How will the global confrontation between Russia and the USA end? How to find out the future that is so exciting for us and our wallets? To learn it, you can use various options. Here are the most famous:
You can ask the astrologers. Many domestic astrologers have already compiled their natal charts and are confident that prosperity awaits Russia in the 21st century. However, while it is not visible: the dollar rises to the ruble, housing and public utilities rates are increasing, prices are rising, and so many people have hemorrhoids from the downpour of the laws being passed that fit into despair. In addition, there are astrologers overseas and, perhaps, they are paid more generously than ours. After all, in our budget, as always, there is not enough money even to ensure that the increase in pensions exceeds the growth of utility tariffs.
You can spread out the tarot cards. But as you know, the cards are lying ...
You can contact the shamans. However, shamans kamlayut for the one who pays the most, and more money from the United States, so the shamans kamlayut for them.
You can watch “The most shocking hypotheses” on REN TV. They have already announced that the United States is waiting for a catastrophe: Yellowstone supervolcano is about to explode, and there is nothing left of North America, so there’s nothing to do, nature itself will decide everything for us. But the exact time of this explosion varies between plus or minus 500 for thousands of years, and who knows that during this time the Yankees will be with us.
You can study the prophecies. But there are many prophecies, they are ambiguous and contradictory, moreover, they are set out very vaguely and are not tied to specific terms.
You can ask the political scientists, of whom now have a number on television talk shows of almost all TV channels. But political scientists can not come to a common opinion, trying to shout down each other in the process of proving their case. Therefore, we, as always, will not achieve anything worthwhile from them.
It was hoped that the "Palace of Heaven" would fall on the Capitol at the time when they were taking regular sanctions. But the Chinese miracle of space technology burned down in the atmosphere over the Pacific Ocean.
Now they say that a mistake has crept into the calculations of Ilona Mask, and his supercar will not reach Mars and will inevitably return to earth. So, maybe, even the muffler will survive and scare the most odious senator in the head?
All these were speculations and fantasies. Therefore, it is best to do mathematics, which, as you know, is the most exact science.
We formalize the problem1:
RUSSIA vs USA = F ($, ₽, Ukr, Sir, Chi, NKor, ∑ (EU & Co), ∑ (Bel & Co), PUS, PRU) xkPVVP,
where: F is the function of influence on the outcome of the confrontation between the parties, $ is money controlled by the United States, ₽ is Russian rubles, Ukr is Ukraine, Sir is Syria, Chi is China, NKor is the DPRK, ∑ (EU & Co) is a set of allied and US-controlled states , ∑ (Bel & Co) - a set of allies of Russia, PUS - the power of the United States, PRU - reduced power of Russia, kPVVP - coefficient of political will of GDP ...
Our article is journalistic, so we will not make a justification for the choice of a mathematical model, although a model based on vague (fuzzy) sets would be most appropriate here. And in fact, the methods and the name of the sets would be the most appropriate model. Artificial intelligence would have come in very handy, since it is necessary to process huge data arrays. They write that the Pentagon is already trying to apply artificial intelligence to control weapons and optimize battlefield resources.
We will arrange the weighting coefficients of the function arguments in the old-fashioned way, call them the chances, and integrate them on a qualitative level. Without the involvement of political scientists, so as not to confuse the mathematical calculation.
So, argument "$". There is so much money from the “partners” that they could buy our planet several times with all the giblets. At the same time, they can easily take away Russian money from us (after all, they robbed Russian oligarchs for $ 16,0 billion overnight). And the reserves of the Central Bank can also be snagged by a purely democratic procedure, for example, accusing Russia of accumulating reserves for poisoning fugitive thieves of the budget funds of the Russian Federation. Therefore, we boldly put “100” chances for a bowl of the USA, Russia - “0”.
The argument "₽". A very weak argument for what evidence is not required, see the MICEX reaction to sanctions against 10.04.18. Although liberals can object to me: “But what about the recognition of E. Nabiulina as the best head of the Central Bank in Europe and her words that the current“ volatility ”of the ruble will not affect the economic indicators?” But we will not take liberal arguments into account, they will constantly statistics they juggle and look at the world through other windows. Therefore, we put a solid "0" on the bowl of Russia and "100" on the bowl of the USA.
Ukr argumentUkraine The Minsk agreements failed, even though they signed under them, all the cease-fire agreements: New Year, Christmas, Easter and even the First of September, about the withdrawal of heavy weapons, the exchange of prisoners of "all for all" poher, attacked defenseless (why nobody defended it?) fishing vessel with white fish (tykulka rot), fishermen in court are then released, then immediately arrested ... You can enumerate ad infinitum, but the conclusion will be the same: how much and whatever you agree with the representatives of Ukr, these agreements will never be implemented. Although some turbid investors from Russia and provide the largest investment in this country. However, on the whole, the regime is relatively stable, but Nadia Savchenko has already gathered to blow everyone up and shoot the survivors' heads. The result - on the "50" chances of both parties.
