UCRAINA: SFARSITUL ARMISTITIULUI. Fortele armate au reluat OFENSIVA in EST. PUTIN afirma ca RUSIA trebuie sa-si apere civilizatia si COMUNITATILE de rusi din afara granitelor

1-07-2014 54 secunde Sublinieri

-

Presedintele Ucrainei, Piotr Porosenko, a declarat incetarea armistitiului dintre fortele armate ucainene si rebelii rusofili din est, respingand, astfel, cererea facuta de presedintele rus Putin de prelungire a acestuia. Faptul a fost intarit si de afirmatiile sefului Parlamentului din Kiev, O. Turcinov, care a anuntat reluarea operatiunilor “antiteroriste” impotriva rebelilor.

Drept raspuns, administratia Kremlinului a avertizat autoritatile ucrainiene ca vor raspunde de viata civililor din regiunile vizate si a acuzat faptul ca armistitiul de pana acum ar fi fost unul “fictiv”. O reactie mai dura a venit insa din partea presedintelui Rusiei, Putin, care l-a indicat pentru prima oara pe omologul sau, Porosenko, drept responsabil direct de razboiul din estul Ucrainei. Putin a mai afirmat ca Rusia este implicata intr-un efort istoric de aparare a civilizatiei sale (Putin a facut referire chiar la Petru cel Mare), promitand, de asemenea, sa protejeze interesele comunitatilor de rusi din afara granitelor. A comparat Ucraina cu Irak, Libia si Siria, a criticat “santajul” americanilor asupra europenilor si “exceptionalismul” ca fundament al politicii internationale a acestora, insa nu a facut comentarii despre o eventuala implicare a Rusiei in estul Ucrainei.

Asistam, astfel, la o noua etapa in conflictul ucrainean. De la alegerea lui Porosenko pana acum, s-a mimat, destul de crispat si neconvingator, o abordare diplomatica a divergentelor. Odata cu incetarea armistitiului, care a fost declarat si incetat doar pentru ca trupele ucrainiene sa declanseze o ofensiva decisiva in regiunile rebelilor pro-rusi, aceasta fatarnicire a diplomatiei a incetat si vom asista la acuze dure de o parte si cealalta, dar si la inrautatirea situatiei militare. Mesajul lui Putin, desi lipsit de aspecte concrete, a fost unul de mobilizare generala. Pentru Kremlin si, cel mai probabil, pentru majoritatea societatii ruse, Rusia este o “cetate asediata”.

razbointrucuvant


Categorii

1. DIVERSE, Opinii, analize, Rusia, Ucraina

Etichete (taguri)

, , , , ,

Articolul urmator/anterior

Comentarii

20 Commentarii la “UCRAINA: SFARSITUL ARMISTITIULUI. Fortele armate au reluat OFENSIVA in EST. PUTIN afirma ca RUSIA trebuie sa-si apere civilizatia si COMUNITATILE de rusi din afara granitelor

  1. Pai Rusia are comnunitati de rusi si in alte tari. Ce va face Putin? Daca nu-i convine/nu-i place conducatorul altor tari, Putin se va implica in alte eforturi istorice de aparare a “civilizatiei sale”, pe teritoriul acestor tari, incalcindu-le suveranitatea?

    Si daca alti conducatori ar gindi ca Putin, poate si ei se vor simti indreptatiti sa faca acelasi lucru, de dragul “civilizatiei” lor, peste hotare? Vai, vai!

  2. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/02/world/europe/ukraine.html?_r=1

    “MOSCOW — The simmering standoff in eastern Ukraine exploded into warfare early Tuesday, pushing the conflict to a dangerous new phase and prompting President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia to warn again that he reserves the right to use force to defend Russian-speaking citizens.”
    Bine concis – “Mesajul lui Putin, desi lipsit de aspecte concrete, a fost unul de mobilizare generala. Pentru Kremlin si, cel mai probabil, pentru majoritatea societatii ruse, Rusia este o “cetate asediata”.

    Rana a inceput sa se cangreneze! Va trebui sa fie operata si inlaturata in totalitate!
    Iar interventia armata in acesta situatie este singura optiune a lui Putin! Nu prea mai are ce sa piarda. Oricum baietii isi fac de cap si impun sanctiuni dupa sanctiuni indiferent de atitudinea “binevoitoare” a rusilor.
    E un joc in care rusul va fi obligat sa face primul pas ( adica sa intervina militar)
    Ar fi trebuit sa intervina mai demult, poate o data cu Crimeea.

  3. Pina in 1944 Romania a fost “aliata cu(controlata de)” Germania care “in colaborare” cu URSS a dezmembrat teritoriul Romaniei in favoarea vecinilor si ne-a determinat prin aceasta sa declaram razboi cu URSS. Dupa 1944 Rusia a ocupat o parte din Europa inclusiv Romania, iar SUA a ocupat restul din Europa. Rusia(URSS) a format in zona ocupata Tratatul militar de la Varsovia, SUA a format in zona ocupata de ea NATO. Tarile ocupate si membre ale NATO sau Tratatului de la Varsovia au primit eticheta de aliati ai ocupantului. Rusia si SUA au continuat razboiul (chiar si dupa ce au semnat niste hirtii care au primit eticheta “Tratat de pace dupa al doile razboi momdial”) dar sub alta forma numita razboi rece. In acest razboi rece Rusia a fost infrinta si apoi SUA a ocupat si partea din Europa “eliberata” de Rusia in al doilea razboi mondial. Crezind ca Rusia nu mai poate opune rezistenta SUA a inceput procesul de ocupare a fostului URSS(intregii Rusii). “Evenimentele ” actuale din Ucraina constituie etape din procesul de ocupare a intregii Rusii de catre SUA. Azi SUA vrea sa faca cu Romania ce a facut Germania inainte de 1944(si atunci ca si acum aveam lipita eticheta de “aliati” cu toate ca eram ocupati).
    Doamne ajuta-ne sa implinim voia ta si sa rabdam tot ce ne dai spre slava Ta.

  4. http://romanian.ruvr.ru/2014_07_01/Al-Treilea-Razboi-Mondial-la-orizont-7404/
    Lasand la o parte periajul rusilor articolul transmite un mesaj cat se poate de clar.

  5. @eucred:

    Sa ne fereasca Dumnezeu de “dreptatea” rusilor – am experimentat-o pe pielea noastra 45 de ani si chiar si dupa Revolutie. Sa nu uitam ce declaratii are Putin, legate de Uniunea Sovietica si Armata Rosie.

    Sa nu ne amagim ca daca suntem impreuna ortodocsi o sa avem vreun tratament preferential. Poate chiar din contra, asa cum s-a intamplat dupa Al Doilea Razboi Mondial.

    Sa ne rugam sa ne fereasca Dumnezeu de varsarea de sange.

  6. @Paul
    Nu tin nici cu rusii nici cu americanii,nato, occidentalii ( in general).
    Tin cu romanii. Din pacate am fost si suntem intre ciocan si nicovala.
    Cat prveste varsarea de sange, banuiesc e foarte vizibil ca in Ukraina se varsa deja foarte mult! Si nu numai! Sa ne fereasca Dumnezeu sa ajunga si la noi!

  7. @eucred:
    Putin nu va face primul pas. A avut oportunitati destule sa il faca si nu l-a facut. Am avut aceasta opinie de la inceput si o am si acum, Putin nu va interveni in Ucraina, el are nevoie de Ucraina (si nici macar de ea toata) sa i se alature de buna voie (ma rog…).
    NATO vrea un conflict cu Rusia si a sperat ca Putin va reactiona impulsiv, stiut fiind ca rusii sunt mai patimasi. Acum a inteles cum joaca Putin si a inteles ca are de ce sa se teama de el, este un strateg de exceptie. NATO stie ca daca intervine in Ucraina pe fata, politicienii occidentali vor pierde sprijinul populatiei si asa nemultumita de ei. Ce mai poate face NATO acolo e sa ii convinga pe ucrainieni sa atace Rusia. Pur si simplu.

  8. @titus l

    Scopul occidentului e sa-l sufoce pe Putin economic si astfel sa scape de el.Nu neaparat sa-l provoace la razboi.
    Dar stie prea bine ca la un moment dat, ca o ultima zvagnire, rusul va apela si la ultima posibilitate si anume razboiul.
    Asa cum concluzionau si admin. mesajul lui Putin este de mobilizare generala si majoritatea rusilor si Putin considera Rusia o cetate asediata.
    Eu stiu din istorie ca cetatile asediate erau obligate, intr-un final, cand ramaneau fara resurse ( de apa, hrana, armament, oameni) sa se preda sau sa iasa si sa dea batalia finala. Adica totul sau nimic. Cred ca asa e si in cazul de fata. Asediul va dura pana la un punct cand o evitare a confruntarii armate finale nu va mai putea fi facuta.
    Ca pana la acel moment Putin va incerca diverse strategii de iesire din acesta situatie ( de asediu) este evident. Asa ca eu cred in continuare ca rusul va fi obligat sa faca prima, si cred ca si ultima miscare ( adica interventia armata) Ei sunt cei asediati nu occidentul.

  9. Consiliul Suprem de Apărare a Țării a aprobat, miercuri(02.07.2014), intrarea şi staţionarea pe teritoriul României a unor forţe şi mijloace din Armata Canadiană “în scopul pregătirii şi desfăşurării unor misiuni ale NATO, la solicitarea părţii române, în contextul evoluţiei situaţiei din regiune”, conform unui comunicat de presă de Administrația Prezidențială.

    http://www.gandul.info/politica/canada-trimite-trupe-pe-teritoriul-romaniei-dupa-criza-din-ucraina-csat-a-analizat-posibile-evolutii-ingrijoratoare-12874355

    http://www.cotidianul.ro/canada-trimite-soldati-in-romania-cu-voie-de-la-csat-242532/

  10. ROGOZIN despre Acordul Moldovei cu UE: vom acorda “TOATE FORMELE DE ASISTENTA” TRANSNISTRIEI/ Premierul Rusiei anunta o CRIZA DE AMPLOARE A GAZELOR/ Trupe canadiene in Romania/ Rusia a INTERZIS importurile de carne din Moldova si Romania

    http://www.cuvantul-ortodox.ro/recomandari/2014/07/03/rogozin-despre-acordul-moldovei-cu-ue-vom-acorda-toate-formele-de-asistenta-transnistriei-premierul-rusiei-anunta-o-criza-de-amploare-a-gazelor-trupe-canadiene-in-romania-rusia-a-interzis-impo/

  11. @ eucred si titus

    Invatind din istoria poporului evreu,prezentata in Vechiul Testament,dar si din istoria crestinilor,atit timp cit conducerea rusa va implementa legi care sa asigure o viata crestina normala,legi care sa impiedice proliferarea perversiunilor sexuale si pervertirea copiilor, iar Biserica Rusa se va dezice de erezia ecumenismului si va incuraja o viata crestina in respect fata de sfintii nostrii si invataturile lor…eu zic ca Dumnezeu va fi cu ei si nu ar trebui sa se teama prea mult de Goliath-ul american si UE.Daca mai sint si crestini de pretutindeni care sa se roage pentru ei,cu atit mai bine.

    Cred ca aceasta ar trebui sa fie prioritatea prioritatilor lui Putin si a guvernantilor rusi,a poporului rus in ansamblu.

    Din cite am inteles eu din profetii,SUA ar fi impiedicata de cataclisme naturale sau alte cauze,de a interveni in Europa impotriva rusilor,aceasta se va intimpla abia dupa ce rusii vor cuceri Turcia,elibera Siria,Irakul poate,Libanul si ii vor urmari pe evrei pina la Ierusalim,incercind poate sa faca dreptate si palestinienilor.

    Cam asa,nu stiu daca zic bine.Adica nu vor fi chiar ca o cetate asediata, vor mai si iesi cu cavaleria la atac.

  12. Ukraine Makes Far-Reaching Concessions to Russia at Berlin Meeting

    The foreign affairs ministers of Russia, Germany, France, and Ukraine conferred on July 2 in Berlin, in a format designed to subject the Ukrainian side to pressure from the other three parties. The Ukrainian side has made far-reaching concessions in this meeting. Those terms are due to be formalized in a Russia-Ukraine-OSCE meeting (without Western participation) on July 5. The ceasefire stipulated in Berlin would, if implemented, stop the Ukrainian forces’ rapid advances against pro-Russia forces in Ukraine’s east. These concessions would haunt Ukraine for a long time to come, if implemented as stipulated in Berlin (see below).

    German and French policies prioritize bilateral relations with Russia at the expense of Ukraine in the ongoing crisis. The United States, which does not do so, and differs with Berlin and Paris in this regard, was not invited to the Berlin meeting. Neither was the European Commission; whereas France, a negligible player in this crisis, was invited to the Berlin meeting for symbolic support to a basically German overture toward Russia.

    This marks an unprecedented advance of Germany’s ambition to handle security issues in Europe’s East on a bilateral Russo-German basis (as foreshadowed in the 2010 Meseberg Memorandum), excluding the United States and bypassing the European Union. In the current crisis, German policy is guided by the principle of defusing tensions with Russia over Ukraine and returning to business as usual with Russia after a decent interval.

    Germany’s Foreign Affairs Minister, Frank-Walter Steinmeier, convened this meeting as an emergency response to Ukraine’s June 30 resumption of military operations against Russia’s proxy forces on Ukraine’s territory. Those forces had inflicted serious losses on Ukraine during the ten days’ ceasefire that Ukraine had unilaterally adhered to. Berlin had nudged Kyiv into that unilateral ceasefire (see EDM, June 21 through June 30).

    Recognizing that the pro-Russia forces breached the ceasefire massively, Germany now seeks to establish a bilateral ceasefire and follow-up negotiations between the Ukrainian government and the pro-Russia secessionists, in a framework that includes Russia while excluding the West. These elements form the basis of a Russo-German consensus regarding Ukraine.

    The “Joint Declaration by the Foreign Ministers of Germany, France, Russia, and Ukraine” (www.auswaertiges-amt.de, July 2) “stress[es] the necessity of a sustainable ceasefire to be agreed upon swiftly and observed by all concerned…Ministers agree to take all necessary measures and use their influence on the concerned parties with a view to achieving this goal.”

    That implies: a) an unconditional ceasefire, thereby throwing out Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko’s June 20 peace plan, in which ceasefire is conditional upon disarmament of pro-Russia forces (in return for amnesty) and/or the evacuation of those forces from Ukraine to Russia; b) treating the “parties” (Ukrainian government and Russia’s armed proxies) on an equal footing by the Berlin document; c) Russia is asked to control its protégés in the field more tightly, in return for Germany and other West-European governments pressing Ukraine into giving up its right to self-defense.

    Under the joint declaration, ”the Contact Group should resume no later than July 5, with the goal of reaching an unconditional [sic] and mutually agreed ceasefire.” “Mutually agreed” implies: negotiated by Kyiv with the pro-Russia forces on an equal basis, as well as veto power for those forces over the terms and their implementation. As an upshot, the secessionist forces will remain entrenched in Ukraine’s east.

    The Berlin declaration does not mention the Contact Group’s composition. In fact, the Contact Group has met twice already (June 23 and June 30), its composition and deliberations being publicly known. It includes representatives of Ukraine, Russia, the OSCE (which operates under Russia’ s statutory veto), and several sets of Russia’s proxies, namely: the Donetsk and Luhansk “people’s republics” (now “Novorossiya”), as well as Ukraine’s foremost pro-Kremlin politician, Viktor Medvedchuk, as an intermediary. Ukraine is alone in this setting, with Russia wielding multiple votes, directly and indirectly (Russia’s own vote plus Donetsk and Luhansk, Medvedchuk, and Russia’s statutory veto right within the OSCE). German Chancellor Angela Merkel personally proposed to Poroshenko that Medvedchuk be included in the Contact group—a proposal that the Kremlin publicly hailed and Poroshenko reluctantly accepted (Interfax, Ukrinform, http://www.ukraine.president.gov, June 23 – 26).

    The Berlin declaration is not binding. If implemented with Ukraine’s assent, the consequences would include: exonerating Russia of its responsibility as the conflict’s initiator, and defining the conflict instead as a purely internal one within Ukraine; the ceasefire as a goal in itself (“de-escalation”), perpetuating the secessionist forces in the field; pressing Ukraine’s government into negotiations with Russia’s armed protégés in Donetsk and Luhansk, legitimizing these de facto; elevating Russia to a mediator’s role; disengaging the West from the conflict-resolution process, and leaving this to the OSCE to handle as a “frozen conflict,” for decades to come.

    –Vladimir Socor

    Ukraine as a battlefield for the new world order according to Putin

    This week in Moscow President Vladimir Putin made a major foreign policy statement, while speaking to a worldwide gathering of Russian ambassadors and permanent diplomatic representatives. According to Putin, the West did not give Moscow a choice, but to move to annex Crimea last March to defend Russians and Russian-speakers “that consider themselves part of the wider Russian world” (“Ruskiy Mir”). Putin insisted that NATO planned to swiftly move its forces into Sevastopol and radically change the balance of power in the region, depriving Russia of everything it had been fighting for since the times of Tsar Peter the Great.

