From what kind of help from the United States refused to Our homeland?

From what kind of help from the United States refused to Russia?On the days of Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev signed a decree on the output of the Russian Federation on cooperation contract with the United States in terms of law enforcement and combating drug trafficking. So Makarov, our motherland and the United States within a defined agreement worked together a little more than 10 years. It should be recalled that the agreement between Moscow and Washington signed in autumn 2002 year. This is yet another cancellation of the previous agreements with the United States, which went to the Russian authorities over the past few months.

Of course, that such a course of official Moscow can be considered a continuation of a series of mutual recriminations and claims that have long since put an end to the so-called reset, first-looking very, very promising. But with all this we must not forget the fact that Moscow and Washington in the case in the near future obligation, to speak out so shoot. For example, the ban on working in Russia for certain non-profit organizations related to the fact that through these organizations often received funds from the United States for a frank sponsorship of destabilizing events in the Russian countryside. Resonant "law of Dima Yakovlev" became Moscow's response to the one shown in the U.S. "Magnitsky Act", and the decision on the RF output from the contract on cooperation in the field of law enforcement and anti-drug activities were born after Washington announced that out of the working group of the President's oboestoronney Commission for the Development of Democracy and civilian society in Russia.

You can with certainty state that now things between Russia and the U.S. are among the most complex in the last decade. With all of this creates a memory that on the other side of the ocean policies play an original game, the main question which is now reflected in the fact, how far you can now, so speak out, to get Russia, and to what extent the case with 2 between countries can be further aggravate . The game started, and Our homeland this game took effect … Then comes the ball for table tennis: you — I, I — for you. It would seem that the time has long been the brakes and start to come out of this prolonged obviously foolish venture, but Washington is now out such obviously not at hand. The fact that the U.S., as happened a few decades simply can not build partnership deal with Russia, if it starts to articulate and defend their point of view. Washington is prepared to call their friends and partners, only those countries that are painted in their own specific dependence on the U.S., addiction — which comes before or servility, or to outright flattery.

And according to this, our homeland standard 90 — impeccable, from the standpoint of the United States government, with whom you can build a "partnership" policy: give me a couple of billion loan — and the trick here … And, you know, the Russian Federation has its own his voice begins to erupt — there is no good! .. It is urgent to start the machine acts, restrictions, lists of critical resolutions — in short, all that is usually called the system of political censure on the part of the country that perceives itself as the only geopolitical and unutterable favorite. But in the history of human civilization was unshakable …
Returning yet, to the document, which Dmitry Medvedev signed. A contract in which our motherland and the United States were to conduct collaborative activities on several at once Fri The agreement standard in 2002, which is now out of our home came out, containing a paragraph together against drug trafficking, assisting in solving cyber crime, building up barriers terrorist activity. In addition, the contract between Russia and the United States suggested that Washington would help RF in terms of strengthening the borders of legalization of the proceeds from criminal methods of corruption.

If you believe the official disk imaging, the agreement between the countries had a financial application, in which the role of the United States designated as a purely financial one. In other words, Washington on the Rights of the great brother to allocate funds, and our home was to let these funds to overcome the existing problems in the criteria regarding the rather poor (in 2002, at least) funding.
Somehow surprisingly, you see, it turns out … the United States signs a document that implies the cooperation of the government in the legal sector, including in terms of fighting corruption, and with all this takes on a purely financial role. Given the means to fight corruption … putting out fire with gasoline …

With all of this part of the funds are transferred to certain funds that were in effect at the territory of Russia in the name of and on behalf of the United States, and these funds were to use their newly acquired money to solve the issue with embezzlement of public funds by local Russian Federation. In the end, it all comes down to the fact that the lion fraction of funds was used only to get their NCOs in all larynx yelling that corruption in Russia is … But, I'm sorry, we do not and funded by U.S. organizations know. Then what's all the same, in fact, aid in respect of the Russian Federation expressed? .. This question has the answer only our protesting against everyone and everything so called non-systemic opposition:

Aha! Our friends gave funds to the Kremlin fought against corruption, but he, you know, these funds pocketed, and even out of the contract went out to cover their tracks …

But with all this, let those same people who are proponents of the idea of a purely "Kremlin trace", explain: if the "friends" gave money, then why are these facilities worked in some unusual direction — were only on the expansion of structures, disguised anti-corruption sonorous names. I do not whether these were the desk 'horns and hoofs ", to solve a completely different puzzles? ..

Then direct bilateral activities RF and the United States of the subject agreement of 2002 was opposition drug threat. With all of this more than the United States this danger "resisted", the greater the flow of potions came from Afghanistan to Russia and on to Europe. Strange … It always seemed that when countering the threat of danger it has over time come to naught. And here came out in front of all.

Not enough of the South American "aid" to curb drug trafficking often went through some organizations, the accounts of which means settled, but not always far later worked specifically in the direction that it was like for them as indicated. Specifically, you can spend a very exciting example of an unusual collaboration of South American DEA (Agency for Drugs) and Russian Federal Drug Control Service. Cooperation was the fact that representatives of the DEA tried to lure employees of the Federal Service for Drug Control for the defeat of a ready to transport the product to the terrain of Afghanistan. If the experts at Federal Drug Control Service said that destroy the finished drug production in Afghanistan — certainly cool, but not as good as absolutely eliminate poppy plantations themselves, as in the DEA immediately included "my yours does not understand." Say, if you kill all the poppy plantations, so that by then there will still exist Afghan farmers, because they can mak more useful for baking kalaches … That's all opposition drug trafficking and limited …

We will not pass even the 1st Fri-Russian contract ref
erence 2002. This paragraph deals with assistance from the United States in combating child pornography. For these purposes, Washington has allocated as much as 100 thousand dollars … With all of this remains a mystery how can a country, is a favorite of child porn (the U.S. accounts for more than half of the world production of materials in the genre of child porn) to help the country, which 2002 year and did not go in the top 20 on production so obscure content? It turned out that even as you can! Eventually, through a decade of "fraternal assistance" from the U.S. Our homeland "Safely" among the three world leaders for the production of child porn. This, you know, help in countering …

It turns out that the agreement with the United States from September 2002 in effect only from the outside looked nice, but not at the far considering its fruits are very confusing. Yes — means Washington gave, but again, to whom? Neuzh then someone seriously thinks that — without compensation to the Russian budget … Yes — funds in any account in Russia come, but here are the objectives pursued by Washington in the end? Maybe assist to overcome corruption? Maybe drug trafficking from Afghanistan, the joint actions stopped? Maybe eliminate child porn industry? What is there … So far just opposite on all fronts.

On this basis, begin to torment downright vague doubts from that help …

Like this post? Please share to your friends: