced to lilypad status. The Turks are certain to eject U.S. forces from the Incirlik base within a year.
Last month the Iranians launched a drone and missile attack on Saudi energy facilities, taking some 5 million barrels of daily output offline. Under normal circumstances that would have prompted massive American military retaliation. Instead, Trump’s response to MBS’ call for assistance was something along the lines of, “sorry, I have a fundraiser.” For those of you who think oil is a globalized commodity and so the U.S. remains vulnerable to price swings, think again. The president has preexisting authority to limit U.S. crude exports. Should global prices get too crazy, an executive order can keep U.S. shale output at home, splitting the North American energy market off from the global market. The Saudi headache is now optional.
Turkey and the United States have been pulling apart for three decades. In a world where Soviet containment is the end-all be-all, the alliance was everything. Remove the Soviet threat, however, and the Turks have interests in the Balkans, Caucasus, Persia, Mesopotamia and the Levant that have next to nothing to do with American interests.
If the Americans really don’t have an interest in maintaining a global Order, then the Middle East is barren of American national interests and it can now firmly be someone else’s problem. It isn’t nice. It isn’t responsible. It won’t be pretty. But that doesn’t mean it isn’t true.
Russian forces can really only operate in Syria with Turkish acquiescence. With the Americans gone and the Turks ramping up, it's probably the Russians’ turn to GTFO of the region. If they don’t, a direct Turkish-Russian clash that leaves the Russians on the wrong side of all their backup will ensue. The climbdown and/or massacre would be globally humiliating.
Europe is… screwed. It is one thing to have to deal with a prickly Turkey who stays at home. It is quite another to have Europe’s largest land army deploying in force in a way that most Europeans have publicly condemned. With the exception of the French, no European power has the capacity of independent power projection to the region. And now Turkey is publicly threatening to herd millions of Syrian refugees to Europe’s doorstep unless the Europeans shut up about Turkey’s new military campaign. After the United States, Turkey ties with Russia for being Europe’s most important partner. Expect those ties to burn in the months to come.
Second, the Americans going pseudo-mercenary is about to be the new normal. If you cannot provide something shiny to bait the Americans into your region (cash is shiny), then you are on your own. That development will reverberate far beyond the Persian Gulf region.
Al-Mouhaji (2002) in his seminal study of European conflict tendencies attributed this primarily to the pork and beef based diet which is rich in zinc and iron, two minerals that have been proven to stimulate the aggression glands. Hence the expression "I got beef with you"
Incidentally there's evidence that this link between eating meat and aggression was known as early as Roman times. And that explains why Julius Caesar invented the Caesar salad and tried to popularise it among enemy tribes.
In more recent years, Europe has witnessed the largest campaign of its kind to promote veganism, precisely because the authorities are aware of the violent tendencies meat-eating triggers
"The thawing of the permafrost has a very good effect. The mammoth bone comes out and brings us money," said Yevgeny Konstantinov, a newspaper editor in the Arctic town of Saskylakh. "Everyone rides Jeeps now."
Navigate: (Previous 50 entries)