    According to Putin, the present crisis in Ukraine is a manifestation of the core Western policy of “deterring Russia” that continued despite the end of the Cold war. Putin announced Moscow would continue to defend the rights of Russian “compatriots” living abroad “using political, economic and self-defense humanitarian operations.” He declared that the time of US world domination has ended and Russia will be reintegrating the Eurasian landmass [former USSR], while promoting better relations with Europe, “which is our natural partner.” The Russian foreign ministry was ordered to work on preparing “a joint space of economic and humanitarian cooperation from Lisbon to Vladivostok,” based on absolute noninterference in internal political matters and excluding the US. Putin accused Washington of blackmailing Paris to stop the delivery of the French-built Mistral helicopter-carrying assault ships to the Russian Navy (kremlin.ru, July 1). The first Mistral is planned for delivery this year and it could be stationed in Sevastopol (Rossyskaya Gazeta, June 25).

    Putin’s speech was controversial: while accusing the West of ignoring international law and interfering in others’ affairs by promoting so called “democracy,” Putin strongly asserted Russia’s right to intervene in other nations internal affairs “to defend Russian compatriots abroad.” The Kremlin rejects the West ideologically, politically and militarily, but Putin’s speech did not spell out fully the practical part of the Russian foreign policy agenda (gazeta.ru, July1).

    After Putin’s foreign policy statement, the deputy secretary of Russia’s National Security Council, Eugenie Lukyanov, Putin’s appointee from St. Petersburg, told RIA Novosti that “the time of US world hegemony is over,” but Washington is not ready to accept this fact. According to Lukyanov, new international rules must be written together by major world powers that would take into account the interests of all key players. Possibly, a global conference to rewrite international law must be called, because today “there are no agreed rules and the world may become an increasingly unruly place” plagued with constant conflicts. Lukyanov accused Washington of directly promoting conflict and bloodshed in Ukraine and using the conflict to rally European nations against Russia. Russia, according to Lukyanov, could reply by cutting supplies of titanium to Boeing that could seriously hamper the production of passenger aircraft in America. Lukyanov ridiculed President Barack Obama’s administration: “They spent $5 billion to prepare and organize the Maidan protests in Kyiv, but the end result was that Crimea became part of Russia and Putin’s approval ratings are more than 80 percent. It turns out Obama’s advisers are our prime helpers.” Lukyanov accused Poland of harboring training centers of Ukrainian radical nationalists on its territory and expressed hope that attempts to use the Ukrainian crisis to consolidate the West and NATO shall fail eventually (RIA Novosti, July 2).

    The Kremlin apparently believes the time is ripe for a decisive drive to undermine US influence and power worldwide and hit at the transatlantic link to undermine NATO, while the White House is occupied by the Obama administration, seen by Moscow as ineffective and indecisive. The Ukrainian crisis may promote the emergence of a new world order that would sideline Western democratic nations and recognize Russia’s own sphere of undisputed influence in the post-Soviet Eurasian landmass. On the practical side, Putin promised the ambassadors gathered in Moscow, who have been tasked to make this happen, a fourfold pay hike for diplomatic staff (kremlin.ru, July 1).

    This week the Ukrainian president Petro Poroshenko announced the termination of a 10-day unilateral ceasefire in fighting with pro-Russian separatists in Donbas. Poroshenko accused the separatists of constantly violating the ceasefire, of killing Ukrainian solders, of failing to liberate hostages and implement Poroshenko’s previously announced peace plan. Poroshenko promised “to liberate our land,” but implied the ceasefire could be resumed, if separatist fighters accept his conditions and that his peace plan was still on the table (Segodnya, July 1). Putin criticized Poroshenko for resuming the so-called anti-terrorist operation in Donbas, but also left open the possibility of a negotiated compromise (kremlin.ru, July 1). The Kremlin is at present concentrating its efforts on pressing for a prolonged ceasefire and “substantial negotiations” between the rebels and Kyiv—an arrangement that would give Putin leverage to keep Kyiv and the unruly Russian nationalist rebels under control, while containing Western influence in Ukraine and possibly inserting wedges into the transatlantic connection between the US and EU. Moscow has been apparently influencing the rebels to scale down their demands and offering some tactical concessions to Poroshenko, while trying to sideline the US and engage European powers as intermediaries (EDM, June 26).

