tyksov, i, traveler, balloonist, jean ivan, and so we go out teski, what a fairy tale, without ivan, eh, what started, without deception and without flint, likhodi sharpened me into flint, self-written pen, magic ink , you'll get it, you're the main thing, vanya, hurry up, so give me a horse. mechanically,

hit yourself on the head, you have a nickname, where you need to go, that's what they call me, because i'm taking you not where you fool want, where you need to go, i can't live without travel, flint, he who has a boot in his pocket doesn't need a pen, soon!

it seems to me that the term saradis defeat was thrown in because something had to be said in response to a special military operation or even earlier, to such a peaceful rise of russia, the russian economy. military power, but i think that for many in washington and for the dep of the deep state, including, and the ideal of strategic defeat is such a non-simultaneous long process, when at the head of russia there is a person like garbachev and you can quietly dismantle the country for a long time during all this time and solve your affairs there in various issues, and undermining the economic, political, military power of the enemy.

the dissertation dealt with this very story, the united states were very indignant, the largest bank of their country, national city bank, was simply furious about the fact that it had lost quite a lot of money, well, finally, of course, later the rise of the soviet union became a real ideological threat to the united states, that is, in this sense, this line can be traced quite clearly and the turning point occurred at the turn of the century, regarding how the transition from soviet union to the russian federation, you know, you can use the decision that was made by the un security council in the fall of 1991, when a resolution was adopted that stated that the russian federation is the successor of the soviet union, this term successor, it had to absorb a lot of things, just like that, even the noun was continuity for us, and that's why.

there was no such gap in our statehood or in our political history, yes, it was very unpleasant history associated with the collapse of the soviet union, but in general for americans, europeans, the soviet union has always been germany is too big a player on

the european stage, so i would like to make some comments or observations regarding modern germany, first of all, in my opinion, in germany they have only now understood.

scholz's attempt to jump from the group of militarists to some other group, it is certainly skillful, but in general he correctly grasped the trend, and although after other non-military forces come, say in italy, the same giorgio miloni, she in fact, it was no different from its

predecessor mario draghi, but still the rhetoric became a little calmer and most importantly, the electorate was able to the people of italy, the people of others... were able to show their reaction, even if this does not lead to any serious political changes, and as for the underestimated or underused potential in europe, this is the russian federation for us - this is the potential of the pacifist anti-war, anti-nuclear movement, he told a big alexandrich, when you were an ardent supporter of schulz, who took part in youth, yes in demonstrations. in different countries of europe flares up periodically, but not very actively, this is largely due to the fact that they shut up the mouths of opponents within european states, and

most importantly, deprived the russian media of the opportunity to communicate directly with european citizens, but twenty-four is still the year when an interview with tucker carlson in... a meeting of the russian president with the largest foreign media corporations in st. petersburg in june, that is, such a breakthrough to or the opportunity to communicate with europeans on not only by europeans, but we are most interested in europeans, it is now emerging, then, as it turns out, europe without the united states, it is not only a military dwarf, as samuel hankington once wrote, but it is an economic dwarf too.

and after this went beyond all reasonable limits, the italians re-elected him, but when he found himself retired, here he really allowed himself to become a scientist again, and his report, it is a little idealistic in the sense that among the problems that exist in europe, he includes, let's say, lack of migrants, we need more migrants, lack of investment in ict,

printing money, so he has something illiberal on the contrary, something neo-marxist, apparently it has always been there, but now it has manifested itself in this document, which i think will have an interesting fate. you said the phrase that the west often declares that we have underestimated its unity, they often declare this. this just shows that they do not understand our motivation at all, yes, they just cannot understand that we have started liberation, well, by and large our movement, fulfilling our obligations to the donetsk and lugansk people's republics, because we had no other choice, we were deeply indifferent to what kind of unity of the west there was no, there was an existential threat.

germany in the first in the second world war. and then many authors wrote, then somehow this term was swept under the carpet, but they remembered that there was such a german question in europe, that no matter what you do, but without, so to speak, conditionally speaking, destruction identity, without destroying the idea of ​​german statehood, you have something hostile rising in the center of europe, in the heart of europe

. and so on, individual hotheads in there were no there to divide into parts and basically even in the white movement, and not so to speak in britain or in the united states talked about it, but in fact very limited goals, and some of them were very so to speak poorly formulated. there was a civil war, it rolled over us very seriously, moreover, i will remind you that all that time, when the whole world was in the roaring twenties, developing their own technologies, we had a fratricidal civil war. we had to catch up so hard that in terms of fratricidality, further industrialization can even compete with the civil war, that is, we had a very hard time with this, but they saw that we got up again, from their point of view, i don’t know, maybe from the point of view of individual people, all researchers have the right to their point of view, but from their point of view it’s completely

it was exactly the same thing, just in an even more severe form, when stalin appeared, the shortcomings in... the idea that stalin is a reincarnation, that stalin was madly tortured by his inner reincarnation of ivan iv, that's exactly right, stalin now about relations with the united states of that time, it's a curious thing, then just a tough anti-bolshevik position, that means inside the usa, it was not an anti-bolshevik position, but not an anti-russian position, an anti-left position, which was promoted by separate elites, there really were no diplomatic relations with the soviet union for a long time, but business worked, stalin appeared on the covers. as an opponent of the united states, because until 1937, when they finally pushed through a trade agreement in which the dollar became the main currency, and the pound became secondary, that is, in fact, they won the cold war, they really considered, including military plans, decisions after the first

world war, now further the nineties, it would seem that communism has been defeated. so, accordingly, territorial losses are obvious, national humiliation is also obvious, everyone is striving for the united states, everyone is striving for the west, everyone is trying to live like in the west, so it would seem, take and reprogram like germany, make russia, so to speak, in fact, a client state, a terrible panic arose, when, you know, i don’t remember exactly who gave the order, now it is believed that boris nikolayevich yeltsin, when, you know, accordingly moved into kosovo, you know, accordingly, our forces, which were part of the composition of the sfor, the bosnian forces, yes. why did they immediately again have the specter of russia, no matter how much we beat it, no matter how much we corrupted it, no matter what we did to it, no matter how much we bribed its leaders, exactly the same thing is happening that has been happening for several hundred years, it is getting up again, they, this is the situation that has arisen for them, in the fourteenth and fifteenth year they wrote very actively about this, that the russian question, in the sense that the german

question was resolved, needs to be resolved, so that on this place, on our land. never arose something, then the classic doctrine of wolfowitz: what can make us a civilizational, ideological, military, economic, any other competition, even, so to speak, potentially, in the military , as it were, part, probably, the definition of strategic defeat is different, well, this is simply because very specific military tasks are being solved, but in the geostrategic sense, what does it mean to inflict a strategic defeat on russia, no matter on the battlefield, not on the battlefield, when about this civil politicians reasoned, they talked about how, if...

if he had good relations with india, china, iran and landed people first, we reached them first, well, yes, in a manned manner, yes, that is, they know perfectly well that, so to speak, what russia is, a strategic defeat is to make it so that we could never develop again, could not build our own technologies and could no longer for...

it was good, although this is not so, they cannot control the entire world economy, this is not the nineties and especially not the eighties, they can't do it, this is the first, well , the second, the development of technologies, which they talk about so often, has led to the fact that many countries are breaking the monopoly of the west on technologies, on, so to speak, the production of certain types of goods and so on, and all over the world, this very disintegration into regional trade, industrial and even most likely... that really, a few years will pass, after putin, and by that time, if we don't fall apart, then we will try again this is to say, to plant a curtain rod, well

, probably such ideas are being developed in academic circles, moreover, if such ideas were not being developed in their academic circles, then the academic circles are bad, then they think badly, well , that they should somehow work for the greatness of america, the west and whatever, but in fact, i just looked at those modern publications that are happening, which we have now. william brens came to london, yes, the director of the cia, spoke together with richard moore, his colleague, the head of mi6, this is one of the generally unprecedented appearances of two anglo-saxon spies, high-ranking together, they also wrote an article in the financial times, in fact, they did not give any recipe for what to do, the only recipe they have is that the west needs to maintain or ensure its technological superiority, and they are talking about approximately the same thing, and it exists, well, while it exists, of course, another thing is that it is not like that. look, and if they could, here is what, if they could really ensure control over absolutely all the flow of goods, where there is their so-called copyright or

patent, then yes, then here we can say that their advantage, it is strategic in the sense that we will never be able to get it, that's what we are talking about, that tactically we are lagging behind in a number of positions, this is obvious, we do not produce civil aviation, let's say yes, but china does not. that's what concerns china, china is a fairly closed society from all points of view, including in digital and so on further, we don't really know what's going on with their production systems, well, for example, in computer technology, if they don't sell them a single lithograph from holland, well , in fact, not from holland, but from the west, it's a transnational corporation, in which everyone participates, co-owners of samsung, japanese firms there and so on, we don't know, but in america and in general all sane people should understand a simple thing:

and before that, let me remind you, google was put in a corner, it was recognized as the official criminal monopolist of the united... everyone will be to bet in fact on this technological war, while it is clear that it is not only computer technologies, but the information environment will also play a huge role here, they will hit here, they will try to destroy our undertakings, protect theirs, well, finally, i would not have been able to make my speech without this, that you got by with me, but in fact they have one more mine left, which is laid absolutely under the entire economy and under the chinese. and under the russian, and even slightly under the iranian, here i am so i think, this is of course what they have in their hands modern financial technology, by the way, they, by the way, when they write about this, well, since william brns and

richard nord published an article, preceding their speech, by the way, on this financial times weekend, they - wrote on the financial times, i actually also looked through the newspaper itself, they, by the way, i found out that it turns out that they directly call now even for the general public, because there are articles there that only a specialist understand, and there are those who, well... to the wider public, they quite call the dollar and the financial system and in general all this technology, this is technology, in fact, this is not the money that we read about in history textbooks there about the fourth, fifth or even the 19th century, yes, this is not gold, not even commodity silver there, let's say, the middle ages, this is technology, if they pull out this technology now, here is a big question, by the way, perhaps this issue has been resolved, but at least hint, at least blink an eye, because i you understand that... secret, but at least blink an eye to loyal citizens, because in fact the next thing, when they understand that they can't pull out other technologies, they will pull out exactly this, here.

mom, why do we need these letters for a fairy tale, in the 39th kingdom, the three-tenth state.

mikhail mikhailovich, perhaps, at some points it is still necessary to clarify, regarding the strategic defeat of russia in the first world war, which the west allegedly wanted, it could not want this, it could not. why? because russia, firstly, was in at that time a member of the entente. at first , the franco-russian agreement was concluded.

the peace treaty of brest between germany and russia, this led to strategic regroupings of german troops from the eastern front to the western, for the first time in 1918 the german empire achieved numerical superiority over great britain and france, over their armed forces, and operations aimed at crushing the western front began, the first of which was michael, yet...

918 it was not at all clear who would win the first world war, so that the defeat, especially strategic defeat of russia, the collective west or non-collective, could not have wished for in those days, well, in no way, as for the second, well, supposedly strategic defeat of russia, it was caused again not so much by some twists and turns of the cold war or the infliction of defeat on some fronts, but again purely internal turmoil, purely betrayal. and the disappearance of the soviet union is by no means the result of the cold war, by no means some kind of result of the afghan war, overstraining of the military-industrial complex, i say again, these are purely internal reasons for the disappearance of the soviet union at that time. that's probably how we should place the emphasis in this regard. as for tony blair's statements on the same matter, well

, really, they amuse me. as he said that it will not be like the first second world war in relation to germany, but then everything was different, both in the first world war and in the second, again 1918 , november 11, the conclusion of an armistice, the end fire was already heading towards the versailles conference, well , at first it was based on the 14 points of wotor wilson, but then there was a real peace treaty. purely more so to speak cruel towards the defeated, which was, in fact, a significant prerequisite for the second world war, that is , then it was like this: an armistice, a peace conference, the signing of this document and so on, but again, well, it was not purely in the second world war, here tony blew compares these two moments, and there is a very big difference between them, firstly, he somehow didn't mention that in 1943 there was

a conference in... blanks, which was put.