Sir argumentSyria There is so much fog that it is very difficult to determine the outcome of the struggle. Iranians, Turks, Israelis, Kurds, Saudis, tribes and religious communities, all under the secret management of instructors from Western democracies. It is best to ask Semyon Arkadyevich Bagdasarov, he knows exactly how the Syrian campaign will end. Therefore, we skip this argument until the picture is cleared by a competent specialist.
Chi ArgumentChina This argument can only be taken into account in terms of indirect influence on the US position in the process of a trade war with China. If the Chinese pin down so that the Americans will need to urgently extinguish losses, then maybe they will loosen their grip for a while. For a short time. And this chance can be used to withdraw money from Western banks. In addition, China periodically supports us in the Security Council. But this body, apparently, the "partners" decided to eliminate - it became an obstacle to the implementation of global political goals. On a bowl of the USA - "30" of chances, on a bowl of Russia - "10".
NKor Argument, DPRK. This argument is also very weak for us - the leader of the DPRK, waving a nuclear club over the heads of the enemies, negotiated with D. Trump, swept the train to Xi Jing Ping for important negotiations, saying later that he would burn the enemy with atomic fire will ignore. Everything is decided without us, so here we, like the United States, do it by zero.
Argument ∑ (EU & Co)allies and vassals. Here, everyone is on the side of the United States, and only sometimes a few so far disobedient countries object to too sharp movements, such as when expelling Russian diplomats on the grounds of chemoscalogue. But everything is serious - even shamelessly bared the bones of the Polish leaders and politicians who died in the plane crash near Smolensk, “finding” not only the “hydraulic explosion” in the wing before the plane fell, but also needles in opened coffins (here, without Hollywood horror do without) Assuming, after all, not “100”, but “90” of chances for a bowl of the USA. Our “10” chances will be at the expense of hypothetical irritation in the ranks of the allies, some of which may be embarrassing for their peoples.
Argument ∑ (Bel & Co), our allies and partners in the EAEU, CSTO. Something is not heard of the voices of the diplomats of our allies, whom we pledged to protect from any military and terrorist threats. Nobody offered at least a little military support, did not allocate financial or in-kind humanitarian aid to the people of Syria, where we found ourselves face to face with a coalition of 60 countries under the auspices of the United States. They also did not help, it seems to be fraternal, to the people of Donbass. No one recognized Crimea as part of the Russian Federation. Kazakhstan generally abandoned the Cyrillic alphabet, on which all books, textbooks and scientific works are written, including historical folk epos. Therefore, here you can give Russia “20” chances for the Allies to observe neutrality. The United States can not accrue anything, it is unlikely that someone will support them in an open confrontation.
Argument PUSgiven by the US state power. The reduced, or cumulative power is made up of components, so consider each of them. This is the economy, finance, military, geopolitical influence. It is clear that our economies do not compare, so we have “0” chances, the US is “1”, the same is with finance - we have “0” chances, the US is “1”, according to the armed forces, it is considered to be parity, therefore both sides by "1" chance. As for geopolitical influence, here we can not oppose anything in the international arena. Even in the information war, we suffer an offensive defeat despite the fact that the truth is on our side. In addition, everyone is talking about a powerful "fifth column" in our ranks. Therefore, we have the “0” chance, the US - “1”. Total 4: 1 is not in our favor, i.e. "80" chances for a bowl of the USA and "20" for a bowl of the Russian Federation.
Argument PRU, the power of Russia. Since all the components were considered in the previous argument, we can only state that only we can, in 10-20 minutes, after making a decision to wipe out the United States. And several times. Even if they destroy us beforehand, the “Dead Hand” will do it automatically. Therefore, without hesitation let us put Russia "100" of chances and "0" of the USA.
Counted - wept: 420: 180 chances in favor of the United States while maintaining the current "Strategy thousands of cuts."
Do not rush to cry. All this must be multiplied by the coefficient of political will of GDP. However, this coefficient cannot be known to us; it exists only in the head of the GDP itself. We can only guess whether our leader will act, as in the cases of South Ossetia, Abkhazia and the Crimea, or will delay, as with the recognition of Donbass (although, who knows, maybe the right moment has not matured yet).
But we must remember once Vladimir Vladimirovich’s words about the St. Petersburg street laws that were said on the air: “If you understand that a fight is inevitable - hit first!”
It seems that our competitors have lost sight of this argument and, being carried away by their strategy with a beautiful name, risk getting it to the full - after all, after the first strike, the second is no longer necessary. Perhaps that is why Vladimir Vladimirovich pities them - they suddenly come to their senses. After all, all the money burned in a nuclear fire! See PRU.
Thus, all mathematics was reduced to the decision of one person, which proves the role of personality in history. References to the fact that the author supposedly flatters V.V. Putin are untenable. We are not familiar and are connected only through the ballot paper. And if kPVVP proves to be insignificant, I will withdraw my vote.
And the most important! I will tell you in confidence that there is another, more reliable way to find out the most reliable outcome of the confrontation between Russia and the United States. Soon there will be a "straight line with the president." Call and he will tell you everything ...
PS “And why do we need a world in which Russia will not be?” Asked V.V. Putin interviewed by American journalist Megin Kelly.
Can add? I add: “Why do we need such a world in which everyone is fattening, and we are languishing under sanctions?”