    Resumed fighting in Donbas this week seems to be marginal in nature—the Ukrainian forces are improving their positions and trying to secure the border with Russia, while not attempting to decisively defeat the rebels or take over any major rebel-held cities. A meeting in Berlin between the German, French, Ukrainian and Russian foreign ministers on July 2 resulted in a joint press conference and a declaration calling for terms of a ceasefire to be finalized by July 5. Moscow has promised to allow Ukrainian border guards and OSCE observers into its posts on the Ukrainian border to verify that men and arms are not being smuggled into Ukraine. Hostages must be released and OSCE observers deployed to monitor any future ceasefire (Rossyskaya Gazeta, July 3). A pattern is emerging of possible intermittent fighting followed by ceasefire and negotiations. This pattern would seem to largely exclude the US from the picture and be in line with Moscow’s announced overall foreign policy objectives.

    –Pavel Felgenhauer

    Eurasia Daily Monitor — Volume 11, Issue 121

  13. @Sherlock:
    evreii considera ca dreptatea lui Dumnezeu se manifesta inca din lumea aceasta. Cum s-am spus, ei trebuie sa vada pentru ca sa creada. Nu as zice ca noi crestinii am avea mai putina nevoie de asa ceva, desi ar trebui. Cred deci ca Dumnezeu se va ingriji de nevoile noastre si macar un semn din dreptatea Sa se va arata inca de pe acum.

    @eucred:
    Asa considera Occidentul, ca Putin este asediat. Asta este propaganda. Gadila placut urechile celor care se tem de rusi si celor care ii urasc, astfel politicienii Occidentului castigand sustinere. Poate ca aspiratiile multor rusi sunt astazi ceva mai elevate, dar daca Rusia poate sa isi hraneasca si sa isi imbrace propria populatie (de resursele energetice pentru propriul consum ce sa mai vorbim…), atunci nu are nimeni ce-i face. Romania, de exemplu, nu mai poate face asta si nu o mai face de multa vreme. Dar Rusia nu e deloc sufocata. Are acorduri nou-noute de livrare de gaze cu China; si ca sa nu devina dependenta de un alt mare rival, are unul si cu Japonia. Are contracte reinnoite cu India si Iran si este in BRICS cu Africa de Sud cu care isi imparte la egalitate peste 90% din productia mondiala de paladium, un metal fara de care nu merge nici un computer, tableta sau telefon, fie ele construite in Taiwan cu bani americani. Mie imi pare ca mai degraba cel asediat este Occidentul! Abia ca Occidentul este cel fortat sa iasa la lupta, ceea ce si face.

    Cat despre teama de rusi la romani, ea este o alegere indusa de un subconstient bombardat de propaganda inca de pe vremea lui Dej, nu are nimic rational. E adevarat ca rusii au adus comunismul pe tancuri, dar pe tancurile acelea erau mai ales evrei si unguri; tortionarii din inchisori au fost romani sadea si noi uitam prea usor ca cei care au bombardat Bucurestiul au fost americanii, ca tot din west a venit generalul Bucov sa ne darame bisericile si sa ne omoare preotii si monahii iar Ip si Traznea nu ar fi existat daca nu exista puterea germana si ura ungurilor fata de romani. NU, rusii nu ne sunt prieteni, dar ca natie nu ne sunt mai dusmani si nu sunt mai periculosi decat cei care astazi ne dau garantii (am mai avut dintr-astea si nu ne-au folosit). Doar ca majoritatea rusilor se inchina cand trec pe langa o biserica si o fac la fel ca noi, cei care inca nu ne-am pus 666 pe numarul de la masina.

  14. Multumesc lui Titus L ca “mi-a limpezit” opiniile proprii tulburate de diverse agenturi de propaganda.
    Doamne ajuta-ne sa implinim voia ta si sa rabdam tot ce ne dai spre slava Ta.

  15. Pingback: SLAVIANSK – recucerit de Armata Ucrainei/ Adolescent palestinian ARS DE VIU drept razbunare pentru moartea unor adolescenti israelieni/ “Califul” ISIS la prima aparitie VIDEO/ ERDOGAN si-a anuntat candidatura la prezidentiale - Recomanda
Formular comentarii

* Pentru a deveni public, comentariul dumneavoastra trebuie aprobat de un administrator. Va rugam sa ne intelegeti daca nu vom publica anumite mesaje, considerandu-le nepotrivite, neconforme cu invatatura ortodoxa sau nefolositoare sufleteste. Va multumim!

Carti

Documentare